The Latarjet Procedure for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability in the Contact Athlete.

In young athletes, anterior shoulder instability is a prevalent condition. Because of high-energy traumas, contact athletes often suffer recurrent instability, bone loss and postoperative recurrences. Patients younger than 20 years, symptomatic for more than 6 months, with ≥ 2 dislocations, with off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, glenoid bone loss, ALPSA lesion, Instability Severity Index Score > 3, and Glenoid Track Instability Management Score > 3 are at higher risk of failure. In cases of multiple dislocations with critical or subcritical glenoid bone loss, notably in collision and contact athletes, the Latarjet procedure is widely recognized as the treatment of choice.

The glenoid track concept is insufficient to predict Bankart failures: a computed tomography scan study.

Background: The glenoid track concept identifies patients with "off-track" (engaging) Hill-Sachs lesions (HSLs) as poor candidates for arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) due to the high risk of shoulder instability recurrence. Purpose: To retrospectively calculate the glenoid track index, using preoperative computed tomography (CT) scans, in a cohort of patients with failed ABR. We hypothesized that all patients with a failed ABR would have engaging ("off-track") HSLs on preoperative CT scan. Type of Study: CT scan study. Methods: Preoperative CT scan of 45 patients, seen in our facility for failed ABR, was used to retrospectively calculate the glenoid track index. The risk of recurrence was also calculated for each patient using Instability Severity Index Score (ISI-Score) and Glenoid Track Instability Management Score (GTIMS). There were 37 failed isolated ABRs and 8 associated HS remplissage. The mean t age at surgery was 24 years (range, 15-52) and instability recurred at a mean of 29 months postoperative (range, 3-167). Results: Preoperative CT scan imaging identified "off-track" bony lesions in 85% of patients (38/45) and "on-track" lesions in 15% (7/45). No significant differences were noted between the 2 groups (off-track vs. on-track) regarding patient age, hyperlaxity, sports participation, size of HS lesion, or ISI-Score. The mean glenoid bone loss was 15.7% (range, 4-36%) with mean HS width was greater than 20 mm in 66% of CT scans. The preoperative ISI-Score was predictive of failures (>3 points in all patients) with no difference between on-track and off-track patients (6.3 ± 1.7 vs. 6.6 ± 1.7, P = .453). By contrast, the GTIMS did not predict failures as there was a significant difference between GTIMS for on-track and off-track patients (2.1 ± 1.3 vs. 6.6 ± 1.7). Conclusions: The glenoid track concept alone is insufficient to predict Bankart failures: in the present series of failed ABR, 15% of shoulders had "on-track" (non-engaging) lesions on preoperative CT scan. In patients, with "on-track" bony lesions, the ISI-Score is a useful predictive tool to detect patients at risk of failure, while the GTIMS is not.

Glenoid track and subcritical Hill-Sachs lesion.

Background: We have proposed the concept of glenoid track ("on-track/off-track" lesion) to evaluate the risk of engagement of the Hill-Sachs lesion with the glenoid after arthroscopic Bankart repair. This concept has been widely used and many clinical validation studies have been reported. To measure the glenoid track width, we have recommended to use 3-dimensional computed tomography (CT) images. However, the CT method has the issue of radiation exposure and involves time and effort to make 3-dimensional CT images from 2-dimensional images. For these reasons, there are several reports describing the measurement method using magnetic resonance imaging. Recently, the threshold of the critical glenoid bone loss becomes lower. A zone of bone loss below the critical size is called "subcritical bone loss", which might be related to deterioration of quality of life and bone grafting is recommended. We applied the concept of "subcritical bone loss" to the glenoid track. Patients with "on-track" lesions can be divided into 2 subgroups: those with a "peripheral-track" lesion (most medial 1/4) and those with a "central-track" lesion (the rest 3/4). More recently, similar evaluation methods to evaluate the risk of "off-track" lesions have been reported: ''distance to dislocation'' and "Hill-Sachs interval/glenoid track ratio". Also, similar concept to "peripheral-track" lesion, "near-track" lesion was reported. The concept of "peripheral-track" lesion is a concept of assessing an "on-track" lesion which is very close to the medial margin of the glenoid track (subcritical bone loss). Methods: Similar evaluation methods to evaluate the risk of "off-track" or "peripheral-track" lesions were proposed in the literature. A review was performed by searching PubMed. Journal articles published between January 2014 and January 2023 were taken into account. They were compared and their differences were explained. Results: The "near-track" lesion concept is similar to "peripheral-track" lesion. However, the cutoff value is different: Hill-Sachs occupancy ≥ 75% is the "peripheral-track" lesion, whereas "distance to dislocation" < 8 mm is the "near-track" lesion. Conclusion: We introduced update of the glenoid track concept including the evaluation method, peripheral-track lesion, and its clinical application.

Effective glenoid track: A novel concept for shoulder instability.

Background: Assessment and quantification of bone loss in cases of shoulder instability is critical for surgical decision making. The glenoid track concept was initially developed to assess Hill Sachs lesions taking into account the native glenoid diameter of the contralateral shoulder and assessing the degree of glenoid bone loss. However, it can not be reverse calculated to determine the effect of an addition of a bone block. We have developed a novel model to help address this problem yielding an "effective glenoid track" (EGT). Methods: Begin as we always do by using Itoi's concept for assessment of tracking based on the CT scan cuts. Next step is to calucate the Hill Sach's interval (HSI) which will require an MRI scan. Conclusion: The EGT allows for calculation of residual tracking of Hill Sachs lesions post a bone block addition and will aid in surgical decision making.

Glenoid track revisited.

The risk of Hill-Sachs lesion (HSL) to cause instability depends not only on the HSL but also on the glenoid size. Clinically, the only method to assess the risk of instability considering the dynamic interaction of both, the HSL together with the glenoid bone loss, is the glenoid track concept. Since it was introduced in a cadaveric study, its clinical efficacy and validity have been reported in the literature. Sometimes, the medial margin of the footprint (lateral margin of the glenoid track) is difficult to identify when a HSL is overriding the footprint. In such cases, we propose a method to draw an imaginary line connecting 2 landmarks. Although 3-dimensional computed tomography is the most accurate and widely used method to assess on/off-track lesions, our interest gradually is shifting toward magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), which has no radiation concern. The current magnetic resonance method is still under way. There are various risk factors influencing the recurrent instability after surgery. The glenoid track concept deals with only 1 of these factors, that is, instability caused by bony lesions. Therefore, the following 2 issues are important: 1) how to assess the glenoid track precisely and 2) how to incorporate other risk factors into consideration. The former can be achieved by obtaining the custom-made glenoid track width using not the fixed value of 83%, but more individualized value obtained by measuring the active horizontal extension angle of the opposite shoulder in the sitting position. At the same time, the gray zone (peripheral-track lesion) needs to be clearly defined. The latter can be achieved by incorporating the risk factors other than the bony lesions. One example is the Glenoid Track Instability Management Score (GTIMS), a combination of the glenoid track concept and the instability severity index score. This new scoring system is expected to increase the predictive potential of the scoring system, and accordingly to enhance clinical decision-making.

The Global Track Concept for Assessment of Engaging Hill-Sachs Defects in Anterior Shoulder Instability.

BACKGROUND: The glenoid track concept is used to determine preoperatively whether a Hill-Sachs defect is engaging or not. Currently, the glenoid track concept relies on measurements of bony structures as well as on the confines and elasticity of the rotator cuff as a reference point, which varies extensively among individuals and therefore limits the reliability and accuracy of this concept. PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability of the global track concept, which determines the angular distance of the Hill-Sachs defect from the center of the articular surface of the humeral head as a new reference point with the help of an automated image analysis software and 3-dimensional analysis of the humeral head. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Computed tomography scans of 100 patients treated for anterior shoulder instability with different sizes of Hill-Sachs defects were evaluated manually by 2 orthopaedic surgeons independently using the software OsiriX as well as automatically by using a dedicated prototype software (ImFusion). Obtained manual and automated measurements included the Hill-Sachs length, Hill-Sachs width, and Hill-Sachs depth of the defect; the Hill-Sachs interval (HSI); and the glenoid width for the glenoid track concept, as well as the angular distance of the Hill-Sachs defect from the center of the articular surface of the humeral head (global track concept). The reliability of the different measurement techniques was compared by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). RESULTS: There was a significant difference for all obtained parameters comparing manual and automatic measurements. For manually obtained parameters, measurements referring to bony boundaries (glenoid width, Hill-Sachs length, and Hill-Sachs width) showed good to excellent agreement (ICC, 0.86, 0.82, and 0.62, respectively), while measurements referring to soft tissue boundaries (HSI and glenoid track; ICC, 0.56 and 0.53, respectively) or not directly identifiable reference points (center of articular surface and global track) only showed fair reliability (ICC middle excursion, 0.42). When the same parameters were measured with the help of an automated software, good reliability for the glenoid track concept and excellent reliability for the global track concept in the middle excursion were achieved. CONCLUSION: The present study showed that the more complex global track measurements of humeral defects are more reliable than the current standard HSI and glenoid track measurements. However, this is only true when automated software is used to perform the measurements. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Future studies using the new proposed method in combination with an automated software need to be conducted to determine critical threshold values for defects prone to engagement.

Longer peripheral-track lesions are associated with instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair.

BACKGROUND: The glenoid track concept has enabled the categorization of Hill-Sachs lesions (HSLs) into on-track lesions and off-track lesions. Furthermore, among the on-track lesions, further categorization has been established based on the distance from the medial edge of the Hill-Sachs lesion to the medial edge of the glenoid track, into peripheral-track lesions and central-track lesions. Recent studies on peripheral-track lesions and central-track lesions within the glenoid track have shown inconsistencies in failure rates, which deserves further investigation. METHODS: A retrospective cohort comparison of patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair between 2015 and 2020 was performed. 102 patients with peripheral-track HSLs were included. The patients were divided into 2 groups based on the results of the postoperative apprehension test: the apprehension positive group (n = 30), and the apprehension negative group (n = 72). Using preoperative computed tomography (CT) and an image reconstruction program, 3-dimensional (3D) images were segmented to calculate the length, width, depth, and distance of the HSLs. A multivariate logistic regression was used to determine the risk factors of recurrence, for which odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were provided. RESULTS: A multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the length of the peripheral-track HSLs was a significant independent predictor of failure in this study. (OR 1.380; 95% CI 1.170-1.627; P < .001). The receiver operating characteristics curve (ROC) demonstrated a predictive power (area under the curve = 0.841) and a threshold value of 14.2 mm. CONCLUSION: Length was the only risk factor for the recurrent instability of peripheral-track HSLs after ABR. In the context of surgical decision-making, utilizing the glenoid track concept, medical practitioners may need to evaluate instability by considering the length as a continuous factor, while differentiating between peripheral-track and central-track classifications.

Validating the Glenoid Track Concept Using Dynamic Arthroscopic Assessment.

Background: Failure after isolated Bankart repair has led surgeons to consider when to address the Hill-Sachs lesion, which is thought to be a contributor to recurrent instability. One approach utilizes the glenoid track concept to determine whether a Hill-Sachs lesion is classified as "off-track," suggesting that the addition of a remplissage procedure may aid stability. However, the accuracy and reliability of using this approach require validation using an appropriate reference. Purpose: To determine the accuracy and reliability of using the glenoid track concept against dynamic arthroscopic assessment of Hill-Sachs lesion engagement. Study Design: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A total of 49 patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair surgery for recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability were enrolled in this diagnostic validation study. Shoulders were classified as on-track or off-track using 3-dimensional computed tomography (3DCT) and static arthroscopic measurements. These classifications were compared with dynamic arthroscopic assessment (engagement of the Hill-Sachs lesion on the anterior glenoid rim in the 'athletic position') to determine their accuracy and reliability. Results: The 3DCT-based measurements to determine glenoid track status had a higher positive predictive value (66% vs 42%), higher specificity (47% vs 42%), and higher accuracy (65% vs 59%) compared with static arthroscopic measurements. Static arthroscopic measurements to determine glenoid track status had a higher negative predictive value (96% vs 64%) and higher sensitivity (96% vs 81%) compared with 3DCT-based measurements. Interrater reliability (Krippendorff α) was 'fair' for determining the glenoid track status using 3DCT (0.368; 95% CI, 0.217-0.519) and 'moderate' for static arthroscopic measurements (0.523; 95% CI, 0.364-0.666). Intrarater reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 3,k) was 'moderate' for 3DCT measurements (0.660; 95% CI, 0.444-0.798) and 'good' for static arthroscopic measurements (0.769; 95% CI, 0.629-0.862). Conclusion: Determining glenoid track status using either 3DCT or static arthroscopic measurements yielded moderate accuracy and reliability. Surgeons using the glenoid track concept to aid surgical decision-making in traumatic recurrent anterior shoulder instability should utilize 3DCT or static arthroscopic measurements with caution.

Long-term Effectiveness and Outcome-Determining Factors of Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Recreational Sports Population: An Assessment of 100 Patients With a Mean Follow-up of 12.7 Years.

BACKGROUND: A limited number of studies have reported the long-term effectiveness of and associated factors for recurrence of anterior shoulder instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR). PURPOSE: To report the long-term clinical outcomes after ABR in a recreational sports population and identify the associated factors that influence the final instability status. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed in patients treated with ABR between 2007 and 2013 by a single surgeon. Patient data, magnetic resonance imaging measurements of bone loss and glenoid track, and intra- and perioperative factors were analyzed. After a minimum follow-up of 10 years, patient-reported outcomes including the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score, the Rowe score, the visual analog scale for pain and function, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and sports activity were assessed. The current instability status was classified into 3 groups: stable, apprehensive, and redislocated. These groups were statistically compared with respect to outcomes and associated factors. RESULTS: A total of 100 patients with a mean age of 22.4 ± 5.5 years and a mean follow-up of 12.7 ± 2.1 years were included. At the final follow-up, 38 patients (38%) showed recurrent symptoms: 19 patients (19%) with subjective apprehension and 19 patients (19%) with redislocation, including 10 patients (10%) with revision surgery. At the final follow-up, the redislocated group showed the lowest patient-reported outcomes and return to sports (both P < .001). The apprehensive group also showed a lower Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score (P = .011), Rowe score (P = .003), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (P = .027), and return to sports (P = .005) than the stable group. Participation in contact sports (P = .026), glenoid bone loss (P = .005), size of Hill-Sachs lesion (P = .009), and off-track lesions (P = .016) were all associated with recurrent symptoms, whereas age <20 years (P = .012), participation in contact sports (P = .003), and off-track lesions (P = .042) were associated with redislocation. CONCLUSION: After long-term follow-up in a recreational sports population, ABR demonstrated a 19% rate of subjective apprehension and 19% rate of redislocation, with a gradual decline in clinical outcomes and sports activity over time. Therefore, candidates for ABR should be selected based on consideration of risk factors such as off-track lesions, age <20 years, and participation in contact sports.

Defining Critical Humeral Bone Loss: Inferior Craniocaudal Hill-Sachs Extension as Predictor of Recurrent Instability After Primary Arthroscopic Bankart Repair.

BACKGROUND: The glenoid track concept for shoulder instability primarily describes the medial-lateral relationship between a Hill-Sachs lesion and the glenoid. However, the Hill-Sachs position in the craniocaudal dimension has not been thoroughly studied. HYPOTHESIS: Hill-Sachs lesions with greater inferior extension are associated with increased risk of recurrent instability after primary arthroscopic Bankart repair. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective analysis of patients with on-track Hill-Sachs lesions who underwent primary arthroscopic Bankart repair (without remplissage) between 2007 and 2019 and had a minimum 2-year follow-up. Recurrent instability was defined as recurrent dislocation or subluxation after the index procedure. The craniocaudal position of the Hill-Sachs lesion was measured against the midhumeral axis on sagittal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using either a Hill-Sachs bisecting line through the humeral head center (sagittal midpoint angle [SMA], a measure of Hill-Sachs craniocaudal position) or a line tangent to the inferior Hill-Sachs edge (lower-edge angle [LEA], a measure of Hill-Sachs caudal extension). Univariate and multivariate regression were used to determine the predictive value of both SMA and LEA for recurrent instability. RESULTS: In total, 176 patients were included with a mean age of 20.6 years, mean follow-up of 5.9 years, and contact sport participation of 69.3%. Of these patients, 42 (23.9%) experienced recurrent instability (30 dislocations, 12 subluxations) at a mean time of 1.7 years after surgery. Recurrent instability was found to be significantly associated with LEA >90° (ie, Hill-Sachs lesions extending below the humeral head equator), with an OR of 3.29 (P = .022). SMA predicted recurrent instability to a lesser degree (OR, 2.22; P = .052). Post hoc evaluation demonstrated that LEA >90° predicted recurrent dislocations (subset of recurrent instability) with an OR of 4.80 (P = .003). LEA and SMA were found to be collinear with Hill-Sachs interval and distance to dislocation, suggesting that greater LEA and SMA proportionally reflect lesion severity in both the craniocaudal and medial-lateral dimensions. CONCLUSION: Inferior extension of an otherwise on-track Hill-Sachs lesion is a highly predictive risk factor for recurrent instability after primary arthroscopic Bankart repair. Evaluation of Hill-Sachs extension below the humeral equator (inferior equatorial extension) on sagittal MRI is a clinically facile screening tool for higher-risk lesions with subcritical glenoid bone loss. This threshold for critical humeral bone loss may inform surgical stratification for procedures such as remplissage or other approaches for at-risk on-track lesions.