Primary Rotator Cuff Bridging Reconstruction Shows Better Clinical and Radiographic Results Than Revision Bridging Reconstruction.

Purpose: To evaluate the outcome of revision rotator cuff bridging reconstruction (BR) as compared to primary BR in a large cohort of patients. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted for patients who underwent BR using dermal allograft for large/massive rotator cuff tears between 2010 and 2018. Patients who completed Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) and Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores both pre- and postoperatively were included. Pre- and postoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans were compared to assess for differences in fatty infiltration, muscle atrophy, and graft status. Results: Eighty patients met the inclusion criteria, including 43 patients who underwent BR as a primary surgery and 37 patients who underwent revision BR. The mean follow-up duration was 5.7 ± 1.9 years in the primary group and 5.8 ± 2.0 years in the revision group. Both WORC and DASH scores significantly improved from pre- to postoperatively for both the primary and revision groups (P < .05). The primary group had significantly better postoperative WORC and DASH scores at 6 months, 1 year, and final follow-up (P < .05). Failure rate of the graft was higher in the revision group compared to primary group (14.3% vs 6.1%, respectively; P = .337), and the amount of fatty infiltration of supraspinatus and infraspinatus muscles significantly improved in patients who received primary BR compared to revision BR (P < .05). Conclusions: BR using dermal allograft for large/massive irreparable rotator cuff tears showed improvement of functional outcomes, with primary cases resulting in better improvement in patient-reported outcomes compared to revision cases. Primary BR was also associated with better postoperative fatty infiltration of supraspinatus and infraspinatus muscles. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Calculating glenoid bone loss based on glenoid height using ipsilateral three-dimensional computed tomography.

PURPOSE: To investigate the relationship between glenoid width and other morphologic parameters using three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) images of native shoulders, and to create a new measurement tool to assess glenoid defects in a Canadian population with established anterior shoulder instability. METHODS: Forty-three glenoid CT scans were analyzed for patients who underwent contralateral shoulder glenoid reconstruction for anterior shoulder instability between 2012 and 2020. Demographic data were obtained including age, gender and BMI. The subjects were excluded if they had a prior history of ipsilateral shoulder instability, shoulder fractures, or bone tumors. The following glenoid parameters were measured: width (W), height (H), anteroposterior (AP) depth, superior-inferior (SI) depth and version. The shape of the glenoid was also classified into pear, inverted comma or oval. RESULTS: There were 35 male and 8 females with a mean age of 34.5 ± 12.9 years. The glenoid width was strongly correlated with the height (R2 = 0.9) and a regression model equation was obtained: W (mm) = 2.5 + 0.7*H (mm). There was also strong correlation with gender (P < 0.001), glenoid shape (P = 0.030), AP and SI depths (P = 0.006 and P < 0.001, respectively). Male gender was associated with higher measurement values for all parameters. The most common glenoid shapes were the pear (46.5%) and oval morphotypes (39.6%) for the whole study group. CONCLUSION: The native glenoid width can be estimated based on glenoid height using ipsilateral 3D CT. This may help with preoperative planning and surgical decision-making for patients with anterior shoulder instability and glenoid bone loss. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction has a lower rate of recurrent instability compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair while otherwise maintaining a similar complication and safety profile.

OBJECTIVES: The primary purpose of this study was to determine the frequency and type of complications, including subluxation, infection, hardware complication, graft/glenoid fracture, chondrolysis, neurovascular deficits and stiffness following an Arthroscopic Bankart Repair (ABR) or an Arthroscopic Anatomic Glenoid Reconstruction (AAGR) using a distal tibia allograft for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Secondary purposes were to determine the frank dislocation rate and the associations of post-operative complications with demographic patient factors. METHODS: Demographic and clinical data were reviewed using means ± standard deviations or frequencies in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability who underwent either an ABR or an AAGR. Post-operative patient records were analysed to identify any post-operative complications. The numerical variables of the two groups were compared using the independent t-test or Mann-Whitney U test. Categorical variables and complications were tested using the chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, or the two-sided Monte Carlo test with a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: We included 174 patients in this cohort, with 61.5% of patients receiving ABR and 38.5% receiving AAGR. Most of our patients were male (70.1%) with an average age of 23.41 ± 8.26 years in the ABR group and 29.37 ± 13.54 years in the AAGR group (p = 0.001). The two groups were similar with respect to their post-operative complication rates when excluding frank dislocation (ABR: 11%, AAGR: 12%). The AAGR group had statistically significantly higher rates of hardware removal compared to the ABR group (p = 0.004). The ABR group had 25 post-operative frank dislocations, with none reported in the AAGR cohort (p < 0.001). The total complication rate for each procedure was found to be 35% for ABR and 12% for AAGR. CONCLUSION: AAGR has a comparable safety profile to the ABR when assessing post-operative complications such as subluxation, infection, graft/glenoid fracture, chondrolysis, neurovascular deficits and stiffness. AAGR is superior to ABR with respect to rates of recurrent instability and should be considered as a first-line treatment in certain patients with specific risk factors such as younger age, competitive contact sports participation, and higher number of instability events pre-operatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Fixation Type Does not Affect the Learning Curve and Short-Term Radiographic Outcomes for Arthroscopic Anatomic Glenoid Reconstruction with Distal Tibia Allograft.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to compare the learning curves and radiographic variables between screw and suture button fixation of the allograft for surgeons learning the all-arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction (AAGR) technique for anterior shoulder instability. We compared the surgical times of these two fixation techniques, as well as the graft placement in the vertical and medial-lateral directions. Methods: This was a retrospective review of patients who underwent AAGR for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Start and end times were recorded for each procedure, and learning was assessed through the change in operative time over successive surgeries and by variability of operative time. Graft placement, in terms of vertical positioning, medial-lateral step formation, and obliquity of fixation (alpha angle), was evaluated using 3-dimensional CT scans at approximately 6 months postoperation. Results: A total of 43 patients were included in our study. Twenty-seven had screw fixation, and 16 had suture button fixation. The surgical duration of the button fixation technique was comparable to that of screw fixation (P = .72), with no significant difference in the variability of surgical time in either cohort (P > .05). Both groups showed similarly optimal vertical positioning of the graft onto the lower third of the glenoid (P = .89). Desired obliquity of graft fixation was identified more frequently with button fixation (P < .001). Both fixation methods provided clinically acceptable medial-lateral step formations, with suture-button fixation being significantly larger (P = .03). Conclusions: Suture button fixation of the allograft is a potential alternative to screw fixation for the management of glenoid bone loss in recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The results of this study show that this method has a comparable learning curve, with a similar surgical duration, while not compromising the optimal accuracy of vertical and medial-lateral placement of the graft and achieves a superior alpha angle of fixation. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective cohort study.

Effect of Osteochondroplasty on Time to Reoperation After Arthroscopic Management of Femoroacetabular Impingement: Analysis of a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: A subset of patients with femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) fail arthroscopic management. It is not clear which patients will fail surgical management; however, several surgical and patient factors, such as type of procedure and age, are thought to be important predictors. Purpose: This time-to-event analysis with a 27-month follow-up analysis compared the effect of (1) arthroscopic osteochondroplasty with or without labral repair versus (2) arthroscopic lavage with or without labral repair on the time to reoperation in adults aged 18 to 50 years with FAI. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: Eligible participants had been randomized in a previous study trial to a treatment of arthroscopic osteochondroplasty or arthroscopic lavage with or without labral repair. Using the comprehensive data set from the Multinational Femoroacetabular Impingement Randomized controlled Trial, all reoperations until 27 months after surgery were identified. The analysis was conducted using a Cox proportional hazards model, with percentage of patients with a reoperation evaluated in a time-to-event analysis as the outcome. The independent variable was the procedure, with age and impingement subtype explored as potential covariates. The effects from the Cox model were expressed as the hazard ratio (HR). All tests were 2-sided, with an alpha level of .05. Results: A total of 108 patients in the osteochondroplasty group and 106 patients in the lavage group were included. The mean age of the patients included in the study was 36 ± 8.5 years. Overall, 27 incident reoperations were identified within the 27-month follow-up, with an incidence rate of 6 per 100 person-years. Within the osteochondroplasty group, 8 incident reoperations were identified (incidence rate, 3.4 per 100 person-years), while within the lavage group, 19 incident reoperations were identified (incidence rate, 8.7 per 100 person-years). The hazard of reoperation for patients undergoing osteochondroplasty was 40% of that of patients undergoing lavage (HR, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.17-0.91] P = .029). Conclusion: This study demonstrated that for adults between the ages of 18 and 50 years with FAI, arthroscopic osteochondroplasty was associated with a 2.5-fold decrease in the hazard of reoperation at any point in time compared with arthroscopic lavage. Registration: NCT01623843 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Interposition Graft Bridging Reconstruction of Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears Using Acellular Dermal Matrix: Medium-Term Results.

PURPOSE: In this study, we aimed to evaluate the medium-term clinical outcomes for patients who underwent bridging reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted for all patients who underwent bridging reconstruction between 2010 and 2018. Patients who were missing either pre- or postoperative outcome scores were excluded. All included patients completed self-reported questionnaires (Western Ontario Rotator Cuff [WORC] and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH]) pre- and postoperatively at 6 months, 1 year, and annually thereafter. All scores were reported out of 100. RESULTS: Ninety-one patients initially met our inclusion criteria, and 33 were excluded owing to lack of either pre- or postoperative outcome scores. Nine patients were lost to follow-up; therefore, 49 patients were finally evaluated, including 30 males (61.2%) and 19 females (38.8%) with an age of 59.6 ± 10.4 years (mean ± standard deviation) and mean follow-up of 5.3 years (range 2 to 9). Both WORC and DASH scores significantly improved from pre- to postoperatively (WORC: 69.6 ± 12.2 to 27.9 ± 23.7, P < .001; DASH: 51.5 ± 17.5 to 24.5 ± 23.0, P = .001). For WORC and DASH, 92% and 74% of patients, respectively, met the minimal clinical importance difference. CONCLUSION: Our results showed that patients' clinical outcome scores significantly improved with an average of 5-year follow-up, which demonstrates that bridging reconstruction is a safe procedure with promising midterm clinical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective case series.

Biological Augments for Acetabular Chondral Defects in Hip Arthroscopy-A Scoping Review of the Current Clinical Evidence.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: A wide array of joint-preserving surgical techniques exists in the management of acetabular chondral defects (ACDs). The purpose of this review is to summarize the clinical outcomes of the recent biologics used to treat ACDs during hip arthroscopy. RECENT FINDINGS: Increasing evidence is available for different biological solutions used in the hip. Studies have shown promising outcomes with minimal complications when using biologics as augmentation to microfracture (MF), including different scaffolds or stem cells, or to enhance autologous chondrocyte implantation (ACI). However, data so far is scarce, and more trials and longer follow-ups are needed to better delineate the appropriate indications and benefits for each technique. Presently, the level of evidence is low, but in general, biologics appear safe and trend toward beneficial compared to standard surgical techniques. Augmented MF is recommended for small to medium ACDs, and matrix-assisted ACI or three-dimensional ACI is recommended for medium to large defects.

Primary Bankart Repair Versus Arthroscopic Anatomic Glenoid Reconstruction in Patients with Subcritical Bone Loss: A Cost-Utility Analysis.

Anterior shoulder instability and its treatment is a quickly evolving field of interest in orthopaedics, both for patients and for health-care systems. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction (AAGR) compared with Bankart repair in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability in patients with subcritical glenoid bone loss. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was performed from the perspective of Canada's publicly funded health-care system. A decision-tree model was created to simulate the progression of patients undergoing either a primary Bankart repair or AAGR. Recently published data were used to determine the recurrence rate and level of glenoid bone loss for the AAGR procedure; the recurrence rate was 1.4% in a cohort with a mean glenoid bone loss of 25.3%. A literature review on the primary Bankart procedure in patients with at least subcritical levels of glenoid bone loss yielded a recurrence rate of 22.9% in patients with a mean glenoid bone loss of 17.5%. AAGR served as the revision surgery for both primary procedures. Health utility scores for anterior shoulder instability were obtained from published literature. Total procedure costs, including costs of operating-room consumables, anesthesia, diagnostic imaging, and rehabilitation, were sourced from a hospital database. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis using 5,000 Monte Carlo simulations was performed, and results were used to create a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. RESULTS: The AAGR procedure was less costly and led to an improvement in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) when compared with the arthroscopic Bankart repair in the treatment of patients with anterior shoulder instability with subcritical glenoid bone loss (AAGR, cost = $16,682.77 [Canadian dollars] and QALYs = 5.76; Bankart, cost = $16,720.29 and QALYs = 5.46), suggesting that the AAGR is dominant, i.e., lower costs with higher QALYs. Applying a commonly used willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000 per QALY gained, the probability that the primary AAGR was more cost-effective was 85.8%. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that, from the perspective of a publicly funded health-care system, AAGR was the economical treatment option when compared with Bankart repair in anterior shoulder instability with subcritical glenoid bone loss. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Economic and Decision Analysis Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Bridging Allograft Reconstruction Is Superior to Maximal Repair for the Treatment of Chronic, Massive Rotator Cuff Tears: Results of a Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in surgical techniques, the use of maximal repair to treat large or massive rotator cuff tears results in a high retear rate postoperatively. Currently, no randomized controlled trials have compared the outcomes of maximal repair with interposition dermal allograft bridging reconstruction. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that large or massive rotator cuff tendon tears reconstructed using bridging dermal allograft would have better clinical outcomes 2 years postoperatively, as measured using the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) index, than would those receiving the current gold standard treatment of debridement and maximal repair alone. We also expected that patients treated via bridging reconstruction using dermal allograft would have fewer postoperative failures as assessed using postoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence 1. METHODS: A sample size of 30 patients (determined using a priori sample size calculation) with massive, retracted rotator cuff tears were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups: maximal repair or bridging reconstruction using dermal allograft. All patients completed questionnaires (WORC and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH]) preoperatively and postoperatively at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. The primary outcome of this study was the WORC index at 2 years. Secondary outcomes included healing rate, progression of rotator cuff arthropathy, and postoperative acromiohumeral distance in both groups. RESULTS: Patients treated via bridging reconstruction using dermal allograft had better postoperative WORC and DASH scores (23.93 ± 24.55 and 15.77 ± 19.27, respectively) compared with patients who received maximal repair alone (53.36 ± 31.93 and 34.32 ± 23.31, respectively). We also noted increased progression to rotator cuff arthropathy in the maximal repair group with an increased retear rate when compared with the reconstruction group (87% and 21%, respectively; P < .001). The acromiohumeral distance was maintained in the reconstruction group but significantly decreased in the maximal repair group. CONCLUSION: Rotator cuff bridging reconstruction using a dermal allograft demonstrated improved patient-reported outcomes as measured using the WORC index 2 years postoperatively. This technique also showed favorable structural healing rates and decreased progression to arthropathy compared with maximal repair. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01987973).

Anterior and posterior glenoid bone augmentation options for shoulder instability: state of the art.

Bony lesions are highly prevalent in anterior shoulder instability and can be a significant cause of failure of stabilisation procedures if they are not adequately addressed. The glenoid track concept describes the dynamic interaction between the humeral head and glenoid defects in anterior shoulder instability. It has been beneficial for understanding the role played by bone defects in this entity. As a consequence, the popularity of glenoid augmentation procedures aimed to treat anterior glenoid bone defects; reconstructing the anatomy of the glenohumeral joint has risen sharply in the last decade. Although bone defects are less common in posterior instability, posterior bone block procedures can be indicated to treat not only posterior bony lesions, attritional posterior glenoid erosion or dysplasia but also normal or retroverted glenoids to provide an extended glenoid surface to increase the glenohumeral stability. The purpose of this review was to analyse the rationale, current indications and results of surgical techniques aimed to augment the glenoid surface in patients diagnosed of either anterior or posterior instability by assessing a thorough review of modern literature. Classical techniques such as Latarjet or free bone block procedures have proven to be effective in augmenting the glenoid surface and consequently achieving adequate shoulder stability with good clinical outcomes and early return to athletic activity. Innovations in surgical techniques have permitted to perform these procedures arthroscopically. Arthroscopy provides the theoretical advantages of lower morbidity and faster recovery, as well as the identification and treatment of concomitant pathologies.

Osteochondroplasty and Labral Repair for the Treatment of Young Adults With Femoroacetabular Impingement: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Femoroacetabular impingement (FAI) is a condition known to cause hip pain in young adults. PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy of the surgical correction of FAI via arthroscopic osteochondroplasty with or without labral repair compared with arthroscopic lavage of the hip joint with or without labral repair. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A total of 220 male and female participants aged 18 to 50 years with nonarthritic FAI suitable for surgical treatment were recruited for the trial at 10 clinical centers in Canada, Finland, and Denmark between October 2012 and November 2017, of whom 214 were included in the final analysis. In the osteochondroplasty group, cam- and/or pincer-type lesions were resected using fluoroscopic guidance. In the lavage group, the joint was washed out with 3 L of normal saline. Surgeons were instructed to repair the labrum in both groups if it was mechanically unstable once probed, showing visible displacement or chondrolabral separation. The primary outcome was patient-reported pain (using the 100-point visual analog scale [VAS]) at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included hip function (Hip Outcome Score [HOS] and International Hip Outcome Tool), physical and mental health (12-Item Short Form Health Survey), and health utility (EuroQol-5 Dimensions) at 12 months as well as any reoperations and other hip-related adverse events at 24 months. RESULTS: At 12 months, there was no difference in pain (VAS) between the groups (mean difference [MD], 0.11 [95% CI, -7.22 to 7.45]; P = .98). Also, 88.3% (189/214) of participants had a labral tear, of which 60.3% were repaired. For the secondary outcomes, there were no significant differences between treatment groups, with the exception of the HOS activities of daily living domain in which lavage showed significant improvement compared with osteochondroplasty (MD, -5.03 [95% CI, -10.40 to -0.03]; P = .049). By 24 months, there were significantly fewer reoperations reported in the osteochondroplasty group (8/105) than the lavage group (19/104) (odds ratio, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.15-0.89]; P = .026). The primary reasons for a reoperation included hip pain (15/27; 55.6%) and a reinjury of the labrum (11/27; 40.7%). CONCLUSION: Both the osteochondroplasty and the lavage groups with or without labral repair for FAI had significantly improved pain or function significantly at 1 year. By 2 years, the reoperation rate was significantly lower in the osteochondroplasty group. REGISTRATION: NCT01623843 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Chapter 6: Attritional Glenoid Bone Loss in the Shoulder: Operative Considerations.

Patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability often have glenoid bone loss present in addition to soft tissue pathologies. It is known that patients with significant glenoid bone loss are best treated with a boney augmentation procedure as opposed to a soft tissue Bankart repair because of the high rate of recurrent instability that results from a Bankart repair. Although the Latarjet technique has been the gold-standard treatment for patients with glenoid bone loss because of the low incidence of recurrent instability, it has a high complication rate and a steep learning curve. Herein, the authors present the technique and outcomes for arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction that has a similar complication rate to the Bankart repair but with a low recurrence rate similar to the Latarjet. This procedure is safe, has a short learning curve, low recurrence rate, and positive patient-reported outcomes.