Dumont Guillaume D, Vopat Bryan G, Parada Stephen, Cohn Randy, Makani Amun, Sanchez George, Golijanin Petar, Beaulieu-Jones Brendin R, Sanchez Anthony, Provencher Matthew T
University Specialty Clinics, University of South Carolina School of Medicine, Columbia, South Carolina, U.S.A.
Sports Medicine & Performance Center, The University of Kansas Hospital, Kansas City, Kansas, U.S.A.
Arthroscopy. 2017 May;33(5):946-952. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2016.09.035. Epub 2016 Dec 31.
To compare the surface area available for bony contact and the width of bone on each side of the Latarjet fixation screws in the traditional Latarjet technique versus the congruent arc modification of the Latarjet technique.
Computed tomographic scans of 24 shoulders in patients with glenohumeral instability who underwent multiplanar reconstruction measurements with multiple dimensions of the coracoid. The surface area of the coracoid available for bony contact with the anterior glenoid and width of bone on each side of a 3.5-mm screw was compared for the traditional Latarjet technique versus the congruent arc modification.
The surface area available for bony contact to the anterior glenoid was 5.65 ± 1.08 cm using the traditional Latarjet technique compared with 3.64 ± 0.93 cm using the congruent arc modification of the Latarjet technique (P < .001). The mean width of bone on each side of a 3.5-mm screw was 7.1 ± 1.0 mm using the traditional Latarjet technique compared with 4.1 ± 1.0 mm using the congruent arc modification (P < .001).
The traditional Latarjet technique has greater bony contact with the glenoid and greater bone width on each side of the screws compared with the congruent arc modification of the Latarjet technique. This potentially allows for a larger surface for healing in the traditional Latarjet technique. Moreover, because of smaller width of the bone around the screw, the congruent arc modification is potentially less tolerant of screw-positioning error compared with the traditional Latarjet technique.
Level III, retrospective comparative study.
比较传统Latarjet技术与Latarjet技术的全等弧改良技术中，Latarjet固定螺钉两侧可供骨接触的表面积以及骨宽度。
对24例接受多平面重建测量喙突多维度的肩肱关节不稳患者的肩部进行计算机断层扫描。比较传统Latarjet技术与全等弧改良技术中，喙突与前关节盂骨接触的表面积以及3.5毫米螺钉两侧的骨宽度。
传统Latarjet技术中，喙突与前关节盂的骨接触表面积为5.65±1.08平方厘米，而Latarjet技术的全等弧改良技术为3.64±0.93平方厘米（P<.001）。传统Latarjet技术中，3.5毫米螺钉两侧的平均骨宽度为7.1±1.0毫米，而全等弧改良技术为4.1±1.0毫米（P<.001）。
与Latarjet技术的全等弧改良技术相比，传统Latarjet技术与关节盂的骨接触更大，螺钉两侧的骨宽度也更大。这可能使传统Latarjet技术有更大的愈合表面积。此外，由于螺钉周围骨宽度较小，与传统Latarjet技术相比，全等弧改良技术对螺钉定位误差的耐受性可能更低。
III级，回顾性比较研究。
