Lin Albert, Gilbert Ryan, Vargas Luilly
University of Pittsburgh.
Arthroscopy. 2025 Sep 3. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2025.08.018.
Recurrent anterior instability with glenoid bone loss is a difficult problem with several surgical options. The Latarjet technique remains the gold standard for glenoid bone reconstruction in the setting of critical glenoid bone loss, with excellent long-term outcomes. However, this technique has well-known downsides including high rates of complications. Free bone blocks have become popular to overcome these limitations and are more flexible for restoring anatomy. Iliac crest bone autograft is a tried-and-true graft used worldwide, particularly in countries where allograft is cost prohibitive, and has shown great clinical results and instability recurrence rates similar to the Latarjet procedure. However, iliac crest bone autograft has also been associated with high rates of donor site morbidity. Alternative methods of fixation such as cortical buttons and tape cerclage are gaining popularity owing to reported risks of screw fixation, including hardware prominence and osteolysis, with mixed results in the literature compared with screws. In many cases, we believe the issues with screws develop as a result of oversized grafts that eventually remodel to the normal shape of the glenoid, leading to screw "prominence." Nonetheless, screw fixation remains the gold standard for fixation. As more is learned of the complex interplay between humeral and glenoid bone loss, simply reconstructing the glenoid may not be enough to address the Hill-Sachs lesion (HSL), particularly if remodeling of the glenoid occurs over time. Regardless of technique, glenoid bone reconstruction should be sized to match the native glenoid, potentially followed by treatment of a concomitant HSL. In our practice, for subcritical bone loss (<20%), we use the Pittsburgh Instability Tool score to determine whether to perform anterior Bankart repair with or without remplissage or bone reconstruction. For glenoid bone loss of 20% to 30%, we typically offer an open Latarjet procedure and consider remplissage for off-track or near-track HSLs. For glenoid bone loss of more than 30%, we use the Latarjet procedure if the glenoid native anatomy can be restored. Otherwise, we typically recommend a distal tibial allograft with screw fixation and potentially a remplissage based on the track status of the HSL.
伴有肩胛盂骨缺损的复发性前向不稳定是一个难题,有多种手术选择。在严重肩胛盂骨缺损的情况下,Latarjet技术仍然是肩胛盂骨重建的金标准,长期效果良好。然而,该技术有众所周知的缺点,包括并发症发生率高。游离骨块已变得流行,以克服这些局限性,并且在恢复解剖结构方面更具灵活性。髂嵴自体骨移植是一种在全球范围内都被尝试且可靠的移植方法,特别是在同种异体骨成本过高的国家,并且已显示出与Latarjet手术相似的良好临床效果和不稳定复发率。然而,髂嵴自体骨移植也与供区并发症发生率高有关。由于报道了螺钉固定的风险,如硬件突出和骨质溶解,与螺钉相比,文献中的结果不一,皮质纽扣和带环扎等替代固定方法越来越受欢迎。在许多情况下,我们认为螺钉问题是由于移植骨过大导致的,最终会重塑为肩胛盂的正常形状,从而导致螺钉“突出”。尽管如此,螺钉固定仍然是固定的金标准。随着对肱骨和肩胛盂骨缺损之间复杂相互作用的了解越来越多,单纯重建肩胛盂可能不足以解决Hill-Sachs损伤(HSL),特别是如果肩胛盂随时间发生重塑。无论采用何种技术,肩胛盂骨重建的尺寸都应与天然肩胛盂相匹配,可能随后要治疗伴随的HSL。在我们的实践中,对于亚临界骨缺损(<20%),我们使用匹兹堡不稳定工具评分来确定是否进行前路Bankart修复,是否进行 remplissage或骨重建。对于肩胛盂骨缺损20%至30%的情况,我们通常提供开放式Latarjet手术,并考虑对脱轨或近轨HSL进行remplissage。对于肩胛盂骨缺损超过30%的情况,如果可以恢复肩胛盂的天然解剖结构,我们使用Latarjet手术。否则,我们通常建议使用带螺钉固定的胫骨远端同种异体骨,并根据HSL的轨迹状态可能进行remplissage。