Glenoid erosion is a risk factor for recurrent instability after Hill-Sachs remplissage.

AIMS: The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for recurrent instability of the shoulder and assess the ability to return to sport in patients with engaging Hill-Sachs lesions treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair and Hill-Sachs remplissage (ABR-HSR). METHODS: This retrospective study included 133 consecutive patients with a mean age of 30 years (14 to 69) who underwent ABR-HSR; 103 (77%) practiced sports before the instability of the shoulder. All had large/deep, engaging Hill-Sachs lesions (Calandra III). Patients were divided into two groups: A (n = 102) with minimal or no (< 10%) glenoid bone loss, and B (n = 31) with subcritical (10% to 20%) glenoid loss. A total of 19 patients (14%) had undergone a previous stabilization, which failed. The primary endpoint was recurrent instability, with a secondary outcome of the ability to return to sport. RESULTS: At a mean follow-up of four years (1.0 to 8.25), ten patients (7.5%) had recurrent instability. Patients in group B had a significantly higher recurrence rate than those in group A (p = 0.001). Using a multivariate logistic regression, the presence of glenoid erosion of > 10% (odds ratio (OR) = 35.13 (95% confidence interval (CI) 8 to 149); p = 0.001) and age < 23 years (OR = 0.89 (0.79 to 0.99); p = 0.038) were associated with a higher risk of recurrent instability. A total of 80 patients (78%) could return to sport, but only 11 athletes (65%) who practiced high-risk (collision or contact-overhead) sports. All seven shoulders which were revised using a Latarjet procedure were stable at a mean final follow-up of 36 months (11 to 57) and returned to sports at the same level. CONCLUSION: Patients with subcritical glenoid bone loss (> 10%) and younger age (≤ 23 years) are at risk of failure and reoperation after ABR-HSR. Furthermore, following this procedure, one-third of athletes practicing high-risk sports are unable to return at their pre-instability level, despite having a stable shoulder. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):718-724.

Revision of failed shoulder arthroplasty: epidemiology, etiology, and surgical options.

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to analyze the epidemiology, etiologies, and revision options for failed shoulder arthroplasty from 2 tertiary centers. METHODS: From 1993 to 2013, 542 failed arthroplasties were revised in 540 patients (65% women): 224 hemiarthroplasties (HAs, 41%), 237 anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties (TSAs, 44%) and 81 reverse total arthroplasties (RSAs, 15%). Data about patients, pathology, and reintervention procedures, as well as intraoperative data, were analyzed from our 2 local registries that prospectively captured all the revision procedures. Patients had an average follow-up period of 8.7 years. RESULTS: The revision rate was 12.7% for HAs, 6.7% for TSAs, and 3.9% for RSAs. HAs were revised earlier (33 ± 40 months) than RSAs (47 ± 150 months) and TSAs (69 ± 61 months). Glenoid failure was a major cause of reintervention: erosion in HAs (29%) or loosening in TSAs (37%) and RSAs (24%). Instability was another major cause of reintervention: 32% in RSAs, 20% in TSAs, and 13% in HAs. Humeral implant loosening led to revision in 10% of RSAs, 6% of HAs, and 6% of TSAs. Multiple reinterventions were required in 21% of patients, mainly for instability (26%) and/or infection (25%). The final implant was an RSA in 48%, especially when associated with cuff insufficiency, instability, and/or bone loss. Final reimplantation was possible in 90% of cases, with the remaining 10% treated with a resection or spacer. CONCLUSION: Glenoid failure and instability are the most common causes of revision. Soft-tissue insufficiency and/or infection results in multiple revisions. Surgeons must recognize all complications so that they can be addressed at the first revision operation and avoid further reinterventions. RSA was the most common final revision implant.

Management of Massive Rotator Cuff Tears: Prospective study in 218 patients.

BACKGROUND: No consensus exists about the management of massive and symptomatic rotator cuff tears (RCTs). The objective of this study was to compare the 12-month clinical outcomes of various treatment options for massive RCTs. HYPOTHESIS: Arthroscopic surgery has a role to play in the treatment of massive and apparently irreparable RCTs. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A prospective multicentre non-randomised study was performed in patients with massive RCTs managed non-operatively (NONOP) or by arthroscopic tenotomy/tenodesis of the long head of biceps (aTLB), arthroscopic partial tendon repair (aPTR), arthroscopic latissimus dorsi transfer (aLDT), or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Clinical outcomes were evaluated based on the Constant score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score after 3, 6, and 12 months. RESULTS: The 218 included patients (mean age, 69 years) were distributed as follows: NONOP, n=71; aTLB, n=26; aPTR, n=61; aLDT, n=25; and RSA, n=35. After 12 months, the mean Constant score, SSV, and ASES score values were 70, 68%, and 73, respectively, and had improved significantly versus the preoperative values in all treatment groups. RSA was the only treatment followed by improvements in all Constant score items. Active forwards elevation improved significantly in the NONOP (+25°), aPTR (+26°), and RSA (+66°) groups. An improvement in active external rotation was seen only in the RSA group, where it was small (+10°, p=0.046). Significant increases in internal rotation were seen in the NONOP (+1.6 points) and aPTR (+1.7 points) groups. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic techniques (aTLB, aPTR, and aLDT) for managing massive irreparable RCTs produce significant functional gains. Partial tendon repair (aPTR) and RSA may provide better outcomes than isolated aTLB or aLDT. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, non-randomised prospective study.

Surgical Technique for Arthroscopic Resection of Painful Bipartite Patella.

Bipartite patella (BP) is uncommon and is usually an incidental finding. Painful BP occurs rarely and is usually associated with post-traumatic anterior knee pain. When nonoperative treatment fails, fragment resection is indicated. A systematic review shows a potentially increased risk of complications with open surgery. The purpose of this Technical Note is to demonstrate a simple arthroscopic technique for treating painful BP through resection of the bone fragment.

Reoperation Rates After Combined Anterior Cruciate Ligament and Anterolateral Ligament Reconstruction: A Series of 548 Patients From the SANTI Study Group With a Minimum Follow-up of 2 Years.

BACKGROUND: Early clinical results of anterolateral ligament (ALL) reconstruction are promising, but concerns exist due to high rates of complications after other types of lateral extra-articular tenodesis. The rate of surgery after combined anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) and ALL reconstruction is not known. PURPOSE: To determine the rate of reoperation after combined ACL and ALL reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Scientific ACL Network International (SANTI) Study Group database was performed to include all patients who had undergone combined ACL and ALL reconstruction between January 2012 and June 2014. At the end of the study period, all patients were contacted by telephone, and the operative notes of those who stated that they had undergone reoperation were reviewed to determine the type and rates of the subsequent procedures performed. Descriptive data were analyzed for the entire patient cohort. RESULTS: The study population comprised 548 quadruple hamstring graft (4HT)+ALL reconstructions. The mean age (±SD) was 24.3 ± 7.9 years (range, 11.9-55.7 years), and 70.3% of subjects were male. The mean duration of follow-up was 35.5 ± 8.0 months (range, 24-54 months). Seventy-two patients (13.1%) underwent ipsilateral reoperation. This comprised a total of 77 procedures. Graft revision occurred in 14 knees (2.6%) at a mean of 18.3 months (±7.4 months) after the index procedure. There were 63 reoperations for ipsilateral, non-graft rupture-related indications (meniscus, n = 30; arthrofibrosis, n = 22; removal of hardware, n = 4; deep infection, n = 3; arthroscopic lavage without infection, n = 4). The only specific complications related to the ALL procedure (n = 3) were all related to femoral hardware that required removal. In both univariate and multivariate analyses, only the presence of a medial meniscal lesion at the index procedure was significantly associated with ipsilateral reoperation (odds ratio, 2.58; 95% CI, 1.43-4.76; P = .002). CONCLUSION: The reoperation rate after combined ACL and ALL reconstruction in this series is broadly comparable to the reoperation rate after isolated ACL reconstruction as reported in previous studies. In addition, the high rates of knee stiffness and reoperation reported in historical series of nonanatomic, lateral extra-articular tenodesis were not observed in the current series.