DOCSLIB.ORG

Borderline Glenoid Bone Defect in Anterior Shoulder Instability

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Borderline Glenoid Bone Defect in Anterior Shoulder Instability Borderline Glenoid Bone Defect in Anterior Shoulder Instability Latarjet Procedure Versus Bankart Repair Yoon Sang Jeon,* MD, Ho Yeon Jeong,y MD, Dong Ki Lee,y MD, and Yong Girl Rhee,yz MD Investigation performed at the Shoulder & Elbow Clinic, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea Background: The optimal procedure for anterior shoulder instability with a borderline (15%-20%) bone defect on the anterior rim of the glenoid is still controversial. Purpose: To compare the clinical outcome and recurrence rate between the arthroscopic Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure among patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability and a borderline glenoid bone defect. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The authors retrospectively reviewed cases of arthroscopic Bankart repair and the Latarjet procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability with a borderline (15%-20%) glenoid bone defect. Enrollment comprised 149 patients (Bankart group, n = 118; Latarjet group, n = 31). The mean follow-up and age at operation were 28.9 6 7.3 months (range, 24-73 months) and 26 6 5 years (range, 16-46 years), respectively. Results: Rowe and UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) shoulder scores significantly improved from 42.0 6 14.3 and 22.9 6 3.2 preoperatively to 90.9 6 15.4 and 32.5 6 3.3 postoperatively in the Bankart group (P \ .001) and from 41.0 6 17.9 and 22.3 6 3.4 to 91.1 6 16.1 and 32.3 6 3.4 in the Latarjet group (P \ .001), respectively. There were no significant between-group differ- ences in Rowe (P = .920) or UCLA (P = .715) scores at the final follow-up. Mean postoperative loss of motion during forward flex- ion, external rotation in abduction, and internal rotation to the posterior was 3.0° 6 6.2°, 11.6° 6 10.2°, and 0.6 spinal segment in the Bankart group and 3.7° 6 9.8°, 10.3° 6 12.8°, and 0.9 spinal segment in the Latarjet group, respectively. These differences were not significant. However, the loss of external rotation at the side was significantly greater in the Bankart group (13.3° 6 12.9°) than in the Latarjet group (7.3° 6 18.1°, P = .034). The overall recurrence rate was significantly higher in the Bankart group (22.9%) than in the Latarjet group (6.5%), (P = .040). Conclusion: The Latarjet procedure and arthroscopic Bankart repair both provided satisfactory clinical outcome scores and pain relief for anterior shoulder instability with a borderline glenoid bone defect. However, the Latarjet procedure resulted in signifi- cantly lower recurrences and less external rotation limitation than the arthroscopic Bankart repair. Therefore, the Latarjet proce- dure could be a more reliable surgical option in anterior recurrent instability with a borderline glenoid bone defect. Keywords: shoulder; instability; anterior; glenoid defect; borderline; arthroscopic; Latarjet Patients with recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation com- accompanied by glenoid labrum detachment,5,16 and these monly have a defect in the anterior rim of the glenoid bone bony lesions are reportedly a risk factor for arthroscopic Bankart repair failure.5,7,8,31 Pagnani25 reported that patients with a large bony defect of the glenoid could z Address correspondence to Yong Girl Rhee, MD, Department of regain sufficient stability with open capsular repair and Orthopaedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University, 1 Hoegi-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul 130-702, Republic of Korea (email: that bone block procedures did not appear to be necessary [email protected]). for these patients. However, most studies have emphasized *Department of Orthopedic Surgery, College of Medicine, Inha Uni- the necessity of bony procedures for patients with a large versity Hospital, Incheon, Republic of Korea. 9 y defect of the glenoid. Burkhart and De Beer reported Shoulder and Elbow Clinic, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, that for patients with anterior-inferior shoulder instability College of Medicine, Kyung Hee University, Seoul, Republic of Korea. The authors declared that they have no conflicts of interest in the attributed to trauma, those with a large bony defect had authorship and publication of this contribution. a significantly higher recurrence rate after an arthroscopic Bankart repair than those without such a lesion. The The American Journal of Sports Medicine authors indicated that in these cases, the Latarjet proce- 1–7 dure should be considered for shoulder reconstruction. Pro- DOI: 10.1177/0363546518776978 26 Ó 2018 The Author(s) vencher et al stated that for patients with recurrent 1 2 Jeon et al The American Journal of Sports Medicine shoulder instability associated with glenoid bone loss dimensional computed tomography and at least 2 years 20% to 25%, an open bone augmentation procedure is of follow-up data. The glenoid bone defect was measured required to reconstitute the glenoid osseous arc. Similarly, with the anteroposterior distance from the bare area in Boileau et al7 reported that bone loss involving 25% of the 3-dimensional computed tomography en face view.13 the glenoid surface might lead to a recurrence rate of 75%. We excluded patients with a bony Bankart lesion or engag- Accordingly, a defect involving 20% to 25% of the glenoid ing Hill-Sachs lesion and those who had undergone revi- bone has historically been considered critical bone loss that sion surgery or other concomitant procedures. The can cause recurrence; the consensus has been that arthro- concept of glenoid track described by Di Giacomo et al14 scopic soft tissue repair alone cannot sufficiently restore gle- was used to assess the engaging Hill-Sachs lesion. It was nohumeral joint stability and that an additional bony classified as an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion if the width of augmentation procedure is required in these cases.1,20,22,24,26 the humeral head defect was greater than the glenoid However, the optimal surgical treatment of anterior track.14,34 The engaging Hill-Sachs lesion was also con- shoulder instability associated with loss of 15% to 20% of firmed via arthroscopy with the arm in abduction–external the glenoid bone (ie, a borderline defect) remains controver- rotation for patients who underwent arthroscopic surgery. sial. Various reports indicate that arthroscopic soft tissue During the study period, 735 patients underwent sur- repair alone can restore stability for patients with recurrent gery for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. A total of anterior shoulder instability accompanied by a defect 28 patients with a borderline glenoid bone defect were involving 20% of the glenoid bone.11,23 However, Shaha lost to follow-up before 2 years (n = 23, arthroscopic Bank- et al28 recently reported that glenoid bone loss 13.5% art repair; n = 5, Latarjet procedure). After application of may lead to an unacceptable outcome after arthroscopic our inclusion and exclusion criteria, 149 patients were Bankart stabilization and suggested that the threshold for enrolled for analysis. The arthroscopic Bankart repair critical bone loss should be lower than the widely accepted and Latarjet operation were performed for 118 and 31 20% to 25%. In a biomechanical cadaveric study by Yama- patients, respectively. The procedure was chosen by an moto et al,35 anterior glenoid defects 19% of the glenoid operator per the clinical situation without any restriction. length caused persistent instability after Bankart lesion However, the Latarjet procedure was preferred for patients repair, and the authors suggested that the deficient glenoid with more frequent episodes of dislocation. In the Bankart cavity should be reconstructed to provide sufficient stability. group, the mean age at the time of operation was 25.6 A similar biomechanical study reported that a glenoid defect years (range, 16-42 years), and the mean follow-up period 15% of the largest anteroposterior glenoid width should be was 28.2 months (range, 24-65 months). In the Latarjet considered the critical amount of bone loss at which gleno- group, the mean age at the time of operation was 27.4 humeral translation could not be restored with isolated years (range, 21-46 years), and the mean follow-up period soft tissue repair alone and that bony restoration proce- was 30.9 months (range, 24-73 months). There were 104 dures would be required in such cases.30 However, there (88.1%) men and 14 (11.9%) women in the Bankart group has been no study comparing the clinical outcomes after and 26 (83.9%) men and 5 (16.1%) women in the Latarjet arthroscopic soft tissue repair and bony augmentation pro- group. Table 1 summarizes the characteristics of the 2 cedures for patients with recurrent anterior shoulder insta- groups. bility and a borderline glenoid bone defect. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical Surgical Techniques outcomes and recurrence rates of the arthroscopic Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure for patients with recurrent Arthroscopic Bankart Repair. All operations were per- anterior shoulder instability and a borderline glenoid formed by a senior orthopaedic surgeon with the patient bone defect. We hypothesized that the Latarjet procedure in a 70° beach-chair position. We developed a standard pos- would provide satisfactory clinical outcomes and a lower terior viewing portal and anteroinferior and anterosupe- recurrence rate than the arthroscopic Bankart repair for rior working portals. The detached labral margin of the patients with a borderline bone defect. Bankart lesion and the glenoid rim were debrided with a motorized shaver. The glenoid rim was decorticated with a motorized bur 1 to 2 mm medially from the edge METHODS of the articular cartilage to stimulate postoperative heal- ing. A suture anchor was inserted at the 5:30- to 6-o’clock This study was approved by our institutional review board positions through the anteroinferior portal, 1 to 2 mm (Kyung Hee University Hospital, KHUH 2017-10-033-0), from the articular cartilage of the glenoid rim.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Is a Function Selection Patient Indication
    CLINICAL ORTHOPAEDICS AND RELATED RESEARCH Number 390, pp. 31–41 © 2001 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc. Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Experience With an Absorbable, Transfixing Implant 03/25/2020 on BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCywCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3XGJiJSDa6kLdjliRzOOsR+bI3gZWJ99pv/KNUfPjA6Y= by https://journals.lww.com/clinorthop from Downloaded Stephen Fealy, MD; Mark C. Drakos, BA; Downloaded Answorth A. Allen, MD; and Russell F. Warren, MD from https://journals.lww.com/clinorthop by 3 BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCywCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3XGJiJSDa6kLdjliRzOOsR+bI3gZWJ99pv/KNUfPjA6Y= The use of arthroscopic means to address shoul- scribed in 1938. The essential lesion of shoul- der instability has provided a technically advan- der instability, as described by Bankart, is tageous way to approach Bankart lesions while thought by many to represent the most com- posing complex questions regarding the specific mon disorder underlying possible causes for indications for such an intervention. A successful shoulder instability.2,19,31 It represents a de- outcome with arthroscopic Bankart repair is a tachment of the labrum and its osseous inser- function of proper surgical indication and pa- tient selection. Several authors have evaluated tion from the anteroinferior glenoid. Reestab- the causes of failure and reasons for success with lishing the structural integrity of the soft tissue the Suretac device. The development of a bioab- to glenoid interface is the paramount objective sorbable repair device at the authors’ institution of the Bankart repair and has an essential role was precipitated by a desire to address and re- in surgery for shoulder stability. Although the pair Bankart lesions arthroscopically while traditional open Bankart repair remains the avoiding the frequent complications associated gold standard in treatment options, continued with the metal staple and the transglenoid suture development of arthroscopic techniques and technique.
    [Show full text]
  • Coracoid Graft Union: a Quantitative Assessment by Computed Tomography in Primary and Revision Latarjet Procedure
    ARTICLE IN PRESS J Shoulder Elbow Surg (2018) ■■, ■■–■■ www.elsevier.com/locate/ymse ORIGINAL ARTICLE Coracoid graft union: a quantitative assessment by computed tomography in primary and revision Latarjet procedure Mohammad Samim, MD, MRCSa, Kirstin M. Small,MDb,*, Laurence D. Higgins, MD, MBAc aDepartment of Radiology, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, USA bDepartment of Radiology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA cBoston Shoulder Institute, Boston, MA, USA Background: The goal of the Latarjet procedure is restoration of shoulder stability enabled by accurate graft positioning and union. This study aimed to establish a reproducible method of quantitatively assess- ing coracoid graft osseous union percentage (OUP) using computed tomography (CT) scans and to determine the effect of other factors on the OUP. Materials and methods: Postoperative CT scans of 41 consecutive patients treated with the open Latarjet procedure (37% primary, 63% revision) for anterior glenohumeral instability were analyzed for the OUP, position of the graft, and screw type and angle. Two musculoskeletal radiologists independently exam- ined the images 2 times, and intraobserver and interobserver reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Results: Mean OUP was 66% (range, 0%-94%) using quantitate methods, with good intraobserver re- liability (ICC = 0.795) and interobserver reliability (ICC = 0.797). Nonunion and significant graft resorption was found in 2 patients. No significant difference was found in the mean OUP in the primary (63%) vs. revision Latarjet procedure (67%). Grafts were flush in 39%, medial in 36%, and lateral in 8%. The medial and neutral graft position was associated with slightly higher OUP (72% and 69%) compared with lateral (65%).
    [Show full text]
  • Validation of a Clinical Prediction Rule for the Differentiation Between Septic Arthritis and Transient Synovitis of the Hip in Children by MININDER S
    COPYRIGHT © 2004 BY THE JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY, INCORPORATED Validation of a Clinical Prediction Rule for the Differentiation Between Septic Arthritis and Transient Synovitis of the Hip in Children BY MININDER S. KOCHER, MD, MPH, RAHUL MANDIGA, BS, DAVID ZURAKOWSKI, PHD, CAROL BARNEWOLT, MD, AND JAMES R. KASSER, MD Investigation performed at the Departments of Orthopaedic Surgery, Biostatistics, and Radiology, Children’s Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts Background: The differentiation between septic arthritis and transient synovitis of the hip in children can be difficult. The purpose of the present study was to validate a previously published clinical prediction rule for this differentiation in a new patient population. Methods: We prospectively studied children who presented to a major children’s hospital between 1997 and 2002 with an acutely irritable hip. As in the previous study, diagnoses of septic arthritis (fifty-one patients) and transient synovitis (103 patients) were operationally defined on the basis of the white blood-cell count in the joint fluid, the re- sults of cultures of joint fluid and blood, and the clinical course. Univariate analysis and multiple logistic regression were used to compare the two groups. The predicted probability of septic arthritis of the hip from the prediction rule was compared with actual distributions in the current patient population. The area under the receiver operating char- acteristic curve was determined. Results: The same four independent predictors of septic arthritis of the hip (a history of fever, non-weight-bearing, an erythrocyte sedimentation rate of 40 mm/hr, and a serum white blood-cell count of >12,000 cells/mm3 (>12.0 × 109/L)) were identified in the current patient population.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Latarjet: Tried, Tested and True
    Review Article Page 1 of 14 Open Latarjet: tried, tested and true Owen Mattern1, Allan Young1, Gilles Walch2 1Sydney Shoulder Research Institute, Sydney, Australia; 2Centre Orthopédique Santy, Lyon, France Contributions: (I) Conception and design: G Walch, A Young; (II) Administrative support: A Young; (III) Provision of study materials or patients: None; (IV) Collection and assembly of data: None; (V) Data analysis and interpretation: None; (VI) Manuscript writing: All authors; (VII) Final approval of manuscript: All authors. Correspondence to: Allan Young. Sydney Shoulder Research Institute, Suite 201, 156 Pacific Highway, St Leonards, Sydney, New South Wales 2065, Australia. Email: [email protected]. Abstract: The open Latarjet procedure has proven to be an effective procedure in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability, particularly in patients with glenoid bone loss and/or an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion. The transfer of the coracoid bone block to the anterior glenoid provides stability via the “triple blocking effect”. We describe our indications and surgical technique for the open Latarjet procedure. Keywords: Latarjet; coracoid transfer; anterior shoulder instability Received: 04 June 2017; Accepted: 18 September 2017; Published: 08 November 2017. doi: 10.21037/aoj.2017.10.01 View this article at: http://dx.doi.org/10.21037/aoj.2017.10.01 Introduction Latarjet included a lower recurrence and dislocation rate, whilst loss of external rotation was less with Latarjet of Traumatic anterior shoulder instability is a common injury 11.5° compared to 20.9° with Bankart repair (11). for the contact athlete, with high rates of recurrence in some athletic populations (1-4). Anatomical Bankart repair procedures have been successful, however high recurrence Principles rates have been shown in certain patient groups (5,6).
    [Show full text]
  • Multidirectional Shoulder Instability with Bone Loss and Prior Failed
    Technical Note Multidirectional Shoulder Instability With Bone Loss and Prior Failed Latarjet Procedure: Treatment With Fresh Distal Tibial Allograft and Modified T-Plasty Open Capsular Shift Liam A. Peebles, B.A., Zachary S. Aman, B.A., Fletcher R. Preuss, B.S., Brian T. Samuelsen, M.D., M.B.A., Tyler J. Zajac, M.S., A.T.C., O.T.C., Mitchell I. Kennedy, B.S., and Matthew T. Provencher, M.D., C.A.PT., M.C., U.S.N.R. Abstract: Recurrent multidirectional shoulder instability (MDI) is a challenging clinical problem, particularly in the setting of connective tissue diseases, and there is a distinct lack of literature discussing strategies for operative management of this unique patient group. These patients frequently present with significant glenoid bone loss, patulous and abnormal capsulolabral structures, and a history of multiple failed arthroscopic or open instability procedures. Although the precise treatment algorithm requires tailoring to the individual patient, we have shown successful outcomes in correcting recurrent MDI in the setting of underlying connective tissue disorders by means of a modified T-plasty capsular shift and rotator interval closure in conjunction with distal tibial allograft bony augmentation. The purpose of this Technical Note was to describe a technique that combines a fresh distal tibial allograft for glenoid bony augmentation with a modified T-plasty capsular shift and rotator interval closure for the management of recurrent shoulder MDI in patients presenting with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome or other connective tissue disorders after failed Latarjet stabilization. ecurrent multidirectional shoulder instability Conversely, MDI without hyperlaxity is more likely to R(MDI) is a difficult clinical problem and becomes present with anterior and/or posterior capsulolabral even more challenging in the face of connective tissue pathology1,2 in addition to bony lesions.
    [Show full text]
  • Knee Joint Surgery: Open Synovectomy
    Musculoskeletal Surgical Services: Open Surgical Procedures; Knee Joint Surgery: Open Synovectomy POLICY INITIATED: 06/30/2019 MOST RECENT REVIEW: 06/30/2019 POLICY # HH-5588 Overview Statement The purpose of these clinical guidelines is to assist healthcare professionals in selecting the medical service that may be appropriate and supported by evidence to improve patient outcomes. These clinical guidelines neither preempt clinical judgment of trained professionals nor advise anyone on how to practice medicine. The healthcare professionals are responsible for all clinical decisions based on their assessment. These clinical guidelines do not provide authorization, certification, explanation of benefits, or guarantee of payment, nor do they substitute for, or constitute, medical advice. Federal and State law, as well as member benefit contract language, including definitions and specific contract provisions/exclusions, take precedence over clinical guidelines and must be considered first when determining eligibility for coverage. All final determinations on coverage and payment are the responsibility of the health plan. Nothing contained within this document can be interpreted to mean otherwise. Medical information is constantly evolving, and HealthHelp reserves the right to review and update these clinical guidelines periodically. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, or otherwise, without permission from HealthHelp.
    [Show full text]
  • The Open Eden-Hybinette Procedure for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability with Glenoid Bone Loss Joseph W
    The Open Eden-Hybinette Procedure for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability With Glenoid Bone Loss Joseph W. Galvin, DO,* Zachary R. Zimmer, MD,* Alexander M. Prete, BS,* and Jon J.P. Warner, MD* In the setting of significant glenoid bone loss, soft tissue stabilization procedures for recur- rent anterior shoulder instability have high failure rates. The open or arthroscopic Eden- Hybinette procedure with tricortical iliac crest autograft has been shown to provide good results with low rates of recurrent instability. Indications for this technique include severe glenoid bone loss (>40%), recurrent instability following a Latarjet or distal tibial allograft procedure, or patients with abnormal coracoid morphology. In this technique article, we review the indications, contraindications, surgical technique, postoperative care, out- comes, and complications of the open Eden-Hybinette procedure. Oper Tech Sports Med 27:95-101 © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. KEYWORDS Eden-Hybinette, recurrent anterior instability Introduction through advanced imaging with MRI and 3-dimensional recon- struction computed tomography (CT) scans has likely led to nterior shoulder instability is a common problem in young increased utilization of bone augmentation techniques such as A active individuals with an incidence in the United States the Latarjet procedure, distal tibial allograft (DTA), and distal 1,2 (US) general population of 0.08 per 1000 person-years. Cer- clavicular autograft.13-17 The Latarjet and DTA procedures have tain at-risk populations involved in contact and collision activi- showntobeeffectiveandprovidegoodoutcomeswithlow ties, such as American football players and military athletes, rates of recurrent instability in primary and revision instability have anterior instability at an order of magnitude greater of scenarios,18-20 with the Latarjet showing long-term durability.
    [Show full text]
  • Clinical Guidelines
    CLINICAL GUIDELINES Joint Services Guidelines Version 1.0.2019 Clinical guidelines for medical necessity review of comprehensive musculoskeletal management services. © 2019 eviCore healthcare. All rights reserved. Regence: Comprehensive Musculoskeletal Management Guidelines V1.0.2019 Large Joint Services CMM-311: Knee Replacement/Arthroplasty 3 CMM-312: Knee Surgery-Arthroscopic and Open Procedures 14 CMM-313: Hip Replacement/Arthroplasty 35 CMM-314: Hip Surgery-Arthroscopic and Open Procedures 46 CMM-315: Shoulder Surgery-Arthroscopic and Open Procedures 47 CMM-318: Shoulder Arthroplasty/ Replacement/ Resurfacing/ Revision/ Arthrodesis 62 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ © 2019 eviCore healthcare. All Rights Reserved. Page 2 of 69 400 Buckwalter Place Boulevard, Bluffton, SC 29910 (800) 918-8924 www.eviCore.com Regence: Comprehensive Musculoskeletal Management Guidelines V1.0.2019 CMM-311: Knee Replacement/Arthroplasty CMM-311.1: Definition 4 CMM-311.2: General Guidelines 5 CMM-311.3: Indications and Non-Indications 5 CMM-311.4 Experimental, Investigational, or Unproven 9 CMM-311.5: Procedure (CPT®) Codes 10 CMM-311.6: References 10 ______________________________________________________________________________________________________ © 2019 eviCore healthcare. All Rights Reserved. Page 3 of 69 400 Buckwalter Place Boulevard, Bluffton, SC 29910 (800) 918-8924 www.eviCore.com Regence: Comprehensive Musculoskeletal Management Guidelines V1.0.2019 CMM-311.1: Definition
    [Show full text]
  • H3 Schedule of Procedures H3 Insurance Schedule of Procedures
    H3 Schedule of Procedures H3 Insurance Schedule of Procedures This schedule is based on the CCSD schedule of procedures. H3 Schedule of Procedures Version 2020 All codes listed detail the maximum amount we will pay towards the fee a specialist and anaesthetist will charge for the operation/procedure. H3 Insurance is a trading name of Insure I Limited which is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Insure I Ltd is registered in Northern Ireland, Registered number NI072940. H3 Insurance Registered address is Channel Wharf, 21 Old Channel Road, Belfast, BT3 9DE. T: 028 9046 9990 www.h3insurance.com H3 Schedule of Procedures Index Guidance Notes .................................................................................................................. 1 Abdomen – excluding urinary / reproductive organs......................................................... 3 Bones, joints & connective tissue / tendon muscle ......................................................... 13 Brain, cranium & other intracranial organs ...................................................................... 29 Breasts .............................................................................................................................. 32 Consultations, simple investigations & general procedures ............................................ 35 Ear, nose & throat… .......................................................................................................... 38 Endoscopic GIT procedures .............................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Biomechanics of the Latarjet Reconstruction: Is It All About the Sling? Nobuyuki Yamamoto, MD,* and Scott P
    The Biomechanics of the Latarjet Reconstruction: Is It All About the Sling? Nobuyuki Yamamoto, MD,* and Scott P. Steinmann, MD† It has been clinically believed that the stabilizing mechanism of the Latarjet procedure is the sling effect. Biomechanical studies have demonstrated that there are 3 stabilizing mecha- nisms of the Latarjet procedure, the main one being the sling effect produced by the sub- scapularis and conjoint tendons. The other 2 mechanisms are the suturing of the capsular flap at the end-range arm position and reconstruction of the glenoid concavity at the mid- range arm position. All 3 stabilizing mechanisms function at both the mid- and end-range arm positions. After the Latarjet procedure, the shoulder even with a large glenoid defect can have stability increased by 14% compared to the normal shoulder. The acceptable clini- cal outcomes of the Latarjet procedure are supported by these 3 stabilizing mechanisms. Oper Tech Sports Med 27:49-54 © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. KEYWORDS biomechanics, Latarjet reconstruction, sling, subscapularis Why Good Clinical Results Can in which the essential lesion, the Bankart lesion is not repaired? To date, “sling effect of the subscapularis muscle” Be Obtained Without the Bankart has been clinically believed as the main stabilizing mechanism Repair? of this procedure. This was speculation among surgeons. Its he Latarjet procedure has gained popularity with recent precise stabilizing mechanism had not been studied. T reports1,2 showing that postoperative arthritis can be avoided by appropriate positioning of the coracoid bone graft. Excellent clinical results even for shoulders with a large Biomechanical Experiments glenoid defect have been reported.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Orthopaedic Updates Bookle
    Doctors Consulting here Dr Todd Gothelf Concord 47-49 Burwood Road Tel 02 9744 2666 Dr Samya Lakis CONCORD NSW 2137 Fax 02 9744 3706 Dr Paul Mason Dr John Negrine Dr Rodney Pattinson Dr Doron Sher Dr Kwan Yeoh Doctors Consulting here Dr Paul Annett Dr Jerome Goldberg Level 7 Dr Todd Gothelf Hurstville Waratah Private Tel 02 9580 6066 Dr Samya Lakis 29-31 Dora Street Fax 02 9580 0890 Dr Andreas Loefler HURSTVILLE NSW 2220 Dr John Negrine Dr Rodney Pattinson Dr Ivan Popoff Dr Allen Turnbull Dr Kwan Yeoh Doctors Consulting here Suite 5B Penrith Tel 02 4721 7799 Dr Todd Gothelf 119-121 Lethbridge St Fax 02 4721 7997 Dr Kwan Yeoh PENRITH NSW 2750 Doctors Consulting here Dr John Best Dr Jerome Goldberg Dr Leigh Golding Dr Todd Gothelf 160 Belmore Road Tel 02 9399 5333 Dr Samya Lakis Randwick RANDWICK NSW 2031 Fax 02 9398 8673 Dr Paul Mason Dr Andreas Loefler Dr John Negrine Dr Rodney Pattinson Dr Ivan Popoff Dr Doron Sher www.orthosports.com.au Topic Presenter Notes An approach to the stiffening painful shoulder Dr John Best Notes below Medial meniscal root tears Dr Doron Sher Notes below The first time dislocation of the shoulder Dr Jerome Goldberg Notes below Diagnosing and treating spinal pain Dr Paul Mason Rapid recovery after joint replacement Dr Andreas Loefler Case based sports medicine mimics, Dr Paul Annett rheumatology and others Lisfranc Injuries Dr Todd Gothelf International touring during a pandemic Dr Leigh Golding Vertebral body tethering (VBT): an update Dr Samya Lakis Notes below Interesting Case Studies Dr John Negrine Slipped upper femoral epiphysis Dr Rod Pattinson Dr John P Best B Med, Dip Sports Med (London), FACSP, FFSEM Sport & Exercise Medicine Physician An Approach to the Stiffening Painful Shoulder This handout complements the video presentation on this topic.
    [Show full text]
  • Ankle and Pantalar Arthrodesis
    ANKLE AND PANTALAR ARTHRODESIS George E. Quill, Jr., M.D. In: Foot and Ankle Disorders Edited by Mark S. Myerson, M.D. Since reports in the late 19th Century, arthrodesis has been a successful accepted treatment method for painful disorders of the ankle, subtalar, and transverse tarsal joints. While the title of this chapter involves arthrodesis - the intentional fusion of a joint - as a form of reconstruction, this chapter will address not only surgical technique, but nonoperative methods of care as well. We will address the pathophysiology leading to ankle and hindfoot disability, succinctly review the existing literature on the topic of hindfoot and ankle arthrodesis, highlight the pathomechanics involved, and spend considerable time on establishing the diagnosis, indications, and preoperative planning when surgery is indicated. We also will discuss the rehabilitation of the postoperative patient, as well as the management of complications that may arise after ankle and pantalar arthrodesis. There are more than thirty different viable techniques that have been described in order to achieve successful ankle and hindfoot arthrodesis. It is not the purpose of this chapter to serve as compendium of all the techniques ever described. The author will, rather, attempt to distill into a useful amount of clinically applicable material this vast body of information that the literature and clinical experience provide. Ankle arthrodesis is defined as surgical fusion of the tibia to the talus. Surgical fusion of the ankle (tibiotalar) and subtalar (talocalcaneal) joints at the same operative sitting is termed tibiotalocalcaneal arthrodesis. Fusion of the talus to all the bones articulating with it (distal tibia, calcaneus, navicular, and cuboid) is termed pantalar arthrodesis.
    [Show full text]