Long-term outcomes of hemiarthroplasty using a smaller head combined with rotator cuff reconstruction in patients with cuff-tear arthropathy.

Background: Hemiarthroplasty (HHR) using a smaller head with rotator cuff reconstruction is a treatment option for cuff-tear arthropathy, offering advantages like facilitating rotator cuff-tear closure, increasing the lever arm of deltoid, and restoring function in irreparable cuff tears. This study aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of this procedure. Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted for 91 shoulders undergoing HHR using a smaller head with rotator cuff reconstruction between May 2005 and September 2012. Surgery involved reducing the size of humeral head and performing rotator cuff reconstruction based on the site of the deficient rotator cuff. The study analyzed University of California, Los Angeles shoulder scores, Japanese Orthopaedics Association shoulder scores, range of motion, and postoperative radiographs. Results: Twenty-eight patients, divided into an elderly group (14 women, 2 men, mean age 74.5 ± 3.8 years) and a younger group (6 women, 6 men, mean age 63.5 ± 3.1 years) were followed up for a mean of 133.2 ± 14.1 months. No complications were reported. The clinical scores and range of motion significantly improved postoperatively and remained over 10 years. Radiographs revealed high incidence of glenoid wear (82.1%), bone resorption (43%) and cranial humeral head migration (54%), with no prosthesis loosening. Conclusion: We believe that HHR using a smaller head with rotator cuff reconstruction is a surgical technique that can maintain stable long-term outcomes in both elderly and younger individuals with cuff-tear arthropathy.

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.

A biomechanical study to optimize superior capsular reconstruction operative technique.

Background: The goals of this study were to optimize superior capsular reconstruction by assessing the relative fixation strength of 4 suture anchors; evaluating 3 glenoid neck locations for fixation strength and bone mineral density (BMD); determining if there is a correlation between BMD and fixation strength; and determining which portal sites have optimal access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck for anchor placement. Methods: Twenty cadaveric specimens were randomized into 4 groups: all-suture anchor (FiberTak), conventional 3.0-mm knotless suture anchor (SutureTak), 3.9-mm knotless PEEK (polyetheretherketone) Corkscrew anchor, and 4.5-mm Bio-Corkscrew anchor. Each specimen was prepared with 3 anchors into the glenoid: an anterosuperior anchor, superior anchor, and posterosuperior anchor. All anchors were inserted into the superior glenoid neck 5 mm from the glenoid rim. A materials testing system performed cyclic testing (250 cycles) followed by load-to-failure testing at 12.5 mm/s. Cyclic elongation, first cycle excursion, maximum load, and stiffness were recorded. Using custom software, BMD was calculated at each anchor location. This software was also used to assess access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck from standard arthroscopic portal positions. Results: There was no significant difference in cyclic elongation (P = .546), first cycle excursion (P = .476), maximum load (P = .817), or stiffness (P = .309) among glenoid anchor positions. Cyclic elongation was significantly longer in the PEEK Corkscrew group relative to the other implants (P ≤ .002). First cycle excursion was significantly greater in the FiberTak group relative to all other implants (P ≤ .008). For load-to-failure testing, the Bio-Corkscrew group achieved the highest maximum load (P ≤ .001). No other differences in cyclic or failure testing were observed between the groups. No differences in stiffness testing were observed (P = .133). The superior glenoid rim had the greatest BMD (P = .003), but there was no correlation between BMD and cyclic/load outcomes. The posterior portal (80% of specimens) and the anterior portal (60% of specimens) demonstrated the best access to the posterosuperior and anterosuperior glenoid neck, respectively. Conclusion: The 4.5-mm Bio-Corkscrew anchor provided the most robust fixation to the glenoid during superior capsular reconstruction as it demonstrated the strongest maximum load, had minimal elongation, had minimal first cycle excursion, and did not fail during cyclic testing. The superior glenoid neck had the highest BMD; however, there was no correlation between BMD or glenoid anchor location and biomechanical outcomes. The posterior portal and anterior portal provided optimal access to the posterosuperior glenoid neck and anterosuperior glenoid neck, respectively.

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.

The Role of Arthroscopy in Contemporary Glenoid Fossa Fracture Fixation.

Glenoid fossa fractures are rare injuries accounting for 10 to 29% of all intra-articular scapula fractures. They are usually the result of high-energy trauma, and concomitant injuries are not uncommon. Patients with glenoid fractures are admitted with shoulder pain and restricted range of motion. Although shoulder plain radiographs could establish the diagnosis, a computed tomography scan is necessary to adequately define the fracture pattern and characteristics. The most commonly used classification system is that of Ideberg (modified by Goss), which includes five glenoid fossa fracture types according to the location, extension, and complexity of the lesion. Articular surface displacement and step-off are the most important factors that should be taken under consideration when deciding for conservative or surgical management. Operative treatment includes open reduction and internal fixation through a posterior or anterior approach depending on fracture morphology and displacement. However, open surgical techniques are related to extensive soft-tissue disruption, risk of neurovascular injury, and inadequate exposure of the entire glenoid cavity. Introduction of arthroscopy could facilitate better visualization of the glenoid articular surface and improved fracture reduction. However, it is a technically demanding procedure with many challenges and pitfalls. The aim of this review is to summarize the current evidence regarding the treatment of glenoid fossa fractures and present the beneficial effect of arthroscopy in improving the quality of fracture fixation and overall functional outcomes.

Total Shoulder Arthroplasty for Glenohumeral Arthritis Associated with Posterior Glenoid Bone Loss: Midterm Results of an All-Polyethylene, Posteriorly Augmented, Stepped Glenoid Component.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to report the minimum 5-year clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients undergoing anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) with a posteriorly augmented glenoid component. METHODS: Thirty-five shoulders with minimum 5-year follow-up underwent aTSA using a posteriorly augmented glenoid component for the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis with posterior glenoid bone loss. Clinical outcomes included range of motion (ROM), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, and patient reported outcomes scores (PROS). Radiographs (XR) and computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained to assess glenoid morphology, retroversion, central peg osseous integration (CPOI) via Wirth score, Lazarus scores, and Yian scores. Postoperative outcomes were measured at minimum 2- and 5-year follow-up. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was calculated. RESULTS: Two patients experienced prosthetic instability requiring revision, leaving 33 shoulders with an average follow-up of 6.6 years. Average preoperative glenoid retroversion was 21.6˚. A significant improvement in pain, ROM, and PROS was noted at minimum 2-year and 5-year follow-up. Additionally, VAS pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores improved between minimum 2-year and 5-year follow-up. The average Lazarus and Yian scores at final follow-up were 0.73 and 2.6, respectively. There was an increase in Lazarus score and decrease in Wirth score between 2- and 5-year follow-up. A significant correlation was identified between VAS pain scores and both Lazarus and Wirth scores. Survivorship free from revision was 92% at 8.8 years postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Midterm results of aTSA with a posteriorly augmented, stepped glenoid component demonstrate sustained improvements in clinical outcomes with low rates of radiographic loosening. Continued improvement in pain and function, as well as a minor progression of radiographic osteolysis, may be expected between 2- and 5-year follow-up. Additionally, the severity of radiographic loosening correlates with subjective pain levels.

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.

Latarjet Procedure: Biomechanical Evaluation of 2 Screw Coracoid Fixation.

BACKGROUND: Coracoid nonunion is a relevant complication following the Latarjet procedure and is influenced by multiple factors, including the method of graft fixation. AIMS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate and characterize the biomechanical properties of various two-screw fixation constructs used for coracoid graft fixation in the Latarjet procedure. METHODS: Forty model scapulae (Sawbones Inc., Vashon, WA, USA) were used for this study. A 15 percent anterior inferior glenoid bone defect was created. The coracoid was osteotomized at the juncture of the vertical and horizontal aspects, transferred to the anterior-inferior edge of the glenoid, and fixed with either two 3.5 mm fully threaded cannulated cortical screws (FTCS), two 3.5 mm fully threaded solid cortical screws (FTSS), two 3.5 mm partially threaded cannulated screws (PTCS), or two 4.5 mm partially threaded malleolar screws (MS). Biomechanical testing was performed with an Instron materials testing machine (Instron Corp., Norwood, MA) by applying loads to the lateral aspect of the transferred coracoid graft. The constructs were preconditioned with non-destructive cyclical loading (0-20N) to determine construct stiffness. After 100 cycles of dynamic loading, the construct was loaded to failure to determine ultimate failure load, yield displacement, and mode of failure. RESULTS: All failures were associated with plastic deformation of the screws and coracoid graft fracture. There was a significantly lower initial stiffness for PTCS compared to MS (186±49.3 N/mm vs 280±65.5 N/mm, p=0.01) but no significant differences among the other constructs. There was no difference in ultimate failure load (p=0.18) or yield displacement (p=0.05) among constructs. CONCLUSION: Two screw coracoid fixation of the coracoid in a simulated classic Latarjet procedure with 3.5 mm fully threaded cortical and cannulated screws is comparable to 4.5 mm malleolar screws in strength, stiffness, and displacement at failure. On the other hand, partially threaded 3.5 mm cannulated screws provide inferior fixation stiffness and could potentially affect clinical outcomes.

Arthroscopic suture bridge fixation for acute bony Bankart with anterior glenohumeral instability: a case report and narrative review.

Background and Objective: Anterior shoulder dislocations can result in acute glenoid rim fractures that compromise the bony stability of the glenohumeral joint. Adequate fixation of these fractures is required to restore stability, decrease shoulder pain, and facilitate return to activity. The double-row suture bridge is a relatively novel fixation technique, first described in 2009, that accomplishes internal fixation with sufficient stability using an all-arthroscopic technique to restore the glenoid footprint. A 40-year-old female with recurrent anterior shoulder instability in the setting of seizure disorder was found to have a bony Bankart lesion of 25% to 30% with a concomitant superior labral tear. The patient was treated with a double-row bony Bankart bridge and labral repair. At six months follow-up, she has progressed to a full recovery with no recurrence. Methods: A search was conducted in May 2023 in PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL with the search terms bony Bankart, bone Bankart, osseous Bankart, acute, bridge, suture bridge, double row. Key Content and Findings: Double-row suture bridge repairs result in improvement in shoulder function as determined by ASES (93.5), QuickDASH (4.5), SANE (95.9), and SF-12 (55.6). The overall recurrence rate of anterior instability after a bony Bankart bridge repair is 8%. When examining the return to prior level of function, 81.4% of patients were able to do so with only 7.9% of patients reporting significant modifications to their activity level. In mid-term results, double row suture bridge demonstrates similar outcomes to other all-arthroscopic fixation methods of bony Bankart injuries. Importantly, bony Bankart bridge remains a viable option for critical glenoid lesions over the 20% cutoff used in other all arthroscopic techniques. Biomechanically, the double-row suture bridge offers distinct benefits over its single-row counterpart including increased compression, reduced displacement, and reduced step-off. Conclusions: Although there is limited data, the studies discussed and the demonstrative case show the potential benefit of all-arthroscopic double-row suture bridge fixation including increased compression, decreased displacement, and a lower complication rate in patients with large bony Bankart lesions traditionally requiring bony augmentation. However, more robust studies are necessary to determine the long-term success of the double-row suture bridge.

Glenoid augmentation for subcritical bone loss: a narrative review.

Background and Objective: Anterior shoulder instability can be debilitating for young, active individuals, and increasing magnitudes of glenoid bone loss (GBL) predisposes patients to recurrent instability and increases the likelihood of failure of soft-tissue only repairs. It is widely accepted that GBL >25% should be treated with a glenoid bone grafting procedure. However, consensus is lacking on the optimal management in the setting of subcritical GBL, typically classified as >13.5%. This article reviews the pathoanatomy relevant to anterior shoulder instability and subcritical GBL, while highlighting existing evidence regarding open augmentation procedures in comparison to other treatment options for this subpopulation. Methods: A narrative review of the current literature was conducted focusing on subcritical GBL in anterior glenoid stabilization procedures, including review of forward citation and reference lists of selected articles. Key Content and Findings: Computed tomography (CT) is the modality of choice for obtaining precise measurements of subcritical GBL, defined as <13.5%, using the best-fit circle method. There is debate surrounding the optimal surgical management of subcritical GBL. Arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) remains the predominate surgery performed for primary anterior shoulder instability, while glenoid augmentation and open Bankart repair continue to be used sparingly in the United States. Historically, the Latarjet procedure was considered for substantial glenoid defects, but the illumination of subcritical GBL has expanded its indications. Arthroscopic, soft tissue-only repairs with the addition of remplissage, has been shown to have similar 2-year outcomes to the Latarjet in patients with >15% GBL, which has been limited in the study of subcritical GBL. Additionally, utilization of distal tibial allograft and local autograft is becoming increasingly prevalent. However, again, with limited prospective studies in the subcritical GBL population. Conclusions: There is no consensus regarding the optimal treatment approach to recurrent shoulder instability in the setting of subcritical GBL. Conversely, there is a growing agreement that isolated ABR is likely inadequate and subcritical GBL should prompt consideration of a more robust operation. To this end, interest in glenoid bone augmentation continues to grow as a reliable technique for recreating the native architecture and restoring glenohumeral stability are developed.

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 two landmarks. Although 3D-CT is the most accurate and widely used method to assess on/off-track lesions, our interest gradually is shifting towards MRI, which has no radiation concern. The current MR method is still under way. There are various risk factors influencing the recurrent instability after surgery. The glenoid track concept deals with only one of these factors, i.e., instability caused by bony lesions. Therefore, the following two 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 (ISI) score. This new scoring system is expected to increase the predictive potential of the scoring system, and accordingly to enhance clinical decision making.

Clinical outcomes of open Latarjet-Patte procedures performed for recurrent anterior shoulder instability with primary bone loss versus failed arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Background: The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of Latarjet-Patte procedures (LPs) performed for primary glenohumeral instability surgery in the setting of critical bone loss (LP-BL) versus salvage surgery performed after a failed primary arthroscopic Bankart repair (LP-FB). Methods: Patients who underwent an LP from 2017 to 2021 were identified from the senior author's database and separated into cohorts by LP indication. Data abstracted from electronic medical records included demographic information, preoperative clinical scores, radiological imaging, and complications. Postoperative clinical outcome scores collected after a 2-year minimum follow-up included: patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) upper extremity (UE), PROMIS Pain interference, PROMIS pain intensity, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Visual Analog Scale pain scores. Results: A total of 47 patients (LP-BL: n=29, LP-FB: n=18) with a mean age of 29 years (range, 15-58 years) were included in this study. Both cohorts achieved good upper extremity functionality without significant differences as indicated by mean PROMIS UE (LP-BL: 52.6±10.0 vs. LP-FB: 54.6±7.6, P=0.442) and ASES scores (LP-BL: 89.9±15.7 vs. LP-FB: 91.5±14.4, P=0.712). However, the LP-FB cohort reported lower levels of pain (LP-FB: 0.5±1.1 vs. LP-BL: 1.9±2.7, P=0.020) at their latest follow-up. There were no significant differences in complication rates including re-dislocation between cohorts (LP-BL: 2/29 [6.9%] vs. LP-FB: 2/18 [11.1%], P=0.629). Conclusions: When performed after failed Bankart repair, the LP results in similar postoperative functional outcomes and similar rates of complications and re-dislocations when compared to the primary indication of recurrent glenohumeral instability in the setting of critical bone loss.

Anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty revision to reverse shoulder arthroplasty using convertible glenoid: a systematic review of clinical and radiological outcomes.

PURPOSE: The aim of the present systematic review is to collect all the available evidence regarding the clinical and radiological results of revision to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) of modular anatomic shoulder prostheses (TSA) using a convertible metal-backed glenoid (MBG). METHODS: This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Studies investigating revision of TSA to RSA utilizing a convertible MBG and reporting clinical and radiological outcomes were identified. RESULTS: A total of five studies on the use of convertible modular glenoid component in the setting of TSA revision to RSA were finally included in the present systematic review. A total of 60 procedures were reported. Mean operative times was 65 min. Intraoperative complications included 3 cases of glenoid loosening. Only one case of dislocation was reported as postoperative complication. At mean follow-up of 32.3 months post-revision, no glenoid loosening was reported, VAS score decreased from 7.7 to 1.5, Constant Score increased from 24.8 to 57.6. CONCLUSIONS: Revision to RSA after failed TSA using a convertible modular glenoid component was associated with a low rate of intraoperative and postoperative complications, low surgical time and led to good results in term of pain relieve and functional outcomes. Given the complexity and risk associated with revision of anatomic shoulder prosthesis having a convertible glenoid may help to simplify the procedure and improve clinical results.

Sutures, Screws, Buttons, and Anchors: A Review of Current Bone Graft Fixation Devices for Glenoid Bone Loss in the Unstable Shoulder.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Anterior shoulder instability is associated with concomitant injury to several stabilizing structures of the shoulder, including glenoid bone loss. While instability is most common in young athletes and patients with predisposing conditions of hyperlaxity, recurrent shoulder instability can occur throughout various age ranges and may lead to longer term effects including pain and shoulder arthritis. Glenoid bone loss exceeding certain thresholds is generally treated by glenoid reconstruction via bone block augmentation to adequately stabilize the glenohumeral joint. These procedures increase the width of the articular surface on which the humeral head can translate before dislocation and, based on the procedure performed, provide a sling effect via the conjoined tendon, and increase tension to support the anterior capsule. The purpose of this review is to summarize the available literature regarding bone block fixation techniques. RECENT DEVELOPMENTS: Various fixation techniques have been utilized to secure bone block transfers. Though screw fixation has traditionally been used for bone block fixation, suture buttons, suture anchors, and all-suture techniques have been utilized in attempts to avoid complications associated with the use of screws. Biomechanical studies report variable force-resistance, displacement, and mode of failure when comparing screw to suture button-based fixation of glenoid bone blocks. Clinical and radiographic studies have shown these novel suture-based techniques to be comparable, and in some cases advantageous, to traditional screw fixation techniques. While screw fixation has long been the standard of care in glenoid bone block procedures, it is associated with high complication rates, leading surgeons to endeavor toward new fixation techniques. In available biomechanical studies, screw fixation has consistently demonstrated high maximal load-to-failure and displacement with cyclic loading. Studies have reported similar clinical and radiographic outcomes in both screw and suture-based fixation methods, with evidence of reduced bone resorption with suture fixation. While suture button fixation is associated with a higher rate of recurrent instability, overall complication rates are low. Future research should address biomechanical shortcomings of suture-based fixation techniques and continue to assess long-term follow-up of patients treated with each fixation method.

The Use of Glenoid Structural Allografts for Glenoid Bone Defects in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Background: The use of reverse shoulder arthroplasty as a primary and revision implant is increasing. Advances in implant design and preoperative surgical planning allow the management of complex glenoid defects. As the demand for treating severe bone loss increases, custom allograft composites are needed to match the premorbid anatomy. Baseplate composite structural allografts are used in patients with eccentric and centric defects to restore the glenoid joint line. Preserving bone stock is important in younger patients where a revision surgery is expected. The aim of this article is to present the assessment, planning, and indications of femoral head allografting for bony defects of the glenoid. Methods: The preoperative surgical planning and the surgical technique to execute the plan with a baseplate composite graft are detailed. The preliminary clinical and radiological results of 29 shoulders which have undergone this graft planning and surgical technique are discussed. Clinical outcomes included visual analogue score of pain (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), Constant-Murley score (CS), satisfaction before and after operation, and active range of motion. Radiological outcomes included graft healing and presence of osteolysis or loosening. Results: The use of composite grafts in this series has shown excellent clinical outcomes, with an overall graft complication rate in complex bone loss cases of 8%. Conclusion: Femoral head structural allografting is a valid and viable surgical option for glenoid bone defects in reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Posterior Shoulder Instability and Glenoid Bone Loss: A Review and a Free Bone Graft Technique.

Posterior glenoid bone loss (pGBL) is frequently associated with posterior shoulder instability. Posterior glenohumeral instability accounts for a small percentage of shoulder pathologies, and critical bone loss in posterior instability has not been well defined in the literature. Younger patient populations who participate in activities that repetitively stress the posterior stabilizing structures of the shoulder are more prone to developing posterior shoulder instability. A variety of surgical options have been described, ranging from isolated capsulolabral repair to glenoid osteotomy. Soft-tissue repair alone may be an inadequate treatment in cases of pGBL and places patients at a high risk of recurrence. Our preferred technique for posterior glenoid reconstruction in cases of pGBL involves the transfer of a free iliac crest bone graft onto the native glenoid. The graft is contoured to fit the osseous defect and secured to provide an extension of the glenoid track. In this study, we review pGBL in the setting of posterior instability and describe our technique in detail. Further long-term studies are needed to refine the indications for glenoid bone graft procedures and quantify what constitutes a critical pGBL.

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with inlay glenoid component: A systematic review.

Background: A total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) system utilizing an inlay glenoid component has been proposed as a means of reducing glenoid component loosening while still providing patients with desirable functional and clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to systematically review current outcomes literature on TSA using an inlay glenoid component. Methods: A literature search was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science databases. Studies comparing pre- and postoperative functional and clinical outcomes were included. Results: Five studies with 148 shoulders (133 patients) were included. Patient-reported outcomes improved, including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (mean change 34.1 to 80.6), Penn Shoulder Score (mean change 43.3 to 85.5), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (mean change 34.1 to 80.6), and visual analog scale-pain (mean change 6.9 to 1.6). Range of motion improved for forward elevation (mean change 109.6 to 156.2) and external rotation (mean change 21.5 to 50.8). Glenoid component loosening occurred in one shoulder (0.68%). Two revision surgeries (1.35%) were performed. Discussion: The use of an inlay glenoid component is associated with improvements in postoperative pain, function, and satisfaction while minimizing rates of glenoid component loosening and the need for revision surgery over short-term follow-up. Level of evidence: systematic review, level IV.

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty for Patients with Glenoid Medialization.

BACKGROUND: Glenoid bone loss in shoulder arthroplasty is a difficult problem that is prone to complications due to challenges with achieving glenoid component fixation and stability. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of primary shoulder hemiarthroplasty for patients with severe glenoid medialization precluding placement of a glenoid component. METHODS: This was a retrospective case series evaluating patients who underwent shoulder hemiarthroplasty for severe glenoid erosion and medialization between 2010 and 2020. Patients were evaluated via chart review and phone survey to determine if there were any reoperations at final follow-up and to obtain Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were evaluated and compared to determine glenoid morphology, version, medialization, acromiohumeral distance, and humeral offset. Final postoperative films were also evaluated for anterosuperior migration and signs of mechanical failure including loosening or periprosthetic fracture. RESULTS: Overall, there were 28 patients during this period who underwent shoulder hemiarthroplasty for severe glenoid medialization. Eight patients were deceased at the time of the study, 2 were unable to complete surveys due to dementia, and 7 were lost to follow-up. The final cohort included 11 shoulders and 11 patients with mean age of 71 +/- 7.1 years and mean follow-up of 6.7 years (range 1.6 - 13.0 years). Mean postoperative SANE, ASES, and SST scores were 80.6 +/- 17.6, 71.5 +/- 29.3, and 7.6 +/- 2.0, respectively. There were no reoperations or revision surgeries at final follow-up. Radiographic evaluation demonstrated severe glenoid medialization and decreased lateral humeral offset which was unchanged postoperatively. There were 2 patients with signs of anterosuperior migration at final radiographic follow-up but no signs of implant failure. CONCLUSION: Shoulder hemiarthroplasty for severe medial glenoid bone loss provides modest clinical outcomes and low rates of reoperation at mid to long term follow-up and is an option worth considering in cases where placement of a glenoid component is challenging due to deficient bone stock and high risk for complications.