Aims. This study aimed to quantify the shoulder kinematics during an apprehension-relocation test in patients with anterior shoulder instability (ASI) and glenoid bone loss using the radiostereometric analysis (RSA) method. Kinematics were compared with the patient’s contralateral healthy shoulder. Methods. A total of 20 patients with ASI and > 10% glenoid bone loss and a healthy contralateral shoulder were included. RSA imaging of the patient’s shoulders was performed during a repeated apprehension-relocation test. Bone volume models were generated from CT scans, marked with anatomical coordinate systems, and aligned with the digitally reconstructed bone projections on the RSA images. The glenohumeral joint (GHJ) kinematics were evaluated in the anteroposterior and superoinferior direction of: the humeral head centre location relative to the glenoid centre; and the humeral head contact point location on the glenoid. Results. During the apprehension test, the centre of the humeral head was 1.0 mm (95% CI 0.0 to 2.0) more inferior on the glenoid for the ASI shoulder compared with the healthy shoulder. Furthermore, the contact point of the ASI shoulder was 1.4 mm (95% CI 0.3 to 2.5) more anterior and 2.0 mm (95% CI 0.8 to 3.1) more inferior on the glenoid compared with the healthy shoulder. The contact point of the ASI shoulder was 1.2 mm (95% CI 0.2 to 2.6) more anterior during the apprehension test compared to the relocation test. Conclusion. The humeral head centre was located more inferior, and the GHJ contact point was located both more anterior and inferior during the apprehension test for the ASI shoulders than the healthy shoulders. Furthermore, the contact point displacement between the apprehension and relocation test revealed increased joint laxity for the ASI shoulder than the healthy shoulders. These results contribute to existing knowledge that ASI shoulders with glenoid bone loss may also suffer from inferior shoulder instability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1133–1140

Aims. Recurrent dislocation is both a cause and consequence of glenoid bone loss, and the extent of the bony defect is an indicator guiding operative intervention. Literature suggests that loss greater than 25% requires glenoid reconstruction. Measuring bone loss is controversial; studies use different methods to determine this, with no clear evidence of reproducibility. A systematic review was performed to identify existing CT-based methods of quantifying glenoid bone loss and establish their reliability and reproducibility. Methods. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses-compliant systematic review of conventional and grey literature was performed. Results. A total of 25 studies were initially eligible. Following screening, nine papers were included for review. Main themes identified compared 2D and 3D imaging, as well as linear- compared with area-based techniques. Heterogenous data were acquired, and therefore no meta-analysis was performed. Conclusion. No ideal CT-based method is demonstrated in the current literature, however evidence suggests that surface area methods are more reproducible and lead to fewer over-estimations of bone loss, provided the views used are standardized. A prospective imaging trial is required to provide a more definitive answer to this research question. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2022;3(2):114–122

Aims. Glenoid bone loss is a significant problem in the management of shoulder instability. The threshold at which the bone loss is considered “critical” requiring bony reconstruction has steadily dropped and is now approximately 15%. This necessitates accurate measurement in order that the correct operation is performed. CT scanning is the most commonly used modality and there are a number of techniques described to measure the bone loss however few have been validated. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of the most commonly used techniques for measuring glenoid bone loss on CT. Methods. Anatomically accurate models with known glenoid diameter and degree of bone loss were used to determine the mathematical and statistical accuracy of six of the most commonly described techniques (relative diameter, linear ipsilateral circle of best fit (COBF), linear contralateral COBF, Pico, Sugaya, and circle line methods). The models were prepared at 13.8%, 17.6%, and 22.9% bone loss. Sequential CT scans were taken and randomized. Blinded reviewers made repeated measurements using the different techniques with a threshold for theoretical bone grafting set at 15%. Results. At 13.8%, only the Pico technique measured under the threshold. At 17.6% and 22.9% bone loss all techniques measured above the threshold. The Pico technique was 97.1% accurate, but had a high false-negative rate and poor sensitivity underestimating the need for grafting. The Sugaya technique had 100% specificity but 25% of the measurements were incorrectly above the threshold. A contralateral COBF underestimates the area by 16% and the diameter by 5 to 7%. Conclusion. No one method stands out as being truly accurate and clinicians need to be aware of the limitations of their chosen technique. They are not interchangeable, and caution must be used when reading the literature as comparisons are not reliable. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(7):478–489

Aims. Rates of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) continue to grow. Glenoid bone loss and deformity remains a technical challenge to the surgeon and may reduce improvements in patients’ outcomes. However, there is no consensus as to the optimal surgical technique to best reconstruct these patients’ anatomy. This review aims to compare the outcomes of glenoid bone grafting versus augmented glenoid prostheses in the management of glenoid bone loss in primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Methods. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated study-level data in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We performed searches of Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and PubMed from their dates of inception to January 2022. From included studies, we analyzed data for preoperative and postoperative range of motion (ROM), patient-reported functional outcomes, and complication rates. Results. A total of 13 studies (919 shoulders) were included in the analysis. The mean age of patients at initial evaluation was 72.2 years (42 to 87), with a mean follow-up time of 40.7 months (24 to 120). Nine studies with 292 rTSAs evaluated the use of bone graft and five studies with 627 rTSAs evaluated the use of augmented glenoid baseplates. One study was analyzed in both groups. Both techniques demonstrated improvement in patient-reported outcome measures and ROM assessment, with augmented prostheses outperforming bone grafting on improvements in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score. There was a higher complication rate (8.9% vs 3.5%; p < 0.001) and revision rate among the bone grafting group compared with the patients who were treated with augmented prostheses (2.4% vs 0.6%; p = 0.022). Conclusion. This review provides strong evidence that both bone graft and augmented glenoid baseplate techniques to address glenoid bone loss give excellent ROM and functional outcomes in primary rTSA. The use of augmented base plates may confer fewer complications and revisions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1334–1342

Aims. The amount of glenoid bone loss is an important factor in deciding between soft-tissue and bony reconstruction when managing anterior shoulder instability. Accurate and reproducible measurement of glenoid bone loss is therefore vital in evaluation of shoulder instability and recommending specific treatment. The aim of this systematic review is to identify the range methods and measurement techniques employed in clinical studies treating glenoid bone loss. Methods. A systematic review of the PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase databases was undertaken to cover a ten-year period from February 2011 to February 2021. We identified clinical studies that incorporated bone loss assessment in the methodology as part of the decision-making in the management of patients with anterior shoulder instability. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) were used. Results. A total of 5,430 articles were identified from the initial search, of which 82 studies met the final inclusion criteria. A variety of imaging methods were used: three studies did not specify which modality was used, and a further 13 used CT or MRI interchangeably. There was considerable heterogeneity among the studies that specified the technique used to quantify glenoid bone loss. A large proportion of the studies did not specify the technique used. Conclusion. This systematic review has identified significant heterogeneity in both the imaging modality and method used to measure glenoid bone loss. The recommendation is that as a minimum for publication, authors should be required to reference the specific measurement technique used. Without this simple standardization, it is impossible to determine whether any published paper should influence clinical practice or should be dismissed. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):12–18

Bone defects are frequently observed in anterior shoulder instability. Over the last decade, knowledge of the association of bone loss with increased failure rates of soft-tissue repair has shifted the surgical management of chronic shoulder instability. On the glenoid side, there is no controversy about the critical glenoid bone loss being 20%. However, poor outcomes have been described even with a subcritical glenoid bone defect as low as 13.5%. On the humeral side, the Hill-Sachs lesion should be evaluated concomitantly with the glenoid defect as the two sides of the same bipolar lesion which interact in the instability process, as described by the glenoid track concept. We advocate adding remplissage to every Bankart repair in patients with a Hill-Sachs lesion, regardless of the glenoid bone loss. When critical or subcritical glenoid bone loss occurs in active patients (> 15%) or bipolar off-track lesions, we should consider anterior glenoid bone reconstructions. The techniques have evolved significantly over the last two decades, moving from open procedures to arthroscopic, and from screw fixation to metal-free fixation. The new arthroscopic techniques of glenoid bone reconstruction procedures allow precise positioning of the graft, identification, and treatment of concomitant injuries with low morbidity and faster recovery. Given the problems associated with bone resorption and metal hardware protrusion, the new metal-free techniques for Latarjet or free bone block procedures seem a good solution to avoid these complications, although no long-term data are yet available. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1100–1110

Aims. Extensive literature exists relating to the management of shoulder instability, with a more recent focus on glenoid and humeral bone loss. However, the optimal timing for surgery following a dislocation remains unclear. There is concern that recurrent dislocations may worsen subsequent surgical outcomes, with some advocating stabilization after the first dislocation. The aim of this study was to determine if the recurrence of instability following arthroscopic stabilization in patients without significant glenoid bone loss was influenced by the number of dislocations prior to surgery. Methods. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using the PubMed, EMBASE, Orthosearch, and Cochrane databases with the following search terms: ((shoulder or glenohumeral) and (dislocation or subluxation) and arthroscopic and (Bankart or stabilisation or stabilization) and (redislocation or re-dislocation or recurrence or instability)). Methodology followed the PRISMA guidelines. Data and outcomes were synthesized by two independent reviewers, and papers were assessed for bias and quality. Results. Overall, 35 studies including 7,995 shoulders were eligible for analysis, with a mean follow-up of 32.7 months (12 to 159.5). The rate of post-stabilization instability was 9.8% in first-time dislocators, 9.1% in recurrent dislocators, and 8.5% in a mixed cohort. A descriptive analysis investigated the influence of recurrent instability or age in the risk of instability post-stabilization, with an association seen with increasing age and a reduced risk of recurrence post-stabilization. Conclusion. Using modern arthroscopic techniques, patients sustaining an anterior shoulder dislocation without glenoid bone loss can expect a low risk of recurrence postoperatively, and no significant difference was found between first-time and recurrent dislocators. Furthermore, high-risk cohorts can expect a low, albeit slightly higher, rate of redislocation. With the findings of this study, patients and clinicians can be more informed as to the likely outcomes of arthroscopic stabilization within this patient subset. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1141–1149

The April 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Acute rehabilitation following traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (ARTISAN): pragmatic, multicentre, randomized controlled trial; Prevalence and predisposing factors of neuropathic pain in patients with rotator cuff tears; Are two plates better than one? The clavicle fracture reimagined; A single cell atlas of frozen shoulder capsule identifies features associated with inflammatory fibrosis resolution; Complication rates and deprivation go hand in hand with total shoulder arthroplasty; Longitudinal instability injuries of the forearm; A better than “best-fit circle” method for glenoid bone loss assessment; 3D supraspinatus muscle volume and intramuscular fatty infiltration after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for recurrent instability of the shoulder and assess the ability to return to sport in patients with engaging Hill-Sachs lesions treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair and Hill-Sachs remplissage (ABR-HSR). Methods. This retrospective study included 133 consecutive patients with a mean age of 30 years (14 to 69) who underwent ABR-HSR; 103 (77%) practiced sports before the instability of the shoulder. All had large/deep, engaging Hill-Sachs lesions (Calandra III). Patients were divided into two groups: A (n = 102) with minimal or no (< 10%) glenoid bone loss, and B (n = 31) with subcritical (10% to 20%) glenoid loss. A total of 19 patients (14%) had undergone a previous stabilization, which failed. The primary endpoint was recurrent instability, with a secondary outcome of the ability to return to sport. Results. At a mean follow-up of four years (1.0 to 8.25), ten patients (7.5%) had recurrent instability. Patients in group B had a significantly higher recurrence rate than those in group A (p = 0.001). Using a multivariate logistic regression, the presence of glenoid erosion of > 10% (odds ratio (OR) = 35.13 (95% confidence interval (CI) 8 to 149); p = 0.001) and age < 23 years (OR = 0.89 (0.79 to 0.99); p = 0.038) were associated with a higher risk of recurrent instability. A total of 80 patients (78%) could return to sport, but only 11 athletes (65%) who practiced high-risk (collision or contact-overhead) sports. All seven shoulders which were revised using a Latarjet procedure were stable at a mean final follow-up of 36 months (11 to 57) and returned to sports at the same level. Conclusion. Patients with subcritical glenoid bone loss (> 10%) and younger age (≤ 23 years) are at risk of failure and reoperation after ABR-HSR. Furthermore, following this procedure, one-third of athletes practicing high-risk sports are unable to return at their pre-instability level, despite having a stable shoulder. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):718–724

Aims. Glenoid bone loss can be a challenging problem when revising a shoulder arthroplasty. Precise pre-operative planning based on plain radiographs or CT scans is essential. We have investigated a new radiological classification system to describe the degree of medialisation of the bony glenoid and that will indicate the amount of bone potentially available for supporting a glenoid component. It depends on the relationship between the most medial part of the articular surface of the glenoid with the base of the coracoid process and the spinoglenoid notch: it classifies the degree of bone loss into three types. It also attempts to predict the type of glenoid reconstruction that may be possible (impaction bone grafting, structural grafting or simple non-augmented arthroplasty) and gives guidance about whether a pre-operative CT scan is indicated. Patients and Methods. Inter-method reliability between plain radiographs and CT scans was assessed retrospectively by three independent observers using data from 39 randomly selected patients. . Inter-observer reliability and test-retest reliability was tested on the same cohort using Cohen's kappa statistics. Correlation of the type of glenoid with the Constant score and its pain component was analysed using the Kruskal-Wallis method on data from 128 patients. Anatomical studies of the scapula were reviewed to explain the findings. Results. Excellent inter-method reliability, inter-observer and test-retest reliability were seen. The system did not correlate with the Constant score, but correlated well with its pain component. . Take home message: Our system of classification is a helpful guide to the degree of glenoid bone loss when embarking on revision shoulder arthroplasty. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:374–80

The December 2012 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: whether allograft is biomechanically superior in large Hill-Sachs defects; glenoid bone loss in shoulder dislocators; repairing irreparable cuff tears; acromioclavicular joint injuries; whether more radiographs equals more surgery; whether reverse TSR is cheaper than hemiarthroplasty; autologous chondrocyte implantation in the shoulder; and fracture of the clavicle

Objectives. A variety of operative techniques have been described as under the term ‘Bristow-Latarjet’ procedure. This review aims to define the original procedure, and compare the variation in techniques described in the literature, assessing any effect on clinical outcomes. Materials and Methods. A systematic review of 24 studies was performed to compare specific steps of the technique (coracoid osteotomy site, subscapularis approach, orientation and position of coracoid graft fixation and fixation method, additional labral and capsular repair) and detect any effect this variability had on outcomes. Results. Overall recurrence rate was 5.36% (2.94% to 43%). Half of the studies performed the procedure for recurrent shoulder instability, with only five studies documenting glenoid bone loss as an indication: 12 studies used the procedure as the primary surgical intervention for recurrent instability. No change in outcome was noted when examining variation in the coracoid osteotomy site, the fixation site on the scapular neck, the fixation method or whether a capsular repair was also performed. Performing a horizontal split in subscapularis may preserve external rotation compared with performing a tenotomy. Conclusions. This is the first review to examine various operative techniques of the Bristow-Latarjet procedure, and their effect on outcome. We found that other than the approach through subscapularis, outcome was independent of the surgical technique, and depended more on patient selection. We would commend future publications on this procedure to provide a detailed description of the surgical technique, and as a minimum present rates of recurrence as an outcome measure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:1208–14

Aims

The open Latarjet procedure is a widely used treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Although satisfactory outcomes are reported, factors which influence a patient’s experience are poorly quantified. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a range of demographic factors and measures of the severity of instability on patient-reported outcome measures in patients who underwent an open Latarjet procedure at a minimum follow-up of two years.

Aims

To systematically review the predominant complication rates and changes to patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) following osteochondral allograft (OCA) transplantation for shoulder instability.

The June 2023 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Proximal humerus fractures: what does the literature say now?; Infection risk of steroid injections and subsequent reverse shoulder arthroplasty; Surgical versus non-surgical management of humeral shaft fractures; Core outcome set needed for elbow arthroplasty; Minimally invasive approaches to locating radial nerve in the posterior humeral approach; Predictors of bone loss in anterior glenohumeral instability; Does the addition of motor control or strengthening exercises improve rotator cuff-related shoulder pain?; Terminology and diagnostic criteria used in patients with subacromial pain syndrome.

The December 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Predicting recurrence of instability after a primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation; Predictors of surgery and long-term outcomes in nonoperative management of full-thickness rotator cuff tears; Reverse shoulder arthroplasty viable despite acquired acromial compromise, but higher infection risk noted; LP-PRP reduces retear rates in rotator cuff repair but shows no functional outcome advantage; Long-term clinical outcomes of arthroscopic supraspinatus tendon repair using the single anchor tension band technique – minimum five-year follow-up; Arthroscopic stabilization for anterior shoulder dislocation shows low recurrence rates regardless of prior dislocations; ORIF outperforms arthroplasty for complex radial head fractures: mid-term outcomes; Routine use of surgical helmet systems may not reduce infection risk in shoulder arthroplasty.

Aims

The Bankart and Latarjet procedures are two of the most common surgical techniques to treat anterior shoulder instability with satisfactory clinical and functional outcomes. However, the outcomes in the adolescent population remain unclear, and there is no information regarding the arthroscopic Latarjet in this population. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the arthroscopic Bankart and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures in the management of anterior shoulder instability in adolescents.

Aims

The aims of this study were to validate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), Rowe score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores following arthroscopic Bankart repair, and to identify preoperative threshold values of these scores that could predict the achievement of MCID and PASS.

Aims

The risk factors for recurrent instability (RI) following a primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (PTASD) remain unclear. In this study, we aimed to determine the rate of RI in a large cohort of patients managed nonoperatively after PTASD and to develop a clinical prediction model.