Hospital Italiano de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina, U.S.A.
Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Arthroscopy. 2021 Jun;37(6):1719-1728. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.12.237. Epub 2021 Jan 13.
To establish an international expert consensus, using the modified Delphi technique, on the evaluation and management of glenohumeral instability with associated bone loss.
A working group of 6 individuals generated a list of statements related to history and physical examination, imaging and specialized diagnostic tests, bone loss quantification and classification, treatment outcomes and complications, and rehabilitation for the management of glenohumeral instability associated with bone loss to form the basis of an initial survey for rating by a group of experts. The expert group (composed of 22 high-volume glenohumeral instability experts) was surveyed on 3 occasions to establish a consensus on the statements. Items with over 70% agreement and less than 10% disagreement achieved consensus.
After a total of 3 rounds, 31 statements achieved consensus. Eighty-six percent of the experts agreed that a history of multiple dislocations and failed soft-tissue surgery should raise suspicion about the possibility of an associated bone deficit. Ninety-five percent of the experts agreed that 3-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) is the most accurate diagnostic method to evaluate and quantify bone loss. Eighty-six percent of the experts agreed that any of the available methods to measure glenoid bone deficiency is adequate; however, 91% of the experts thought that an en face view of the glenoid using 3D CT provides the most accurate method. Ninety-five percent of the experts agreed that Hill-Sachs lesions are poorly quantified and classified by current imaging systems. Ninety percent of the experts agreed that in cases with a glenoid bone deficit greater than 20%, glenoid bone graft reconstruction should be performed and any of the available options is valid. There was no consensus among experts on how Hill-Sachs injuries should be managed or on how postoperative rehabilitation should be carried out.
The essential statements on which the experts reached consensus included the following: A history of multiple dislocations and failed soft-tissue surgery should make surgeons consider the possibility of an associated bone deficit. Three-dimensional CT is the most accurate diagnostic method to evaluate and quantify bone loss. Although any of the available methods to measure glenoid bone deficiency is adequate, an en face view of the glenoid using 3D CT provides the most accurate method. Hill-Sachs lesions are poorly quantified and classified by current imaging systems. Finally, in cases with a glenoid bone deficit greater than 20%, glenoid bone graft reconstruction should be performed.
Level V, consensus statement.
使用改良 Delphi 技术,就伴发骨丢失的盂肱关节不稳定的评估和处理达成国际专家共识。
由 6 名工作人员组成的工作组制定了一份与病史和体格检查、影像学和特殊诊断性检查、骨丢失定量和分类、治疗效果和并发症以及康复相关的陈述清单,作为专家初始评分调查的基础,用于伴发骨丢失的盂肱关节不稳定的处理。专家组(由 22 名高容量盂肱关节不稳定专家组成)接受了 3 次调查,以就陈述达成共识。对于超过 70%的专家达成一致且少于 10%的专家持不同意见的项目达成共识。
经过总共 3 轮,31 个项目达成共识。86%的专家同意,多次脱位和软组织手术失败的病史应提示存在相关骨缺损的可能性。95%的专家同意,三维(3D)计算机断层扫描(CT)是评估和定量骨丢失最准确的诊断方法。86%的专家同意,现有的任何一种测量肩胛盂骨缺损的方法都是足够的;但是,91%的专家认为使用 3D CT 的肩胛盂正面视图提供了最准确的方法。95%的专家同意,目前的影像学系统对 Hill-Sachs 病变的定量和分类效果不佳。90%的专家同意,对于肩胛盂骨缺损大于 20%的病例,应进行肩胛盂骨重建,任何现有的选择都是有效的。专家们对于如何处理 Hill-Sachs 损伤以及如何进行术后康复存在分歧。
专家们达成共识的基本陈述包括以下内容:多次脱位和软组织手术失败的病史应使外科医生考虑到存在相关骨缺损的可能性。3D CT 是评估和定量骨丢失最准确的诊断方法。虽然现有的任何一种测量肩胛盂骨缺损的方法都是足够的,但使用 3D CT 的肩胛盂正面视图提供了最准确的方法。目前的影像学系统对 Hill-Sachs 病变的定量和分类效果不佳。最后,对于肩胛盂骨缺损大于 20%的病例,应进行肩胛盂骨重建。
5 级,共识声明。