Salvage Latarjet may provide worse outcomes in terms of recurrent instability and returning to sports compared to primary Latarjet: a systematic review of comparative studies.

BACKGROUND: The Latarjet procedure (LP) is performed as a primary stabilization procedure (primary LP) and a salvage procedure when an earlier shoulder stabilization procedure has failed (salvage LP). However, whether primary LP or salvage LP provides better outcomes for anterior shoulder instability remains unknown. METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on the PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, web of science and Cochrane Library was performed from their inception date to December 4, 2023. Inclusion criteria mainly included the comparison of postoperative outcomes between primary and salvage LP, English language, and full text availability. Two reviewers independently examined the literature, collected data, and evaluated the methodological robustness of the included studies. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies was used to evaluate the quality of nonrandomized studies. Recurrent instability, complications, reoperations, return to sports, patient-reported outcomes, and range of motion were assessed. Statistical evaluations were conducted using Manager V.5.4.1 (The Cochrane Collaboration, Software Update, Oxford, UK). RESULTS: Twelve studies were included in the systematic review, with 940 shoulders undergoing primary LP and 631 shoulders undergoing salvage LP. Statistically significant differences in favor of primary LP were found in 2 of the 11 and 2 of 4 included studies in terms of recurrent instability and returning to the same sports (RTS) at preinjury level, respectively. In terms of the visual analog scale, subjective shoulder value and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, 2 of the 4, 1 of the 3 and 1 of the 3 included studies reported statistically significant differences in favor of primary LP. Differences were not noticed regarding complications, reoperations, the time to RTS, the Rowe score, the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System, and forward flexion. CONCLUSION: Current evidence suggests that compared with primary LP, salvage LP may provide inferior postoperative outcomes in terms of recurrent instability and the rate of RTS at preinjury level. Primary and salvage LP may yield comparable efficacy in terms of complications, reoperations, the rate of RTS, the time to RTS, pain, shoulder function, and range of motion. PROSPERO ID: CRD42023492027.

High Variability in Standardized Outcome Thresholds of Clinically Important Changes in Shoulder Instability Surgery: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to examine reported MCID and PASS values for PROMs following shoulder instability surgery and assess variability in published values depending on the surgery performed. Secondarily, our aims were to describe the methods used to derive MCID and PASS values in the published literature, including anchor-based, distribution-based, or other approaches, and to assess the frequency of MCID and PASS usage in studies on shoulder instability surgery. METHODS: A systematic review of MCID and PASS values following Bankart, Latarjet, and Remplissage procedures was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA). The Embase, Pubmed, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were queried from 1985 to 2023. Inclusion criteria included studies written in English, and studies reporting utilization MCID or PASS for patient reported outcome measures (PROMS) following Latarjet, Bankart, Remplissage approaches for shoulder instability surgery. Extracted data included study population characteristics, intervention characteristics, and outcomes of interest. Continuous data were described using median and range. Categorical variables, including PROMs reported and MCID/PASS methods, were described using percentages. As MCID is a patient-level metric and not a group-level metric, the authors validated that all included studies reported proportions (%) of subjects that met or exceeded the MCID. RESULTS: A total of 174 records were screened, and 8 studies were included in this review. MCID was the most widely utilized outcome threshold which was reported in all 8 studies, with only 2 studies reporting both the MCID and the PASS. The most widely studied PROMs were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) (range 5.65-9.6 for distribution MCID, 8.5 anchor MCID, 86 anchor PASS); Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) (range 11.4-12.4 distribution MCID, 82.5-87.5 anchor PASS); visual analog scale (VAS) (range 1.1-1.7 distribution MCID, 1.5-2.5 PASS); Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) (range 60.7-254.9 distribution MCID, 126.43 anchor MCID, 571-619.5 anchor PASS); and Rowe scores (range 5.6-8.4 distribution MCID, 9.7 anchor MCID). Notably, no studies reported on substantial clinical benefit (SCB) or maximal outcome improvement (MOI). CONCLUSION: Despite the wide array of available PROMs for assessing shoulder instability surgery outcomes, the availability of clinically significant outcome thresholds such as MCID and PASS remains relatively limited. While MCID has been the most frequently reported metric, there is considerable inter-study variability observed in their values. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Knowing the outcome thresholds such as MCID and PASS of the PROMs frequently used to evaluate the results of glenohumeral stabilization surgery is fundamental, since they allow us to know what is a clinically significant improvement for the patient.

Shoulder Instability-Return to Sports After Injury (SIRSI) Scale Shows That Lack of Psychological Readiness Predicts Outcomes and Recurrence Following Surgical Stabilization.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the predictive ability of psychological readiness to return to sports on clinical outcomes and recurrences in athletes who return to sports following shoulder instability surgery. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent shoulder instability surgery between September 2020 and October 2021 (arthroscopic Bankart repair or Latarjet procedure) with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients were grouped according to the achievement of psychological readiness to return to play using the SIRSI scale (≥ 55 points) measured at 6 months following surgery. Recurrences were measured and functional outcomes were evaluated by the Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Rowe, and Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS). The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the VAS and Rowe scores was calculated using the distribution-based method of ½ standard deviation of the delta (difference between postoperative and preoperative scores). The patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for the VAS scale was set at 2.5 based on previous literature. To evaluate the predictive ability of SIRSI a regression model analysis and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve were used. RESULTS: A total of 108 who achieved psychological readiness (PSR) and 41 who did not (NPSR) met the study criteria. PSR achieved significantly higher percentages of MCID and PASS thresholds for VAS than NPSR (MCID: 68.5% vs 48.7%, p=0.026; PASS: 92.5% vs 58.5%, p<0.001). However, there were no differences in the percentage of patients achieving MCID for the Rowe score between groups (98.1% vs 100%, p=0.999). The only strongest independent predictor of postoperative outcomes was being psychologically ready to return to sports. The SIRSI scale had an excellent predictive ability for recurrences (area under curve 0.745, 95% CI 0.5-0.8). Of those who sustained a recurrence, 20% were not psychologically ready compared to 4.3% who were (p= 0.002). A power analysis was not conducted for this study. CONCLUSION: The SIRSI scale is associated with postoperative clinical outcomes and recurrences in patients who returned to sports following shoulder instability surgery. Patients who were not psychologically ready following shoulder instability surgery had worse clinical outcomes with fewer patients achieving clinically significant outcomes (PASS and MCID) for pain, and a higher risk of recurrence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, Retrospective cohort study.

The arthroscopic Latarjet procedure with a posterior guided system and suture-button fixation enables more precise bone block positioning in the axial plane versus anterior screws fixation.

PURPOSE: Adequate position of the bone block during arthroscopic Latarjet procedure is critical for an optimal functional outcome. However, this procedure is complex with a long learning curve. Our aim was to compare the bone block position between a dedicated glenoid posterior instrumentation and suture button fixation versus an anterior screw fixation, on a postoperative computed tomography (CT) scan. METHOD: Seventy-nine consecutive patients operated on for an anterior shoulder instability were included in this retrospective study. The same surgeon performed arthroscopically the Latarjet procedure either with an anterior drilling and screw fixation (Group A), or with a specific posterior glenoid guide pin, a posterior drilling, and a suture cortical button fixation (Group B). Evaluations were made by two independent observers. The position was evaluated by CT scan in the axial and sagittal planes. Learning curves with operative time, complications and clinical outcomes were assessed at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were included in Group A and 44 in Group B. In Group A, 27 bone blocks were flush (87.1%) and 38 in Group B (92.7%) (p < 0.01). In Group A, 72% of the bone block height was below the equator and 76%, in Group B (ns). The mean operating time was 123 ± 32.5 min in Group A and 95 ± 34.1 min in Group B (p < 0.0001). At the final follow-up, the mean aggregate Rowe score was respectively 94.6 ± 10.4 and 93.1 ± 9.8 points in Groups A and B. The mean aggregate Walch-Duplay score was respectively 94.2 ± 11.6 and 93.4 ± 10.6 points in Groups A and B. There were 11 complications (31.4%) in Group A and five complications (11.3%) in Group B (ns). CONCLUSION: The arthroscopic Latarjet procedure with a posterior drilling guided system and suture-button fixation allows more precise positioning in the axial plane than with anterior drilling and screw fixation. This posterior-guided procedure could reduce intraoperative and short-term complications. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV.

Glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs width percentage score are useful to select optimal operation for the treatment of glenohumeral instability in overhead athletes: Arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage versus open Latarjet.

PURPOSE: Glenohumeral instability with combined bone lesion in contact and overhead athletes with subcritical bone loss is challenging to treat with high recurrent instability. Treatment options are arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage and Latarjet operations. However, there is no consensus on their effectiveness. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes and return to sports after both operations and whether evaluating the glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs width to calculate the total bone loss can help determine the appropriate operation. METHODS: In this retrospective comparative analysis, 30 athletes who underwent index arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage (n = 16) or Latarjet procedure (n = 14) between 2017 and 2020 were included. Computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were routinely performed. The quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (qDASH), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), instability severity index (ISI) scores and range of motion (ROM) were recorded preoperatively and at a mean follow-up of 53 months (SD = 12). Follow-up included time-to-return sports, self-perceived sports performance level and complications/recurrent dislocations. RESULTS: Preoperative qDASH, ASES, ISI scores, ages and genders were similar. The Latarjet group had significantly larger glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs width and total bone loss (p < 0.01). Both groups had significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after the operations (p < 0.01). Athletes with a total bone loss <25% underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage and total bone loss ≥25% underwent Latarjet procedure, and there were no differences between the groups in terms of postoperative PROs, ROM, time-to-return sports and performance. There were no re-dislocations. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage or Latarjet procedure can adequately address glenohumeral instability with combined bone lesions. Patients with total bone loss scores greater than or equal to 25 may particularly benefit from the Latarjet procedure, while the minimally invasive arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage can yield equally satisfying scores for total bone loss less than 25. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Primary bone graft stability after Latarjet surgery: biomechanical evaluation of a fixation technique with metal-free all-suture cerclage vs. cortical screws.

BACKGROUND: To reduce hardware-related complications in coracoid graft fixation to the anterior aspect of the glenoid, a metal-free Latarjet technique was recently introduced. The aim of this study was to compare the primary stability of a classic Latarjet procedure with 2 metal screws to a novel metal-free, all-suture cerclage method. It is hypothesized that fixation of the coracoid graft with 2 malleolar screws will provide higher primary stability compared with an all-suture cerclage technique. METHODS: This biomechanical in vitro study was conducted on 12 fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders (6 matched pairs) with a mean donor age of 80 years (range, 67-89 years). Coracoid graft fixation was performed using a recently introduced all-suture cerclage technique (group A) or a classic Latarjet technique with two 4.5-mm malleolar screws (group B). The conjoint tendon was loaded with a static force of 10 N to simulate the sling effect. Graft loading with a probe head consisted of 6 ascending load levels (10-50 N, 10-100 N, 10-150 N, 10-200 N, 10-250 N, and 10-300 N) with 100 cycles each at 1 Hz. Relative motion of the bone graft to the glenoid was measured using an optic 3-dimensional system. RESULTS: While loading the conjoint tendon with 10 N, no difference in mean displacement of the bone-graft was found between both groups (P = .144). During cyclic loading, a significant difference in relative displacement for both groups was already detected in load level 1 (group A: 2398.8 µm vs. group B: 125.7 µm; P = .024), and this trend continued with the following load levels (P < .05). DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The study demonstrated that the innovative metal-free, all-suture cerclage fixation technique results in higher micromotion than the classic coracoid graft fixation with 2 malleolar screws. According to the present biomechanical investigation, shoulders treated with a metal-free all-suture cerclage technique might need adapted rehabilitation protocols to protect the construct and allow for graft healing.

Comparing postoperative proprioception of the glenohumeral joint between the open and the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder proprioception, in which the anterior glenohumeral capsule plays a major role, is critical to the functioning of the shoulder. Consequently, most surgeons either do not resect or reinsert the anterior capsule in shoulder stabilization surgery. In the original open Latarjet procedure (OLP), the anterior capsule is preserved. However, in the all-arthroscopic Latarjet procedure (ALP), complete anterior capsule resection is recommended for better view and access to the coracoid. This raises the question if there is a postoperative difference in proprioception between these 2 procedures. Therefore, the aims of this study are (1) to assess the difference in postoperative proprioception between the operated and healthy sides after the OLP and ALP and (2) to compare the difference in postoperative proprioception on the operated side between the OLP and ALP. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis including all patients who underwent a proprioception test after an OLP or ALP at our center. Collected baseline characteristics included sex, age at surgery, operated side, hand dominance, presence of a Hill-Sachs lesion, and time between surgery and the proprioception test. For the test, patients were positioned 1 meter from a wall. They were blindfolded and had to point at a target with a laser pointer taped to their index finger. The laser point was marked and the errors were measured horizontally and vertically and categorized as <4 cm, 4-8 cm, 8-16 cm, and >16 cm. RESULTS: Between April 2022 and April 2024, a total of 91 cases were identified, of which 24 underwent an OLP and 67 underwent an ALP. No significant difference was found in error distribution between the healthy and operated side after both the OLP (P = .30 horizontally, P = .67 vertically) and ALP (P = .20 horizontally, P = .34 vertically). Moreover, there was no significant difference in error distribution between the operated sides after the OLP vs. ALP (P = .52 horizontally; P = .61 vertically). CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that postoperative proprioception is not significantly different between the operated and healthy sides after both the OLP and ALP, nor between the operated sides after the OLP vs. after the ALP. This might imply that completely resecting the anterior glenohumeral capsule does not have a detrimental effect on shoulder proprioception. However, these results are multifactorial and prospective studies are needed to better understand the regeneration potential of glenohumeral capsule mechanoreceptors and the importance of the anterior capsule for shoulder proprioception.

Inlay structure can improve bone graft stability in the Bristow procedure.

BACKGROUND: Compared with the Latarjet procedure, the Bristow procedure has a lower screw-related complication rate but poor bone healing. A modified Inlay Bristow procedure has been reported to significantly improve the bone healing rate, but the biomechanical mechanism is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical stability of the bone graft between a modified Inlay Bristow procedure and the classic Bristow procedure. METHODS: Sixteen left scapula models (Sawbones, Composite Scapula, and fourth generation) were randomly divided into 2 groups (8:8). The bone graft in the first group was fixed with a 3.5 mm screw using the Inlay structure. The bone graft in the second group was fixed with a 3.5 mm screw via the traditional method. The maximum cyclic displacement, ultimate failure load and stiffness were evaluated biomechanically. The failure type was recorded for each model. RESULTS: Cyclic loading tests demonstrated that the maximum cyclic displacement of the Inlay procedure was significantly smaller (P = .001) than that of the classic procedure. The Inlay Bristow technique resulted in a significantly higher (P = .024) ultimate failure load than the classic Bristow technique. The stiffness of the classic group was 19.17 ± 4.01 N/mm and that of the inlay group was 22.34 ± 5.35 N/mm (P = .232). Failure was mainly due to bone graft fractures through the drill hole or glenoid bone fractures. CONCLUSION: Inlay Bristow fixation of the bone graft in a Sawbones model provides significantly stronger fixation and better time point zero stability than classic Bristow fixation, suggesting a higher likelihood of graft union.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair vs. Latarjet Procedure for Recurrent Shoulder Instability: A Meta-Analysis of Clinical Outcomes and Complication Rates in General and Athletic Populations.

BACKGROUND: The Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure are both effective surgical methods for treating repeated recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder. However, there is still little consensus regarding the standard treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Typically, the choice of treatment has been influenced more by training and tradition rather than the existing evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes, recurrence, and complications between the two procedures, among both athletic and non-athletic cohorts. METHODS: Relevant clinical trials were identified through a systematic search of databases in April 2023 including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. RCTs and cohort studies were included if they compared patient-reported outcomes or complication rates of open Latarjet procedure versus arthroscopic Bankart repair. Continuous data, such as patient-reported outcomes were pooled as the weighted mean difference (WMD). For dichotomous data such as recurrence and revision rates, the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated using random effects meta-analysis. RESULTS: 21 clinical studies (3 RCTs) were included in the meta-analysis involving a total of 13176 operated shoulders. Arthroscopic Bankart showed a 3.08 times higher risk of recurrence and revision due to post operation instability (RR=3.08, 95% CI: 2.03 to 4.68) compared to those who had the Latarjet approach. The ROWE score, was higher in the Latarjet group by an average of 4.55 points (95% CI: 2.41 to 6.68). This difference was more pronounced in athletes, with an increase of 5.47 points (95% CI: 0.16 to 10.78), compared to the non-athletic population: 4.03 (95% CI: 2.04 to 6.02). Return to sport time was shorter by 0.40 months (95% CI: -0.75 to -0.05) in the Latarjet group. The total complication rate was approximately 47% lower in the Bankart group (RR=0.53, 95% CI: 0.31-0.90). Additionally, the risk of hematoma was 75% lower in patients undergoing the arthroscopic Bankart compared to the Latarjet procedure. External rotation, assessed both in abduction and adduction of the arm, as well as forward elevation, show no significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Our results demonstrate that the Latarjet procedure has a lower recurrence rate, excels in patient-reported outcomes, and requires less time for return to sports. Thus, it may be a superior alternative to arthroscopic Bankart repair. However, it is still associated with a higher incidence of complications.

Splitting the subscapularis at the upper two-third and lower one-third junction or in the middle during the Latarjet-Walch procedure does not affect the external rotation range of motion.

BACKGROUND: Our purpose was to investigate (1) the difference in external rotation range of motion (ROM) limitation between the two recommended subscapularis-splitting techniques (mid-split vs. upper 2/3rd -lower 1/3rd split) and (2) the differences in elevation ROM, internal rotation (IR) ROM, the functional outcomes and the IR strength between the two techniques in the Latarjet-Walch procedure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of patients with recurrent shoulder instability treated by the Latarjet-Walch procedure between January 2021 and January 2022. After a priori calculation of sample size, 32 patients were divided into two groups according to the type of intraoperative subscapularis split [upper 2/3rd -lower 1/3rd level split (LS group, n = 19) vs. mid-LS (MS group, n = 13)] performed in the Latarjet-Walch procedure. RESULTS: The final external rotation with the arm adducted deficit (as compared to opposite normal shoulder) was not significantly different between the LS (9° ± 8°) and the MS (10° ± 8°, P = .8) groups. The final ER with the elbow abducted @ 90° (ER2) deficit was not significantly different between that of the LS (14° ± 12°) and the MS groups (12° ± 9°, P = .5). Only in the MS group were the final ER with the arm adducted deficit (P = .03) and the final ER with the elbow abducted @ 90° deficits (P = .05) significantly better (smaller) than the corresponding baseline values. The Rowe scores (P = .2) and the Shoulder Subjective Value (P = .7) were not significantly different between the two groups. There were no postoperative subluxations in either group. However, 3 patients tested positive in apprehension testing in the LS group compared to none in the MS group, the difference being statistically insignificant. The IR strength was 95% of the normal, unaffected shoulder in the LS group and 93% of the normal in the MS group (P = .6). Computed tomography scan evaluation showed that the transverse diameter index of subscapularis (upper subscapularis diameter/lower subscapularis diameter) was not different in the MS (0.9 ± 0.1) and the LS (0.9 ± 0.1, P = .3) groups. CONCLUSION: We found no difference in final external rotation limitation between the upper 2/3rd - lower 1/3rd vs. mid-level subscapularis split techniques. The functional outcomes, the IR strength, subscapularis transverse diameter index, and fatty infiltration in the computed tomography scan were similar in both groups.

Does previous arthroscopic Bankart repair influence coracoid graft osteolysis in Latarjet procedure? A case-control study with computed tomography scan data.

BACKGROUND: The Latarjet procedure is commonly performed in the treatment of recurrent shoulder instability and is also indicated as a salvage procedure for recurrence after failed arthroscopic Bankart repair. Although this procedure has shown success, there has been an increased awareness of complications in recent studies, especially graft osteolysis. Most relevant research has focused on the pathophysiology, incidence, or location of graft osteolysis or the risk factors for graft osteolysis; however, the data are limited to primary Latarjet procedures. This study aimed to investigate the effect of previous arthroscopic Bankart repair surgery on coracoid bone graft osteolysis in the Latarjet procedure. METHODS: This retrospective case-control study analyzed data from patients who underwent primary Latarjet procedures or revision Latarjet procedures following failed arthroscopic Bankart repair. Clinical outcome measures included range of motion, the Subjective Shoulder Value, and the Rowe score. Volumetric analysis of each transferred coracoid graft was performed using early postoperative and late postoperative computed tomography scan data, and the amount of graft osteolysis was then calculated as the percentage of volume reduction of each graft. RESULTS: A total of 32 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in this study, with 24 patients in the primary Latarjet group (group I) and 8 patients in the revision Latarjet group (group II). The mean age of the patients was 32.5 ± 7.7 years, and the mean follow-up duration was 52.1 ± 8.9 months. Both study groups showed significant improvement in the Subjective Shoulder Value compared with baseline (P < .05). Comparison of postoperative clinical outcome measures showed no significant difference in any outcome parameter between the 2 study groups (P > .05). No recurrence was observed during the follow-up period. A positive apprehension sign was present in 6 patients (25%) in group I and 4 patients (50%) in group II (P > .05). Analysis of radiologic data revealed that all patients underwent some degree of graft osteolysis, with varying osteolysis ratios between 12% and 98%. The mean osteolysis ratio of the coracoid graft was 67.3% ± 22.6% in group I and 69.4% ± 25.6% in group II, with no significant difference between the 2 groups (P > .05). CONCLUSION: The findings of this study suggest that a considerable amount of coracoid graft osteolysis is observed after both primary Latarjet procedures and revision Latarjet procedures following failed arthroscopic Bankart repair. Previous arthroscopic Bankart repair did not seem to have a significant influence on the amount of graft osteolysis, and both primary and revision Latarjet procedures showed satisfactory clinical outcomes.

Management of the failed Latarjet procedure.

BACKGROUND: To analyze the causes of failure after a Latarjet procedure and to evaluate the results of revision surgery. METHODS: Single-cohort, retrospective, observational study. Fifteen patients (13 males, mean age at revision failed Latarjet 38.9 years [range, 20-57]) with anterior glenohumeral instability who underwent a revision surgery for a failed Latarjet procedure were reviewed. Failure was defined as subluxation or dislocation. Demographic features, the reason for failure, type of lesions observed, and postoperative clinical and functional status were recorded. Functional status was assessed with the Rowe score. Subjective clinical evaluation was performed using the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) and Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV). RESULTS: Recurrence occurred in the first year following the Latarjet procedure in 11 patients (73.3%). The causes of failure were graft avulsion in 3 cases, fracture in 1, coracoid misposition in 2 cases, graft nonunion in 1, advanced osteolysis in 4 cases, and persistence of an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion in 1. In 3 cases, no identifiable cause of failure but generalized severe hyperlaxity was found. Regarding revision surgery after the Latarjet procedure, 8 patients underwent an arthroscopic Eden-Hybinette procedure and in 3 patients the graft was repositioned. In the remaining 4 patients, an extra-articular capsular reinforcement was performed. Regarding the latter, 1 patient suffered new dislocations and required an additional revision surgery consisting of an Eden-Hybinette procedure. All patients remained stable after the revision surgery at the latest follow-up, except 2 who reported subluxations after an arthroscopic Eden-Hybinette and an extra-articular capsular reinforcement, but no additional surgical procedure was required. Functional status after revision surgery was satisfactory, with a mean Rowe score of 78 (10-100), WOSI score of 829 (225-1425), and an SSV score of 67 points (40-90). CONCLUSION: The causes of failure after a Latarjet procedure were poor bone graft due to mispositioning, avulsion, fracture or resorption, generalized hyperlaxity, and incomplete restoration of the glenoid track. Our study demonstrates that when the cause of failure is identified and addressed, stability is restored, and clinical and functional scores improved.

Stability of novel cow-hitch suture button coracoid bone graft fixation in Latarjet procedures: a biomechanical study.

BACKGROUND: The Latarjet procedure is widely used to address anterior shoulder instability, especially in case of glenoid bone loss. Recently, cortical suture button fixation for coracoid transfer has been used to mitigate complications seen with screw placement. The aim of this biomechanical study was to evaluate the stability of a novel and cost-effective cow-hitch suture button technique, designed to be performed through a standard open deltopectoral approach, and compare this to a well-established double suture button technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We randomly assigned 12 fresh frozen cadaveric shoulders to undergo the Latarjet procedure with either 4 suture button (S&N EndoButton) fixations (SB group; n = 6, age 72 ± 9.8 years) or cow-hitch suture button technique using a 1.7-mm FiberTape looped sequentially in 2 suture buttons (Arthrex Pectoralis Button) placed from anterior on the posterior glenoid (CH-SB group; n = 6, age 73 ± 9.3 years). After fixation, all shoulders underwent biomechanical testing with direct loading on the graft via a material testing system. Cyclic loading was performed for 100 cycles (10-100 N) to determine axial displacement with time; each graft was then monotonically loaded to failure. RESULTS: The maximum cyclic displacement was 4.3 ± 1.6 mm for the cow-hitch suture button technique and 5.0 ± 1.7 mm for the standard double suture button technique (P = .46). Ultimate load to failure and stiffness were, respectively, 190 ± 82 N and 221 ± 124 N/mm for the CH-SB technique and 172 ± 48 N and 173 ± 34 N/mm for the standard double SB technique (P = .66 and .43). The most common failure mode was suture cut-through at the anteroinferior aspect of the glenoid for both fixation groups. CONCLUSIONS: The cow-hitch suture button technique resulted in a similar elongation, stiffness, and failure load compared to an established double suture button technique. Therefore, this cost-effective fixation may be an alternative, eligible for open approaches, to the established double suture button techniques.

The open Latarjet-Patte procedure for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability in professional handball players at a mean follow-up of 6.6 years.

BACKGROUND: The popularity of team handball is increasing, with >10 million children playing this overhead throwing and collision sport with highest demands on the shoulder joint. Because of the risk of recurrent instability, the Latarjet-Patte (LP) procedure has been recommended to treat young competitive players. This is the first LP outcome study in professional handball players. METHODS: We retrospectively included 20 shoulders (18 players [17 male patients]; mean age, 22.9 years [range, 17-35 years]; minimum follow-up period, 2 years; mean follow-up period, 6.6 years) operated on by 3 expert surgeons (2011-2020) with the Walch LP technique. We documented preoperative hyperlaxity (25%, n = 5), affected throwing arm (55%, n = 11), position (backcourt, winger, and goalkeeper, 22% each; full back and pivot, 17% each), >2 dislocations prior (20%, n = 4), >10 dislocations prior (5%, n = 1), previous failed Bankart or humeral avulsion of glenohumeral ligament (HAGL) repair (10%, n = 2), and large Hill-Sachs lesions (HSLs) (20%, n = 4). Clinical and radiographic outcomes, visual analog scale score, Subjective Shoulder Value, Walch-Duplay score, Rowe score, and return-to-sport (RTS) rate were recorded. RESULTS: The RTS rate was 85% (17 of 20 shoulders); rate of RTS at the same level, 80% (16 of 20); and rate of RTS with no throwing pain, 73% (8 of 11). The time to training with a ball was 3.2 months, and the time to competition was 4.9 months. The mean Rowe score, Walch-Duplay score, and Subjective Shoulder Value were 90 points, 88 points, and 89%, respectively. Shoulder symptoms led players to give up handball in 2 cases (10%), whereas 1 player (5%) stopped playing handball for other reasons. We recorded 1 recurrent dislocation (5%) (non-throwing arm, winger, no recurrence after rehabilitation). Persistent apprehension occurred in 1 goalkeeper (5%). Residual pain was seen in 4 shoulders (20%); this was relieved by screw removal in 1. Resistant pain (throwing shoulder) was seen in 2 backcourt players (10%, 1 of whom had a large HSL) and 1 goalkeeper (5%; large HSL with >10 dislocations prior), all 3 of whom were aged > 30 years. Bone block positioning was correct (no lateral overhang) in all shoulders. At final follow-up, 1 shoulder (5%) showed mild arthritic changes (>10 dislocations, large HSL). CONCLUSION: The open LP procedure is consistent in providing shoulder stability combined with return-to-throwing performance in professional handball players with a short time to RTS and high same-level RTS rate without increasing the risk of arthritic changes. Throwing shoulders of backcourt players, large HSLs, or age > 30 years may have an increased risk of persistent symptoms.

Analysis of reasons for failure to return to sport after Latarjet surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the literature to identify Shoulder Instability Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) scores in athletes who underwent open Latarjet surgery, determine the reasons why athletes failed to return to play (RTP) after Latarjet surgery, and compare SIRSI scores of those who did vs. did not RTP. METHODS: According to PRISMA guidelines, the PubMed, SportDiscus, and Ovid MEDLINE databases were queried to identify studies evaluating return to sport after Latarjet surgery. Study quality was assessed using the MINORS criteria. Studies were included if RTP after Latarjet surgery and a psychological factor were evaluated, with potential psychological factors including readiness to RTP and reasons for failure to RTP. RESULTS: Fourteen studies, 10 of level III evidence and 4 of level IV evidence, with 1034 patients were included. A total of 978 athletes were eligible to RTP. Of these, 792 (79%) successfully returned to play and 447 (56.4%) returned to play at their previous level of play. Mean RTP time was 6.2 months. Postoperative SIRSI scores averaged 71.2 ± 8.8 at a mean of 21 months' follow-up. Postoperative SIRSI scores for those able to RTP was 73.2, whereas athletes unable to RTP scored an average of 41.5. Mean postoperative SIRSI scores for those in contact sports was 71.4, whereas those in noncontact sports was 86.5. There were 31 athletes with a documented reason why they did not RTP, with postoperative shoulder injury being the most common reason (54.5%). Fear of reinjury and feeling "not psychologically confident" each represented 6.5% of the total. CONCLUSION: Athletes who RTP have higher average SIRSI scores than those who are unable to RTP. Of the athletes who documented why they did not RTP, more than half cited a shoulder injury as their reason for not returning to play, whereas fear of reinjury and lack of psychological readiness were other common reasons.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage yields similar outcomes to open Latarjet for primary and revision stabilization in the setting of subcritical glenoid bone loss.

BACKGROUND: Management of patients with recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability in the setting of subcritical glenoid bone loss (GBL), defined in this study as 20% GBL or less, remains controversial. This study aimed to compare arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage (ABR + R) to open Latarjet for subcritical GBL in primary or revision procedures. We hypothesized that ABR + R would yield higher rates of recurrent instability and reoperation compared to Latarjet in both primary and revision settings. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on patients undergoing either arthroscopic ABR + R or an open Latarjet procedure. Patients with connective tissue disorders, critical GBL (>20%), <2 year follow-up, or insufficient data were excluded. Recurrent instability and revision were the primary outcomes of interest. Additional outcomes of interest included subjective shoulder value, strength, and range of motion (ROM) RESULTS: One hundred eight patients (70 ABR + R, 38 Latarjet) were included with an average follow-up of 4.3 ± 2.1 years. In the primary and revision settings, similar rates of recurrent instability (Primary: P = .60; Revision: P = .28) and reoperation (Primary: P = .06; Revision: P = 1.00) were observed between Latarjet and ABR + R. Primary ABR + R exhibited better subjective shoulder value, active ROM, and internal rotation strength compared to primary open Latarjet. However, no differences were observed in the revision setting. CONCLUSION: Similar rates of recurrent instability and reoperation in addition to comparable outcomes with no differences in ROM were found for ABR + R and Latarjet in patients with subcritical GBL in both the primary and revision settings. ABR + R can be a safe and effective procedure in appropriately selected patients with less than 20% GBL for both primary and revision stabilization.

Latarjet procedure: biomechanical evaluation of 2-screw coracoid fixation.

BACKGROUND: Coracoid nonunion is a relevant complication following the Latarjet procedure and is influenced by multiple factors, including the method of graft fixation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate and characterize the biomechanical properties of various two-screw fixation constructs used for coracoid graft fixation in the Latarjet procedure. METHODS: Forty model scapulae (Sawbones Inc., Vashon, WA, USA) were used for this study. A 15% anterior inferior glenoid bone defect was created. The coracoid was osteotomized at the juncture of the vertical and horizontal aspects, transferred to the anterior-inferior edge of the glenoid, and fixed with either two 3.5 mm fully threaded cannulated cortical screws, two 3.5 mm fully threaded solid cortical screws, two 3.5 mm partially threaded cannulated screws, or two 4.5 mm partially threaded malleolar screws (MS). Biomechanical testing was performed with an Instron material testing machine (Instron Corp., Norwood, MA, USA) by applying loads to the lateral aspect of the transferred coracoid graft. The constructs were preconditioned with nondestructive cyclical loading (0N-20N) to determine construct stiffness. After 100 cycles of dynamic loading, the construct was loaded to failure to determine ultimate failure load, yield displacement, and mode of failure. RESULTS: All failures were associated with plastic deformation of the screws and coracoid graft fracture. There was a significantly lower initial stiffness for partially threaded cannulated screws compared to MS (186 ± 49.3 N/mm vs. 280 ± 65.5 N/mm, P = .01) but no significant differences among the other constructs. There was no difference in ultimate failure load (P = .18) or yield displacement (P = .05) among constructs. CONCLUSION: Two screw coracoid fixation of the coracoid in a simulated classic Latarjet procedure with 3.5 mm fully threaded cortical and cannulated screws is comparable to 4.5 mm MS in strength, stiffness, and displacement at failure. On the other hand, partially threaded 3.5 mm cannulated screws provide inferior fixation stiffness and could potentially affect clinical outcomes.

Good clinical outcomes and low recurrence rate in patients undergoing arthroscopic revision Latarjet for failed arthroscopic Bankart repair.

BACKGROUND: The role of arthroscopic Latarjet stabilization after failed arthroscopic Bankart repair has yet to be definitively established and merits further investigation. OBJECTIVE: To assess clinical and radiological outcomes after arthroscopic Latarjet stabilization as a revision procedure for failed Bankart repair, as well as the return to athletic activity and complication rates. METHODS: Between 2009 and 2020, patients with a previous failed arthroscopic Bankart repair who were treated with an arthroscopic Latarjet were retrospectively evaluated. Clinical outcomes at a minimum of 24 months postoperatively included the Rowe score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, Constant-Murley Shoulder Outcome score, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. Dislocations, subluxations, complications, pre- and postoperative levels of activity, and degree of osteoarthritis were also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 77 patients, with a mean age at revision surgery of 31.2 ± 9.1 years and with either 1 (n = 59), 2 (n = 13), or 3 (n = 4) previous arthroscopic stabilizations, who underwent revision surgery using an arthroscopic Latarjet procedure were studied. Postoperatively, the mean Rowe and Constant-Murley Shoulder Outcome scores increased from 41.8 ± 16 to 90.7 ± 14.3 (P < .001) and from 50.5 ± 13.8 to 90.5 ± 10.3 (P < .001), respectively. Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index decreased from 1247 ± 367.6 to 548.9 ± 363 at the final follow-up (P < .001). After a mean follow-up of 39.6 ± 23.1 months, 64 shoulders (83.1%) were subjectively graded as good to excellent using the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score. Grade 1, 2, and 3 osteoarthritis, according to Ogawa et al, was found in 18 (23.4%), 6 (7.8%), and 3 (3.9%) shoulders, respectively. Six (7.8%) dislocations after revision surgery were reported. In 4 failed cases, an Eden-Hybinette procedure was conducted, and in the remaining 2 patients, an arthroscopic extra-articular anterior capsular reinforcement was performed. A significantly decreased level of athletic activity was observed postoperatively (P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic Latarjet for the revision of failed arthroscopic Bankart repair provides satisfactory patient-reported subjective outcomes with a low rate of recurrences and complications. However, a decreased level of athletic activity is expected.

Surgical treatment of anterior glenohumeral instability: a historical review.

BACKGROUND: Glenohumeral instability is a common pathology, particularly in young, active patients. METHODS: A narrative review was performed to describe the history of surgical treatments for anterior shoulder instability. RESULTS: Open surgical techniques were first described by Bankart in 1923. Techniques include both anatomic soft tissue repairs and nonanatomic procedures to provide constraint to motion and dislocation. Osseous techniques to address glenoid bone loss include both autograft techniques, such as the Latarjet procedure, and the use of various allografts. Technologic advances, particularly arthroscopy, have continued to drive the evolution of treatments. The concept of the glenoid track has furthered our understanding of this pathology to guide appropriate treatment to reduce recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment for anterior shoulder instability continues to evolve in an effort to restore function and prevent additional injury.

Surgical Options and Clinical Outcomes Following a Failed Latarjet Procedure: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: A failed prior Latarjet procedure can be a challenging situation for both patients and surgeons. The purpose of this study was to report on the techniques and outcomes of patients undergoing revision surgery for the treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability after a failed Latarjet procedure. METHODS: A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify clinical studies which reported on surgical techniques for a failed Latarjet procedure with reporting of clinical outcomes. The search terms used were: Latarjet failed. Patients were evaluated based on revision method, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), reoperation rates, recurrent instability, overall satisfaction, and return to sports and work. RESULTS: Thirteen studies (all Level IV evidence) met inclusion criteria, including a total of 293 shoulders with a mean age of 28.3 years (range, 16-55 years) at the time of surgery. The mean follow-up time was 50.4 months (range, 14.0-208.0 months) and males accounted for 78.6% of all patients. Revision procedures included open and arthroscopic Eden-Hybinette, distal tibial allograft, iliac crest autograft, osteochondral glenoid allograft, and Bankart repair and/or capsular plication. These may all be viable techniques for revision surgery for a failed Latarjet procedure. All revision procedures showed improvements in PROMs including the VAS (Visual analogue scale), Constant score, subjective shoulder value (SSV), Walch-Duplay, and Rowe scores. Return to sports ranged from 46.1% to 94%. Recurrent instability rates ranged from 0% to 43.8%. Reoperation rates ranged from 0% to 31.3%. Overall satisfaction following a revision procedure ranged from 80% to 100%. CONCLUSION: A failed Latarjet procedure can be treated with various revision procedures such as open and arthroscopic Eden-Hybinette, distal tibial allograft, iliac crest autograft, osteochondral glenoid allograft, and Bankart repair and/or capsular plication. Overall, surgical management of the failed Latarjet results in improvements in PROMs, pain, return to sports, and decreased recurrent instability with a moderate complication rate.