We have located links that may give you full text access.
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
Preliminary clinical outcomes of Latarjet-Patte coracoid transfer by arthroscopy vs. open surgery: Prospective multicentre study of 390 cases.
Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery & Research : OTSR 2016 December
BACKGROUND: The Latarjet-Patte procedure consisting in transfer and screw fixation of the coracoid process to the anterior glenoid is a treatment of reference for anterior shoulder instability. Over time, surgical innovations translated into a number of improvements and, in late 2003, an arthroscopically assisted variant of the procedure was described.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare clinical outcomes of the modified Latarjet-Patte procedure performed by open surgery, arthroscopy with screw fixation, or arthroscopy with endobutton fixation.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: A total of 390 patients who underwent surgery to treat anterior shoulder instability between March 2013 and June 2014 were included and divided into three groups depending on whether they were managed using open surgery with screw fixation, arthroscopy with screw fixation, or arthroscopy with endobutton fixation. Clinical findings were recorded pre-operatively then 6 months post-operatively and at last follow-up (mean, 27.7 months). Range of motion and apprehension test (arm in external rotation at 0°, 90°, and 140° of abduction) were assessed and the Walch-Duplay and modified Rowe scores were determined.
RESULTS: Motion range restriction was minimal with all three techniques, and motion range continued to improve throughout follow-up. Apprehension in external rotation was noted at 90° of abduction in 11% of cases and at 140° of abduction in 4% of cases. The mean total Walch-Duplay score improved from 46 pre-operatively to 90.6 and the mean total modified Rowe score from 46 pre-operatively to 91.1. By statistical analysis, external rotation at 90° of abduction and internal rotation at 0° of abduction were better after open surgery, but the differences were of limited clinical significance. Recurrence was noted in 3.3% of cases, nerve injury in 0.8%, and infection in 1.5%.
CONCLUSION: In this study, the three techniques produced similar clinical outcomes, with a stable shoulder and no joint stiffness.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate and compare clinical outcomes of the modified Latarjet-Patte procedure performed by open surgery, arthroscopy with screw fixation, or arthroscopy with endobutton fixation.
MATERIAL AND METHOD: A total of 390 patients who underwent surgery to treat anterior shoulder instability between March 2013 and June 2014 were included and divided into three groups depending on whether they were managed using open surgery with screw fixation, arthroscopy with screw fixation, or arthroscopy with endobutton fixation. Clinical findings were recorded pre-operatively then 6 months post-operatively and at last follow-up (mean, 27.7 months). Range of motion and apprehension test (arm in external rotation at 0°, 90°, and 140° of abduction) were assessed and the Walch-Duplay and modified Rowe scores were determined.
RESULTS: Motion range restriction was minimal with all three techniques, and motion range continued to improve throughout follow-up. Apprehension in external rotation was noted at 90° of abduction in 11% of cases and at 140° of abduction in 4% of cases. The mean total Walch-Duplay score improved from 46 pre-operatively to 90.6 and the mean total modified Rowe score from 46 pre-operatively to 91.1. By statistical analysis, external rotation at 90° of abduction and internal rotation at 0° of abduction were better after open surgery, but the differences were of limited clinical significance. Recurrence was noted in 3.3% of cases, nerve injury in 0.8%, and infection in 1.5%.
CONCLUSION: In this study, the three techniques produced similar clinical outcomes, with a stable shoulder and no joint stiffness.
Full text links
Related Resources
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app