Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Graft Position, Healing, and Resorption in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability: A Comparison of 4 Glenoid Augmentation Techniques.
Delgado, Cristina; Calvo, Emilio; Díaz Heredia, Jorge; Cañete, Pablo; García Navlet, Miguel; Ruiz Ibán, Miguel Angel.
Afiliación
  • Delgado C; Shoulder and Elbow Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain.
  • Calvo E; Shoulder and Elbow Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Department of Orthopedic Surgery and Traumatology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Jiménez Díaz, Madrid, Spain.
  • Díaz Heredia J; Shoulder and Elbow Reconstructive Surgery Unit, Hospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal, Madrid, Spain.
  • Cañete P; Departamento de Cirugía, Ciencias Sanitarias y Medicosociales, Universidad de Alcalá de Henares, Madrid, Spain.
  • García Navlet M; Hospital Manises, Valencia, Spain.
  • Ruiz Ibán MA; Hospital Asepeyo Coslada, Madrid, Spain.
Orthop J Sports Med ; 12(6): 23259671241253163, 2024 Jun.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38840788
ABSTRACT

Background:

The success of glenoid augmentation procedures depends on accurate placement and healing of the graft to the glenoid. Different glenoid augmentation techniques have been described, but no comparative studies between them exist.

Purpose:

To assess the bone graft position, healing, and resorption in a group of patients treated with 1 of 4 procedures arthroscopic anterior bone-block procedure using either (1) fresh-frozen iliac crest allograft or (2) iliac crest autograft, (3) open Latarjet, or (4) arthroscopic Latarjet. Study

Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

A total of 40 patients (87.5% men; mean age, 29.5 ± 7.9 years) were included, with 10 patients in each of the procedure groups. The graft position in the axial and sagittal planes was assessed on postoperative computed tomography (CT). Graft healing and resorption were assessed in a second CT scan performed 1 year postoperatively. Qualitative variables were compared between the 4 procedures using the chi-square test, and quantitative variables were compared with the Student t test or Mann-Whitney U test.

Results:

No differences were found between the procedures in the axial or sagittal position. The healing rate was significantly lower in the allograft bone-block group (20%) compared with the autograft bone-block (80%), open Latarjet (90%), and arthroscopic Latarjet (90%) groups (P < .001). Graft resorption developed in 17 of 40 (42.5%) cases overall. Osteolysis occurred in 100% of cases in the allograft bone-block group compared with 50% in the autograft group, 20% in the open Latarjet group, and 0% in the arthroscopic Latarjet group (P < .001). The glenoid surface area on 1-year CT scan was significantly lower in the allograft bone-block group compared with the autograft bone-block, open Latarjet, and arthroscopic Latarjet groups (P < .001).

Conclusion:

Arthroscopic bone-block, open Latarjet, and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures provided accurate bone graft positioning. However, very high rates of osteolysis and nonunion were observed in the iliac crest fresh-frozen allograft bone-block procedure when compared with the other procedures.
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Orthop J Sports Med Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: España Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Idioma: En Revista: Orthop J Sports Med Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: España Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos