No abstract

ObjectivesOur objective is to provide a systematic and technical guide on how to reduce a shoulder dislocation, based on techniques that have been described in literature for patients with anterior and posterior shoulder instability.Materials and methodsA PubMed and EMBASE query was performed, screening all relevant literature on the closed reduction techniques. Studies regarding open reduction techniques and studies with fracture dislocations were excluded.ResultsIn this study we give an overview of 23 different techniques for closed reduction and 17 modifications of these techniques.DiscussionIn this review article we present a complete overview of the techniques, that have been described in the literature for closed reduction for shoulder dislocations. This manuscript can be regarded as a clinical guide how to perform a closed reduction maneuver, including several technical tips and tricks to optimize the success rate and to avoid complications.ConclusionThere are 23 different reduction techniques with 17 modifications of these techniques. Knowledge of the different techniques is highly important for a good reduction.

No abstract

For closed reduction of anterior shoulder dislocations, the combined data from the selected studies indicate that scapular manipulation is the most successful and fastest technique, with the shortest mean hospital stay and least pain during reduction. The FARES method seems the best alternative.

Background and purpose Humeral shaft fractures are often associated with radial nerve palsy (RNP) (8-16%). The primary aim of this systematic review was to assess the incidence of primary and secondary RNP in closed humeral shaft fractures. The secondary aim was to compare the recovery rate of primary RNP and the incidence of secondary RNP between operative and non-operative treatment. Methods A systematic literature search was performed in 'Trip Database', 'Embase' and 'PubMed' to identify original studies reporting on RNP in closed humeral shaft fractures. The Coleman Methodology Score was used to grade the quality of the studies. The incidence and recovery of RNP, fracture characteristics and treatment characteristics were extracted. Chi-square and Fisher exact tests were used to compare operative versus non-operative treatment. Results Forty studies reporting on 1758 patients with closed humeral shaft fractures were included. The incidence of primary RNP was 10%. There was no difference in the recovery rate of primary RNP when comparing operative treatment with radial nerve exploration (98%) versus non-operative treatment (91%) (p = 0.29). The incidence of secondary RNP after operative and non-operative treatment was 4% and 0.4%, respectively (p < 0.01). Interpretation One-in-ten patients with a closed humeral shaft fracture has an associated primary RNP, of which > 90% recovers without the need of (re-)intervention. No beneficial effect of early exploration on the recovery of primary RNP could be demonstrated when comparing patients managed non-operatively with those explored early. Patients managed operatively for closed humeral shaft fractures have a higher risk of developing secondary RNP. Level of evidence Level IV; Systematic Review.

Purpose: To determine the definitions for recurrence used in the literature, assess the consensus in using these definitions, and determine the impact of these definitions on recurrence rates. Methods: A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE including studies from 2000 to 2020 reporting on recurrence rates after anterior arthroscopic shoulder instability surgery. Dislocation, apprehension, subluxation and recurrence rates were compared. Results: Ninety-one studies were included. In 68% of the eligible studies, recurrence rates are not well defined. Thirty (33%) studies did not report on dislocations, 45 (49%) did not report on subluxations, and 58 (64%) did not report on apprehension. Seventeen different definitions for recurrence of instability, 4 definitions of dislocations, and 8 definitions of subluxation were used. Conclusion: Recurrence rates are poorly specified and likely underreported in the literature, hampering comparison with results of other studies. This highlights the need for a consensus on definition of recurrence across shoulder instability studies. We recommend not using the definition recurrence of instability anymore. We endorse defining dislocations as a radiographically confirmed dislocation or a dislocation that is manually reduced, subluxations as the feeling of a dislocation that can be (spontaneously) reduced without the need for a radiographically confirmed dislocation, and a positive apprehension sign as fear of imminent dislocation when placing the arm in abduction and external rotation during physical examination. Reporting on the events resulting in a dislocation or subluxation aids in making an estimation of the severity of instability. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review.

Collision athletes are not more at risk for redislocation rates after an open Bristow-Latarjet procedure compared to noncollision athletes. Overall postoperative outcomes were good, although numerous complications occurred.

Background: Our aim is to determine the interobserver reliability for surgeons to detect Hill-Sachs lesions on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), the certainty of judgement, and the effects of surgeon characteristics on agreement. Methods: Twenty-nine patients with Hill-Sachs lesions or other lesions with a similar appearance on MRIs were presented to 20 surgeons without any patient characteristics. The surgeons answered questions on the presence of Hill-Sachs lesions and the certainty of diagnosis. Interobserver agreement was assessed using the Fleiss’ kappa (κ) and percentage of agreement. Agreement between surgeons was compared using a technique similar to the pairwise t-test for means, based on large-sample linear approximation of Fleiss' kappa, with Bonferroni correction. Results: The agreement between surgeons in detecting Hill-Sachs lesions on MRI was fair (69% agreement; κ, 0.304; p<0.001). In 84% of the cases, surgeons were certain or highly certain about the presence of a Hill-Sachs lesion. Conclusions: Although surgeons reported high levels of certainty for their ability to detect Hill-Sachs lesions, there was only a fair amount of agreement between surgeons in detecting Hill-Sachs lesions on MRI. This indicates that clear criteria for defining Hill-Sachs lesions are lacking, which hampers accurate diagnosis and can compromise treatment.