A high level of scientific evidence is available to guide treatment of primary shoulder stiffness: The SIAGASCOT consensus.

PURPOSE: Shoulder stiffness (SS) is a condition characterised by active and passive restricted glenohumeral range of motion, which can occur spontaneously in an idiopathic manner or be associated with a known underlying aetiology. Several treatment options are available and currently no consensus has been obtained on which treatment algorithm represents the best choice for the patient. Herein we present the results of a national consensus on the treatment of primary SS. METHODS: The project followed the modified Delphi consensus process, involving a steering, a rating and a peer-review group. Sixteen questions were generated and subsequently answered by the steering group after a thorough literature search. A rating group composed by professionals specialised in the diagnosis and treatment of shoulder pathologies rated the question-answer sets according to the scientific evidence and their clinical experience. RESULTS: Recommendations were rated with an average of 8.4 points out of maximum 9 points. None of the 16 answers received a rating of less than 8 and all the answers were considered as appropriate. The majority of responses were assessed as Grade A, signifying a substantial availability of scientific evidence to guide treatment and support recommendations encompassing diagnostics, physiotherapy, electrophysical agents, oral and injective medical therapies, as well as surgical interventions for primary SS. CONCLUSIONS: A consensus regarding the conservative and surgical treatment of primary SS could be achieved at a national level. This consensus sets basis for evidence-based clinical practice in the management of primary SS and can serve as a model for similar initiatives and adaptable guidelines in other European countries and potentially on a global scale. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I.

Clinical outcomes and recurrence rate of 4 procedures for recurrent anterior shoulder instability: ASA, remplissage, open, and arthroscopic Latarjet: a multicenter study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to compare the clinical outcomes of 4 surgical techniques in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation, glenoid bone loss (GBL) <15% and Instability Severity Index (ISI) score >3. METHODS: A retrospective multicenter study was conducted on 226 patients who underwent 1 of 4 different techniques (Bankart plus arthroscopic subscapularis augmentation (ASA), Bankart plus remplissage, Latarjet, Arthro-Latarjet). The inclusion criteria were: recurrent dislocation, GBL <15%, and ISI score >3. The exclusion criteria were: GBL >15%, voluntary instability, multidirectional instability, preexisting osteoarthritis, throwing athletes' first dislocation, and ISI score<3. Follow-up ranged from 24 months to 6 years. Hyperlaxity was clinically evaluated according to Neer and Coudane-Walch tests. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Rowe score and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) for each technique. Before surgery, all patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging and computed tomography scanning. The Pico area method was used to assess the percentage of GBL. The operations were performed by 10 experienced surgeons; the functional outcomes were evaluated by 2 independent observers. RESULTS: A total of 226 patients who met the inclusion criteria were included in the present series. A total of 89.2% of patients in the ASA group reported an excellent Rowe score at the final follow-up, and their scores on the WOSI scale, improved from 838 to 235 points. A total of 79.9% of patients in remplissage (R) group reported an excellent Rowe score at the final follow-up, and their scores on the WOSI scale improved from 1146 to 465 points. A total of 98.5% of patients in the Latarjet (L) group reported an excellent Rowe score at the final follow-up, and their scores on the WOSI scale improved from 1456 to 319 points. A total of 81.6% of patients in the Arthro-Latarjet (AL) group reported an excellent Rowe score at the final follow-up, and their scores on the WOSI scale improved from 1250 to 221 points. The recurrence rates were as follows: ASA group (7%), remplissage group (6.1%), L group (1.5%), Arthro-Latarjet group (0%). Patients in the open L group had 15.5% (10/66) more complications. CONCLUSION: The use of ASA and remplissage to augment the Bankart repair have been demonstrated to be effective for restoring joint stability, yielding good clinical outcomes similar to the L procedure in patients affected by recurrent anterior dislocation with GBL <15% and an ISI score score >3. Soft tissues augmentations of the Bankart repair have been demonstrated to be effective for addressing anterior soft tissue deficiency dysfunction and critical Hill-Sachs lesions.

Glenohumeral translation in ABER position during muscle activity in patients treated with Latarjet procedure: an in vivo MRI study.

PURPOSE: The Latarjet procedure is frequently performed when treating traumatic anteroinferior shoulder instability. This procedure is supposed to have a triple effect: osseous, muscular and ligamentous. The main stabilizing mechanism in cadaver studies on fresh-frozen shoulders seems to be the sling effect produced by the subscapularis and the conjoint tendon. It has been hypothesized that muscle contraction in ABER position (abduction-external rotation) is able to translate the humeral head posteriorly and superiorly due to the sling effect. The aim of this study was to analyse the humeral head translation relative to the glenoid with the arm in ABER position with and without muscle contraction. METHODS: Twenty-one subjects divided into two groups (Group A: after Latarjet; Group B: healthy subjects) were examined with an open MRI system with the shoulder in abduction-external rotation (ABER) position to analyse humeral head translation during muscle activity. RESULTS: In normal shoulders, there was no significant difference in anteroposterior or superoinferior translation between the rest position and the muscle-activated state. In subjects after the Latarjet procedure, the difference was significant and was also significant between both groups of subjects for posterior translation, but not for superior translation. CONCLUSION: In patients treated with Latarjet procedure, there are significant changes in glenohumeral translation during muscular activity when in ABER position, with the humeral head going more posteriorly, in comparison with normal shoulders. This study confirms the stabilizing sling effect of the transposed conjoint tendon in the ABER position. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective case-control study, Level III.

Does the presence of glenoid bone loss influence coracoid bone graft osteolysis after the Latarjet procedure? A computed tomography scan study in 2 groups of patients with and without glenoid bone loss.

BACKGROUND: Coracoid bone graft osteolysis and fibrous union are the principal causes of failure in patients treated with the Latarjet procedure. This study aims to investigate the hypothesis that coracoid bone graft osteolysis is more pronounced in cases without glenoid bone loss, which may be due to a diminished mechanotransduction effect at the bone healing site. METHODS: We prospectively followed up 34 patients, treated with a mini-plate Latarjet procedure, divided into 2 groups (group A patients had glenoid bone loss >15% and group B patients had no glenoid bone loss). A computed tomography scan evaluation with 3-dimensional reconstruction was then performed on all patients to evaluate coracoid bone graft osteolysis according to our coracoid bone graft osteolysis classification. RESULTS: The computed tomography scan analysis showed a different distribution of osteolysis between group A and group B. The statistical analysis showed a significant difference (P < .01, Bonferroni test) between groups A and B for the following sections: proximal/lateral/superficial, proximal/medial/deep, distal/lateral/superficial, and distal/lateral/deep. On average, the coracoid grafts in group A patients showed less osteolysis than the coracoid grafts in group B patients (39.6% vs 65.1%). DISCUSSION: The coracoid bone graft underwent much less osteolysis in patients with significant glenoid bone loss (>15%) than in those without it. Because factors of blood supply, compression, and surgical technique were the same for both groups, we believe that the mechanotransduction effect from the humeral head on the graft influences its remodeling. CONCLUSION: The results of this study suggest that the bone graft part of the Latarjet procedure plays a role in patients with significant coracoid bone loss but much less so when there is no bone loss.

Management of humeral head deficiencies and glenoid track.

When considering the management of shoulder anterior instability with glenoid bone loss ≥25 % of the inferior glenoid diameter (inverted-pear glenoid), the consensus among recent authors is that glenoid bone grafting should be done. Although the engaging Hill-Sachs lesion has been recognized as a risk factor for recurrent anterior instability, there has been no generally accepted methodology for quantifying the Hill-Sachs lesion taking into account the geometric interplay of various sizes and various orientations of bipolar (humeral-sided plus glenoid-sided) bone loss. Keeping the glenoid track concept in mind, if a Hill-Sachs lesion engages the anterior glenoid rim, with or without concomitant anterior glenoid bone loss, it is possible to manage this pathology, reducing the risk of recurrent shoulder instability after surgery. If the Hill-Sachs engages, "Remplissage" or "Latarjet" surgical procedures are indicated depending of glenoid bone loss.

Coracoid bone graft osteolysis after Latarjet procedure: A comparison study between two screws standard technique vs mini-plate fixation.

AIMS: One of the reason for Latarjet procedure failure may be coracoid graft osteolysis. In this study, we aimed to understand if a better compression between the coracoid process and the glenoid, using a mini-plate fixation during the Latarjet procedure, could reduce the amount of coracoid graft osteolysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A computed tomography scan analysis of 26 prospectively followed-up patients was conducted after modified Latarjet procedure using mini-plate fixation technique to determine both the location and the amount of coracoid graft osteolysis in them. We then compared our current results with results from that of our previous study without using mini-plate fixation to determine if there is any statistical significant difference in terms of corcacoid bone graft osteolysis between the two surgical techniques. RESULTS: The most relevant osteolysis was represented by the superficial part of the proximal coracoid, whereas the deep part of the proximal coracoid graft is least involved in osteolysis and has best bone healing. The current study showed a significant difference only for the deep part of the distal coracoid with our previous study (P < 0.01). DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, there are no studies in literature that show the causes of coracoid bone graft osteolysis after Latarjet procedure. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that there is a significant difference only for the deep part of the distal coracoid in terms of osteolysis. At clinical examination, this difference did not correspond with any clinical findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Prospective case series, Treatment study.

Coracoid graft osteolysis after the Latarjet procedure for anteroinferior shoulder instability: a computed tomography scan study of twenty-six patients.

BACKGROUND: The Latarjet procedure has been advocated as an option for the treatment of anteroinferior shoulder instability in certain patients. However, progression of the transferred coracoid bone graft to osteolysis has been reported in the literature. We propose that the coracoid bone graft osteolysis could be one of the causes of failure of the Latarjet procedure. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A computed tomography scan analysis was done of 26 patients prospectively followed-up after the Latarjet procedure to determine the location and the amount of the coracoid graft osteolysis. RESULTS: The most relevant osteolysis was represented by the superficial part of the proximal coracoid, whereas the distal region of the coracoid bone graft, especially in the deep portion, was the least involved in osteolysis and had the best bone healing. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study to quantify and localize coracoid osteolysis after Latarjet procedure for anteroinferior shoulder instability using CT scan analysis. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that the bone-block effect from the Latarjet procedure may not be the principal effect in its treatment of anteroinferior shoulder instability in patients without significant bony defects.

Postoperative analgesia for arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a prospective randomized controlled study of intraarticular, subacromial injection, interscalenic brachial plexus block and intraarticular plus subacromial injection efficacy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to compare the new combination of intraarticular + subacromial injection, with intraarticular, subacromial injection and interscalenic brachial plexus block as postoperative analgesia in shoulder arthroscopy. METHODS: One hundred and twenty patients scheduled for shoulder arthroscopy were enrolled and randomly assigned to one of five groups: intraarticular, subacromial, interscalenic brachial plexus block (IBPB), intraarticular + subacromial (intraarticular + subacromial) injection or a control group. All patients received standardized general anaesthesia and all the injections were given with the same dose and volume of local anaesthetic. The number of boluses (fentanyl 1 microg kg(-1) delivered by a patient-controlled analgesia pump applied at the end of the surgery and the visual analogue pain score (VAPS) at 0, 2, 4, 6, 12, 18 and 24 h after the intervention were recorded. A patient satisfaction score was also assessed at 24 h. RESULTS: Mean bolus consumption, compared with control group, was significantly less in all groups (P < 0.01). Intraarticular + subacromial group utilized fewer boluses compared with subacromial group and significantly lower boluses than intraarticular group (P < 0.01), but IBPB group utilized significantly fewer boluses than intraarticular + subacromial group. Patients in IBPB, intraarticular + subacromial and subacromial groups showed VAPSs that were significantly better than that of the control group at all time points (P < 0.01). The VAPS in intraarticular + subacromial group was statistically comparable with those in IBPB and subacromial groups at each time interval. IBPB and intraarticular + subacromial groups showed comparable patient satisfaction scores. CONCLUSION: These results confirm the analgesic efficacy of IBPB for shoulder surgery. Nonetheless, the combination of intraarticular and subacromial infiltration, studied for the first time, appears to be a clinically valid alternative with no clinical meaningful adverse effects.