No abstract

No abstract

Purpose The purpose of this study is to evaluate the patient-reported outcomes of open Latarjet (OL) compared to arthroscopic Latarjet (AL) for anterior shoulder instability. Methods A retrospective review of patients who underwent either OL or AL for anterior shoulder instability between 2011 and 2019 was performed. Recurrent instability, visual analog scale (VAS) score, Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) score, patient satisfaction, willingness to undergo surgery again, and return to work/sport (RTW/RTS) were evaluated. A P value of < .05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results Our study included 102 patients in total; 72 patients treated with OL, and 30 treated with AL. There were no demographic differences between the two groups ( P > .05 for all). At final follow up (mean of 51.3 months), there was no difference between those that underwent OL or AL in the reported WOSI, VAS, VAS during sports, SSV, and SIRSI scores, nor in patient satisfaction, or whether they would undergo surgery again ( P > .05). Overall, there was no significant difference in the total rate of RTP (65% vs 60.9%; P = .74), or timing of RTP (8.1 months vs 7 months; P = .35). Additionally, there was no significant difference in the total rate of RTW (93.5% vs 95.5%; P = .75). Overall, 3 patients in the OL group and 2 patients in the AL group had recurrent instability events (6.9% vs 6.7%; P = .96), with no significant difference in the rate of recurrent dislocation (4.2% vs 3.3%; P = .84). Conclusion In patients with anterior shoulder instability, both the OL and AL are reliable treatment options, with a low rate of recurrent instability, and similar patient-reported outcomes.

Background: Performing open subpectoral biceps tenodesis in overhead athletes with a superior labrum anterior to posterior (SLAP) tear may affect their ability to return to overhead sports. Purpose: To investigate clinical outcomes in overhead athletes undergoing biceps tenodesis for the treatment of symptomatic, isolated SLAP tears involving the biceps-labral complex. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A retrospective review of overhead athletes who underwent biceps tenodesis for a SLAP tear was performed. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, subjective shoulder value (SSV), patient satisfaction, willingness to undergo surgery again, revision procedures, and return to play were evaluated. Psychological readiness to return to sport was evaluated using the SLAP–Return to Sport after Injury (SLAP-RSI) score. A P value of <.05 was considered to be statistically significant. Results: The current study included 44 overhead athletes. The mean age was 34.9 years (range, 16-46 years), 79.5% were male, and the mean follow-up was 49.0 months (range, 18-107 months). Overall, 81.8% of patients returned to play their overhead sport after biceps tenodesis, and 59.1% of patients returned to the same or higher level of play. It took patients, on average, 8.7 months to return to play after biceps tenodesis. The mean SLAP-RSI score was 69.4, and 70.5% of patients passed the SLAP-RSI threshold of 56. The mean ASES score, VAS score, SSV, and satisfaction were 92.0, 0.8, 80.6, and 87.9%, respectively. No patients in our cohort required revision surgery. Conclusion: This study found that athletes undergoing biceps tenodesis for the treatment of a symptomatic, isolated SLAP tear had a high rate of return to play, good functional outcomes, and a low rate of revision surgery.

No abstract