Dataset Information

Both Open and Arthroscopic Latarjet Result in Excellent Outcomes and Low Recurrence Rates for Anterior Shoulder Instability.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the patient-reported outcomes of open Latarjet (OL) compared to arthroscopic Latarjet (AL) for anterior shoulder instability.

Methods

A retrospective review of patients who underwent either OL or AL for anterior shoulder instability between 2011 and 2019 was performed. Recurrent instability, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) score, patient satisfaction, willingness to undergo surgery again, and return to work/sport (RTW/RTS) were evaluated. A P value of < .05 was considered to be statistically significant.

Results

Our study included 102 patients in total; 72 patients treated with OL, and 30 treated with AL. There were no demographic differences between the two groups (P > .05 for all). At final follow up (mean of 51.3 months), there was no difference between those that underwent OL or AL in the reported WOSI, VAS, VAS during sports, SSV, and SIRSI scores, nor in patient satisfaction, or whether they would undergo surgery again (P > .05). Overall, there was no significant difference in the total rate of RTP (65% vs 60.9%; P = .74), or timing of RTP (8.1 months vs 7 months; P = .35). Additionally, there was no significant difference in the total rate of RTW (93.5% vs 95.5%; P = .75). Overall, 3 patients in the OL group and 2 patients in the AL group had recurrent instability events (6.9% vs 6.7%; P = .96), with no significant difference in the rate of recurrent dislocation (4.2% vs 3.3%; P = .84).

Conclusion

In patients with anterior shoulder instability, both the OL and AL are reliable treatment options, with a low rate of recurrent instability, and similar patient-reported outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Hurley ET

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8689257 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo evaluate the outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage (ABRR) compared with the arthroscopic Latarjet (AL) procedure for anterior shoulder instability in patients with a labral tear and a concomitant engaging Hill-Sachs lesion.MethodsA retrospective review of patients who underwent either ABRR or the AL procedure for a diagnosis of anterior shoulder instability with a concomitant engaging Hill-Sachs lesion between 2011 and 2019 was performed. Recurrent instability, the visual analog scale score, the Subjective Shoulder Value, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability score, patient satisfaction, willingness to undergo surgery again, and return to work or sport were evaluated.ResultsOur study included 41 patients treated with ABRR and 26 treated with the AL procedure. At final follow-up, there was no difference between patients who underwent ABRR and those who underwent the AL procedure in the reported Western Ontario Shoulder Instability score (21.8% vs 28.2%, P = .33) or any of its components, the visual analog scale score (0.9 vs 1.4, P = .32), the Subjective Shoulder Value (78.4 vs 74.5, P = .6062), the rate of satisfaction (81.6% vs 85.6%, P = .54), or whether patients would undergo surgery again (81.6% vs 96.1%, P = .16). Overall, 5 patients in the ABRR group and 2 patients in the AL group had recurrent instability events (12.2% vs 7.8%, P = .70), with no significant difference in the rate of recurrent dislocation (12.2% vs 3.8%, P = .39).ConclusionsIn patients with anterior shoulder instability and a concomitant Hill-Sachs lesion, both ABRR and the AL procedure were shown to be reliable treatments, with a low rate of recurrent instability and excellent patient-reported outcomes in appropriately selected patients. However, our study could not determine whether there was critical glenoid bone loss in patients undergoing ABRR, and surgeons should still exercise caution in performing ABRR in patients with high-grade glenoid bone loss or in those with failed prior stabilizations.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective cohort study.

Project description:PurposeThe purpose of this systematic review was to examine the effect that sex has on recurrence of anterior shoulder instability following primary arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization.MethodsA systematic review using PRISMA guidelines was performed by searching PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies reporting recurrence rates following arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years. Patient demographics as well as preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative findings, including patient-reported outcomes and recurrence rates, were analyzed by 2 independent reviewers. Recurrence was defined as an episode of dislocation, subluxation or instability following primary arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization. Study methodological quality was evaluated with the Modified Coleman Methodology Score (MCMS). Risk bias was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS score). Descriptive statistics are presented.ResultsTen studies (1 Level I, 1 Level II, 5 Level III, and 3 Level IV), including a total of 7,102 patients with primary traumatic and/or recurrent traumatic shoulder instability without previous procedures who underwent primary arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization, were included (mean follow-up, 34.6 months; mean age, 25.4 years). There was a total of 5,097 males (71.8%) and 2,005 females (28.2%). There was a higher recurrence rate in males (6%-37%) compared to females (0-32%). Clinical outcomes were inconsistently reported, so no quantitative analysis of clinical outcomes or return-to-sport between sexes was possible. The average MCMS of all 10 studies was 76.8 ± 8.0, indicating good methodology.ConclusionsMales may have higher recurrence rates than females following primary arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization; however, the heterogeneity of the included studies precludes any definitive conclusions.Level of evidenceIV, Systematic Review of Level I-IV.

Project description:PurposeTo compare the outcomes of athletes who have been treated for either primary or recurrent anterior shoulder instability with arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR).MethodsA retrospective review of patients who underwent ABR for anterior shoulder instability, with a minimum of 24 months' follow-up, was performed. Those who underwent ABR for primary instability were matched in a 1:1 ratio for age, sex, sport, and level of preoperative play to those who underwent ABR for recurrent instability. The rate, level, and timing of return to play (RTP), as well as the Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport After Injury score, were evaluated. Additionally, the recurrence rate, visual analog scale score, Subjective Shoulder Value, Rowe score, satisfaction, and whether patients would undergo the same operation again were compared.ResultsAfter analysis of 467 patients, 100 athletes who underwent ABR for primary instability were identified and subsequently pair matched to 100 patients who underwent ABR for recurrent instability, with a mean age of 27.2 years, 87% male patients, 68% collision athletes, and a mean follow-up period of 61.9 months. There was no significant difference between the groups in the rate of RTP (80% vs 79%, P = .86) or RTP at the preinjury level (65% vs 65%, P >. 999); however, there was a significant difference in time to RTP (6.9 ± 2.9 months vs 5.9 ± 2.5 months, P = .02). There were no significant differences in visual analog scale score, Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport After Injury score, Subjective Shoulder Value, Rowe score, patient satisfaction, and whether patients would undergo the operation again (P > .05 for all). There was no difference in the rate of recurrent instability after ABR (10% vs 16%, P = .29).ConclusionsABR results in excellent clinical outcomes, high rates of RTP, and low recurrence rates for both athletes with primary instability and those with recurrent instability.Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative cohort study.

Project description:BackgroundA paucity of literature exists on the outcomes after Latarjet for anterior shoulder instability in patients with seizure disorders (SDs). The purpose of this study was to determine the effectiveness of the Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability in patients with SDs.MethodsA retrospective review of patients undergoing Latarjet from 2013 to 2017 for anterior shoulder instability with minimum 2 years of clinical follow-up was performed. Patients were divided into two groups: patients diagnosed with SD, and patients without a history of seizure (control). Demographics, indications, SD details, and postoperative outcomes were collected. The incidence of complications, recurrent instability, revision surgery, and repeat seizure(s) were also examined.ResultsA total of 53 patients were identified, including 10 shoulders in 9 patients with an SD (88.9% male; mean age, 29.2 years [range, 20-37]), and 44 shoulders in 44 non-SD patients (86.4% male; mean age, 30.3 years [range, 18-52]). The mean follow-up time was 3.4 (range, 2.2-4.8) and 3.8 (range, 2.1-5.6) years in the SD and control group, respectively. During the follow-up period, 4 of 9 (44.4%) patients with an SD (50% shoulders) had a recurrent seizure postoperatively. Of those 4 patients, three sustained a recurrent dislocation of the operative shoulder(s) resulting from a postoperative seizure, including one who dislocated bilateral shoulders from a single seizure event after bilateral Latarjet procedures. There was no recurrent instability in patients who did not sustain a seizure in the postoperative period. Having a seizure in the postoperative period significantly increased the risk of recurrent dislocation (OR = 39.9, P = 0.04).ConclusionsLatarjet is a successful operation for recurrent anterior shoulder instability in patients without an SD. While it can still be successful in patients with SD, adequate control of seizures postoperatively is paramount to prevent recurrent instability episodes. Patients with an SD can be advised that if their seizures can remain controlled, they have a high likelihood of clinical success equal to that of patients without an SD.