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.

High degree of consensus on diagnosis and management of rotator cuff tears: a Delphi approach.

PURPOSE: To develop a consensus on diagnosis and treatment of rotator cuff tears. The study focused on selected areas: imaging, prognostic factors, treatment options, surgical techniques. METHODS: Panel was composed of all members of the shoulder committee of the Italian Society of Arthroscopy, Knee, Upper arm, Sport, Cartilage and Orthopedic techniques (SIAGASCOT). Four rounds were performed. The first round consisted of gathering questions which were then divided into seven blocks referring to: imaging, patient-related prognostic factors, treatment options, surgical steps, reparative techniques, surgical predictive factors, advanced techniques. Subsequent rounds consisted of condensation by means of online questionnaire and debates. Consensus was defined as two-thirds agreement on one answer. Descriptive statistic was used to summarize the data. RESULTS: Forty-one shoulder experts were involved. Fifty-six statements were finally formulated. A consensus could be achieved on 51. Experts agreed that preoperative magnetic resonance imaging is strongly recommended because it allows a careful evaluation of tear characteristics, while the role of US remains debatable. Controversial patient-related factors such as age, comorbidities, smoking and stiffness do not contraindicate the repair. From a surgical standpoint, the experts highlighted that pseudo-paralysis is not a contraindication to rotator cuff repair. Consensus on specific surgical steps was also achieved: capsular release should be performed only in stiff shoulders; footprint preparation is mandatory, while debridement of tendon edges is not essential. If necessary, a rotator interval release could be performed without interrupting the continuity between subscapularis and supraspinatus tendon; posterior delamination should be always included in the repair. Advanced techniques such as tendon transfers should be selected based on the main clinical deficit, while the superior capsule reconstruction plays a role only in combination with a functional repair. CONCLUSION: A consensus was achieved almost on every topic of controversy explored. Particularly, MRI was deemed necessary to determine tear characteristics, while radiographs remain important for differential diagnosis; age should not be considered a contraindication to surgery; pseudo-paralysis does not represent a contraindication to arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, but superior capsule reconstruction plays a role only in combination with a functional repair. Latissimus dorsi transfer plays a role when the main functional deficit is in elevation, while the lower trapezius transfer plays a role when the main functional deficit is the external-rotation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V.

The role of arthroscopy in revision of failed open anterior stabilization of the shoulder.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results of revision arthroscopic stabilization after failed open anterior shoulder stabilization. METHODS: We studied a retrospective series of 22 consecutive patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability after open surgical stabilization (12 Latarjet procedures, 4 Eden-Hybinette procedures, 3 open Bankart repairs, and 3 capsular shifts). Failure was associated with a traumatic episode in 12 patients, capsular laxity with persistent Bankart lesions in all patients, and a bone block complication in 13 patients. Labral reattachment and capsuloligamentous retensioning with suture anchors were performed in all cases. An additional rotator interval closure was performed in 4 cases and an inferior capsular application in 12. Bone block screws were removed during arthroscopy in 8 patients because of malpositioning or mobility. Nineteen patients were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 43 months. RESULTS: All patients returned to their previous occupations, including 6 cases of work-related injury. Of the patients, 1 (5%) had recurrent subluxation and 2 (11%) had persistent apprehension. The subjective shoulder value was 83% +/- 23%. A good or excellent result was found in 85% of patients according to the Walch-Duplay score and 13 patients (67%) according to the Rowe score. Shoulder pain was found in 6 patients (32%) (4 with light pain and 2 with moderate pain). Of the 5 patients with osteoarthritis before surgery, 3 progressed by 1 stage. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic revision of failed open anterior shoulder stabilization provides satisfactory results in a selected patient population. Some persistent pain and osteoarthritis progression remain concerns. The main advantages of the arthroscopic approach are the avoidance of anterior dissection in front of the subscapularis, which places the axillary nerve at risk, and the ability to address the various soft-tissue pathologies encountered. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.