No abstract

No abstract

A trend exists toward slight underestimation of cup abduction angle measurement using intraoperative radiographs. Pelvic tilt or obliquity alters the measured cup abduction angle in known directions.

Objectives:The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical outcomes following revision anterior shoulder stabilization performed either via all-arthroscopic soft tissue repair or via Latarjet coracoid transfer.Methods:A retrospective review of prospectively collected data on 91 shoulders undergoing revision anterior shoulder stabilization was performed. All patients underwent prior soft tissue stabilization; those with prior open bone grafting procedures were excluded. For patients with 25% glenoid bone loss, Latarjet was performed (n=28). Patients were queried regarding recurrent instability (subluxation or dislocation). Clinical outcomes were evaluated using validated patient reported outcome questionnaires including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI).Results:A total of 63 shoulders in 62 patients (46 males, 16 females) with an average age of 23.2 ± 6.9 years were included in the revision arthroscopy group. At an average follow-up of 46.9 ± 16.8 months (range, 15 to 78), the mean WOSI score was 80.1 (range, 15.0 to 100), and there were significant improvements (p<0.001) in ASES (63.7 to 85.1), SST (6.2 to 9.1), and VAS pain scores (2.89 to 0.81). Recurrent instability occurred in 12 of 63 shoulders (19%); the number of prior surgeries and baseline hyperlaxity were significant risk factors for failure (p<0.001 and p=0.04, respectively). No patients developed clinical or radiographic evidence of arthritis. A total of 28 shoulders in 28 patients (21 male, 7 female) with an average age of 27.5 years (range 14 to 45) were included in the Latarjet group. Thirteen (46%) had more than one previous stabilization attempt. ), the average WOSI score was 71.9, and there were significant improvements (p<0.001) in ASES (65.7 to 87.0), SST (7.2 to 10.3), and VAS (3.1 to 1.1). Recurrent instability occurred in 2 of 28 shoulders (7%), including 1 patient with symptomatic subluxation and 1 patient with a recurrent dislocation resulting in rapid arthrosis requiring revision to hemiarthroplasty at 20 months after Latarjet.Conclusion:Both arthroscopic revision stabilization and Latarjet coracoid transfer result in satisfactory outcomes in patients who have failed previous arthroscopic capsulolabral repair. Recurrent instability rates were higher in the all-arthroscopic group (19% versus 7%). Longer-term studies are required to determine whether similar results are maintained over time, and to provide guidance on focused clinical indications for this challenging patient population.

Focal chondral lesions of the glenohumeral joint, though less common than chondral defects in the knee or ankle, can be a significant source of pain in an active population. For patients in whom nonsurgical management fails, promising results have been reported after arthroscopic microfracture surgery to treat such lesions. However, microfracture leads to growth of fibrocartilage tissue and is biomechanically less durable than native hyaline cartilage. Recently, augmentation of the microfractured defect with micronized allogeneic cartilage and platelet-rich plasma has been described to restore hyaline-like cartilage and potentially protect the subchondral bone from postsurgical fracture biology within the base of the defect. We present a simple arthroscopic technique of implanting dehydrated, micronized allogeneic cartilage scaffold to treat an isolated chondral lesion of the glenoid.

Objectives:Biceps tendoesis is a commonly accepted surgical option for long head biceps related pathology. Sub-pectoral tenodesis with interference screw offers reproducible outcomes with high biomechanical strength allowing for accelerated rehabilitiation. However, there is concern regarding potential fracture risk associate with a diaphyseal humeral tunnel particularly in an athletic population. The purpose of this study was to determine the amount of torsional strength reduction in the humerus resulting from an unicortically drilled hole, and to evaluate the effect of inserting a tenodesis screw into the drilled defect. We hypothesized that unicortical drilling would weaken the humerus and that the use of tenodesis screws would restore strength to the humerus.Methods:Twenty (10 matched pairs) of fresh frozen full length humeri (mean age 55.3 years, range 37-70 years) were used to perform this study. All humeral specimens were stripped of all soft tissue, except for the pectoralis major tendon, which was used to determine location of the tenodesis. Specimens were allocated to either Screw (n=5) or Empty Ream Group (n=5) and the matching contralateral pairs remained intact. In the Empty Ream specimens, an 8 mm unicortical hole was placed into the bicipital groove 1 cm proximal to the inferior border of the pectoralis major tendon. The humeri in the Screw Group were prepared in the same manner and filled with a 8mm x 12 mm polyetheretherketone (PEEK) screw. All specimens were tested until failure under torsional loading at a rate of 1 degree/second. Peak torque, angular deformation at peak, and total energy to failure were recorded. A paired t-test was used to compare data from left and right humeri for each of the two groups. Data were also evaluated as the ratio of the intervention humerus to its contralateral intact humerus in order to compare Tenodesis Screw and Empty Ream groups via a 2-tailed, unpaired t-test. Statistical significance was assumed for P <0.05.Results:When compared with intact group, both Screw and Empty Ream groups showed a significant reduction in peak torque, energy and angular displacement (P < 0.05). No statistical differences were noted between Screw and Empty Ream group for all measured values (Table 1).Conclusion:Drilling an 8mm unicortical hole for subpectoral biceps tenodesis reduces the torsional load to failure of the proximal humerus at time zero. Placing a PEEK tenodesis screw alone does not appear to increase the strength of the humerus.

No abstract

No abstract