UNASSIGNED: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has revolutionized the treatment landscape for a spectrum of shoulder pathologies, extending its indications from rotator cuff arthropathy to encompass irreparable rotator cuff lesions, fractures, inflammatory arthritis, and tumors. However, the exponential increase in RTSA usage has brought a proportional rise in associated complications, with dislocation being one of the most common early post-operative complications.
UNASSIGNED: This case report details a 65-year-old right-hand dominant male patient presenting with chronic pain and weakness in the right shoulder, diagnosed with advanced glenohumeral arthritis and massive irreparable rotator cuff tears. The patient underwent a Bony Increased- Offset RTSA (BIO-RTSA) procedure, coupled with subscapularis repair. Postoperatively, the patient experienced pain and instability, culminating in an atraumatic anterior dislocation at 4 months. Despite conservative management, recurrent dislocations persisted. Revision surgery was performed with an increase in the linear component size for containment. About 1 year postoperative of the revision surgery, recurrent dislocation reoccurred. Re-revision surgery was performed with secondary pectoralis major (PM) transfer for subscapularis deficiency due to re-tear from recurrent dislocation, and with an increased humeral tray size for better containment. About 1-year and 6-month post-operative to the re-revision surgery, the patient achieved restored stability, improved range of motion, and reported satisfaction with the outcome.
UNASSIGNED: This case report underscores the challenges of managing recurrent anterior dislocation after RTSA. The successful use of secondary PM transfer highlights its efficacy as a salvage procedure in restoring stability for persistent anterior dislocation after RTSA. Yet, further clinical studies are warranted to establish the role of such interventions in the management for RTSA-associated complications.
UNASSIGNED: Case report.

暂无摘要。

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: Irreparable subscapularis tears, especially in younger patients with higher functional demands, present a challenging entity. Pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi tendon transfers are commonly considered for surgical management of this pathology, yet no consensus exists regarding the superior option. The purpose of this article is to review the most current tendon transfer techniques for irreparable subscapularis tears.
RESULTS: For decades, transfer of the pectoralis major has been considered the gold standard technique for irreparable subscapularis tears. This transfer was found to reduce pain and improve functional outcome scores, yet range of motion and force of internal rotation were not maintained in long-term follow-up studies. The latissimus dorsi tendon transfer for the same indications has demonstrated biomechanical superiority in recent cadaveric studies with promising short-term results clinically. Both pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi tendon transfers improve outcomes of patients with irreparable subscapularis tears. Future comparative studies are still needed to determine superiority amongst techniques.

Primary repair of acute subscapularis (SSC) tears provides excellent results, but tendon retraction, muscle atrophy, fatty infiltration, and humeral head migration may render a more chronic tear irreparable. These irreparable SSC tears present a diagnostic and treatment challenge for orthopaedic surgeons. Careful physical examination and imaging evaluation can help to distinguish those with reparable versus irreparable tears, but they are still not very reliable due to the methodological limitations of current evidence. Therefore, future research using 3D and quantitative measurement techniques is necessary to better predict the irreparability of the SSC. When conservative treatment of an irreparable SSC tear fails, reversed shoulder arthroplasty has been established as the preferred treatment option for older, low-demand patients with arthropathy, providing reliable improvements in pain and function. In younger patients without significant arthropathy, musculotendinous transfers are the treatment of choice. The pectoralis major transfer is historically the most frequently performed procedure and provides improved range of motion and pain relief, but fails to adequately restore strength and shoulder function. The latissimus dorsi transfer has gained increased interest over the last few years due to its biomechanical superiority, and early clinical studies suggest improved outcomes as well. More recently, anterior capsular reconstruction has been proposed as an alternative to musculotendinous transfers, but clinical data are completely lacking. Future high-quality randomised controlled trials are necessary to reliably compare the different musculotendinous transfers and anterior capsular reconstruction.

UNASSIGNED: Latissimus dorsi transfer (LDT) and pectoralis major transfer (PMT) were developed to treat an irreparable subscapularis tendon tear (ISScT); however, the difference in their outcomes remains unclear.
UNASSIGNED: To systematically review and compare the outcomes of LDT and PMT for ISScT.
UNASSIGNED: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic review was performed through a comprehensive search of Embase, PubMed, and the Cochrane Library. Studies of LDT or PMT were included according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The primary outcome was the Constant-Murley score (CMS) at the final follow-up. Secondary outcomes included the subjective shoulder value (SSV), visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, active shoulder range of motion, and the belly-press and lift-off tests. Postoperative failure and complication rates were the safety outcome measures. Outcomes were summarized into the LDT and PMT groups, and results were compared statistically (P < .05).
UNASSIGNED: Twelve studies were included in this review: 184 shoulders from 9 studies for the PMT group and 85 shoulders from 3 studies for the LDT group. For the PMT and LDT groups, the mean ages were 58.9 and 55.1 years, respectively, and the mean follow-up was 66.9 and 17.4 months, respectively. Overall, the LDT and PMT groups improved in the primary outcome (CMS) and secondary outcomes (SSV, VAS, ROM, and belly-press and lift-off tests), with low rates of failure and complication. When compared with the PMT group, the LDT group showed more significant improvements in CMS (35.2 vs 24.7; P < .001), active forward flexion (44.3° vs 14.7°; P < .001), abduction (35.0° vs 17.6°; P < .002), and positive belly-press test rate (45% vs 27%; P < .001). No statistically significant difference was seen between the groups in postoperative failure rate, complication rate, mean improvement of active internal rotation, VAS, or SSV.
UNASSIGNED: In general, LDT showed significantly better clinical outcomes postoperatively than did PMT. The available fair-quality evidence suggested that LDT might be a better choice for ISScT. Further evaluations on the relative benefits of the 2 surgical approaches are required, with more high-quality randomized controlled studies.

BACKGROUND: Locked dislocations of the glenohumeral joint are disabling and often painful conditions and the treatment is challenging. This study evaluates the functional outcome and the different prosthetic treatment options for chronic locked dislocations of the glenohumeral joint and a subclassification is proposed.
METHODS: In this single-center retrospective case series, all patients with a chronic locked dislocation treated surgically during a four-year period were analyzed. Constant score (CS), Quick Disabilities of Shoulder and Hand Score (DASH), patient satisfaction (subjective shoulder value (SSV)), revision rate and glenoid notching were analyzed.
RESULTS: 26 patients presented a chronic locked dislocation of the glenohumeral joint. 16 patients (62%) with a mean age of 75 [61-83] years were available for follow-up at 24 ± 18 months. CS improved significantly from 10 ± 6 points to 58 ± 21 points (p < 0.0001). At the final follow-up, the mean DASH was 27 ± 23 and the mean SSV was 58 ± 23 points. The complication rate was 19% and the revision rate was 6%; implant survival was 94%. Scapular notching occurred in 2 (13%) cases (all grade 1).
CONCLUSIONS: With good preoperative planning and by using the adequate surgical technique, good clinical short-term results with a low revision rate can be achieved. The authors suggest extending the Boileau classification for fracture sequelae type 2 and recommend using a modified classification to facilitate the choice of treatment as the suggested classification system includes locked posterior and anterior dislocations with and without glenoid bone loss.
METHODS: IV.

OBJECTIVE: Irreparable subscapularis tears represent a challenging entity, especially when they occur in younger patients with high functional demands. Tendon transfers are one of the options considered for surgical management for this pathology. The purpose of this article is to review the surgical technique and outcome of the two most common tendon transfers considered for irreparable subscapularis tears: pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi.
RESULTS: Transfer of the pectoralis major has been considered for decades the transfer of choice for irreparable subscapularis tears. Recently, a series with long-term follow-up (over 18 years) supported the reduction in pain and improvement in functional scores and patient satisfaction after pectoralis major transfer. However, the range of motion and the force in internal rotation were not maintained over time. Transfer of the latissimus dorsi to the lesser tuberosity has been recently described as an alternative with a sound biomechanical rationale and encouraging short-term results. Transfer of the pectoralis major and the transfer of latissimus dorsi to the lesser tuberosity are the two transfers most commonly considered for patients with irreparable subscapularis tears. Transfer of the pectoralis major has a much longer track record. Both procedures seem to improve outcomes. Comparative studies are needed to determine the relative indications of these two procedures.

BACKGROUND: There are several tendon transfers for reconstruction of irreparable subscapularis tears. The latissimus dorsi (LD) could be used because its direction and function are similar to those of the subscapularis. We performed LD transfers for irreparable subscapularis tears and evaluated clinical outcomes.
METHODS: The study enrolled 24 consecutive patients who underwent LD transfers. Clinical and functional outcomes were evaluated using the Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, pain visual analog scale, and range of shoulder motion preoperatively and at last follow-up. The lift-off and belly-press tests were performed to assess subscapularis integrity and function. Magnetic resonance imaging was performed preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively to evaluate tendon integrity.
RESULTS: Mean Constant, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and pain scores improved from 46 ± 6 to 69 ± 5 (P < .001), from 40 ± 3 to 70 ± 5 (P < .001), and from 6 ± 1 to 2 ± 1 (P = .006), respectively. The mean range of motion for forward elevation and internal rotation increased from 135° ± 17° to 166° ± 15° (P = .016) and from L5 to L1 (P = .010), respectively. Improvement in the range of motion for external rotation was not significant (51° ± 7° to 68° ± 7°; P = .062). At final follow-up, the belly-press test results were negative for 18 of 24 patients, and the lift-off test results were negative for 16 of 20 patients. No complications related to tendon transfer, including axillary and radial nerve injuries, were found. No retearing of the transferred LD was observed.
CONCLUSIONS: LD transfer resulted in pain relief and restoration of shoulder range of motion and function. LD transfer could be considered an effective and safe salvage treatment for irreparable subscapularis tears.

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this review is to provide a guide on surgical decision-making options for complex anterior shoulder instability using a case-based approach.
RESULTS: Arthroscopic Bankart repair is well documented for having successful outcomes in patients with isolated labral tear involvement with minimal bone loss. Latarjet is a generally accepted procedure in patients with 20-30% glenoid bone loss. When bone loss exceeds that which cannot be managed through Latarjet, a range of options exist and are highly dependent upon the extent of osseous deficiency on both the glenoid and humeral sides, surgeon experience, and patient-specific factors. The use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for the management of chronic locked shoulder dislocations has been described as a successful management option. Treatment options for complex anterior shoulder instability range widely based on patients\' presenting exam, surgical history, amount of glenoid bone loss, size of Hill-Sachs lesion, and surgeon preference. When selecting the appropriate surgical intervention, the treating surgeon must consider the patient history, physical exam, and preoperative imaging along with patient expectations.