Clinical Outcomes Following Revision Anterior Shoulder Stabilization: Arthroscopic Revision Stabilization versus Latarjet

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...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine 2015-07, Vol.3 (7_suppl2)
Hauptverfasser: Frank, Rachel M., Mellano, Chris, Shin, Jason J., Feldheim, Terrence F., Mascarenhas, Randhir, Yanke, Adam Blair, Cole, Brian J., Nicholson, Gregory P., Romeo, Anthony A., Verma, Nikhil N.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung: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
ISSN:2325-9671
2325-9671
DOI:10.1177/2325967115S00048