Bone defects are frequently observed in anterior shoulder instability. Over the last decade, knowledge of the association of bone loss with increased failure rates of soft-tissue repair has shifted the surgical management of chronic shoulder instability. On the glenoid side, there is no controversy about the critical glenoid bone loss being 20%. However, poor outcomes have been described even with a subcritical glenoid bone defect as low as 13.5%. On the humeral side, the Hill-Sachs lesion should be evaluated concomitantly with the glenoid defect as the two sides of the same bipolar lesion which interact in the instability process, as described by the glenoid track concept. We advocate adding remplissage to every Bankart repair in patients with a Hill-Sachs lesion, regardless of the glenoid bone loss. When critical or subcritical glenoid bone loss occurs in active patients (> 15%) or bipolar off-track lesions, we should consider anterior glenoid bone reconstructions. The techniques have evolved significantly over the last two decades, moving from open procedures to arthroscopic, and from screw fixation to metal-free fixation. The new arthroscopic techniques of glenoid bone reconstruction procedures allow precise positioning of the graft, identification, and treatment of concomitant injuries with low morbidity and faster recovery. Given the problems associated with bone resorption and metal hardware protrusion, the new metal-free techniques for Latarjet or free bone block procedures seem a good solution to avoid these complications, although no long-term data are yet available.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1100–1110.

Rotator cuff pathology is the main cause of shoulder pain and dysfunction in older adults. When a rotator cuff tear involves the subscapularis tendon, the symptoms are usually more severe and the prognosis after surgery must be guarded. Isolated subscapularis tears represent 18% of all rotator cuff tears and arthroscopic repair is a good alternative primary treatment. However, when the tendon is deemed irreparable, tendon transfers are the only option for younger or high-functioning patients. The aim of this review is to describe the indications, biomechanical principles, and outcomes which have been reported for tendon transfers, which are available for the treatment of irreparable subscapularis tears.

The best tendon to be transferred remains controversial. Pectoralis major transfer was described more than 30 years ago to treat patients with failed surgery for instability of the shoulder. It has subsequently been used extensively to manage irreparable subscapularis tendon tears in many clinical settings. Although pectoralis major reproduces the position and orientation of the subscapularis in the coronal plane, its position in the axial plane – anterior to the rib cage – is clearly different and does not allow it to function as an ideal transfer. Consistent relief of pain and moderate recovery of strength and function have been reported following the use of this transfer. In an attempt to improve on these results, latissimus dorsi tendon transfer was proposed as an alternative and the technique has evolved from an open to an arthroscopic procedure. Satisfactory relief of pain and improvements in functional shoulder scores have recently been reported following its use. Both pectoralis minor and upper trapezius transfers have also been used in these patients, but the outcomes that have been reported do not support their widespread use.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(9):970–977.

Aims

This study compared patients who underwent arthroscopic repair of large to massive rotator cuff tears (LMRCTs) with isolated incomplete repair of the tear and patients with incomplete repair with biceps tendon augmentation. We aimed to evaluate the additional benefit on clinical outcomes and the capacity to lower the re-tear rate.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of surgical repair to conservative treatment and subacromial decompression for the treatment of chronic/degenerative tears of the rotator cuff.

Aims

The appropriate management for patients with a degenerative tear of the rotator cuff remains controversial, but operative treatment, particularly arthroscopic surgery, is increasingly being used. Our aim in this paper was to compare the effectiveness of arthroscopic with open repair of the rotator cuff.

Aims

To compare radiographic failure and re-operation rates of anatomical coracoclavicular (CC) ligament reconstructional techniques with non-anatomical techniques after chronic high grade acromioclavicular (AC) joint injuries.

Dislocation of the acromioclavicular joint is a relatively common injury and a number of surgical interventions have been described for its treatment. Recently, a synthetic ligament device has become available and been successfully used, however, like other non-native solutions, a compromise must be reached when choosing non-anatomical locations for their placement. This cadaveric study aimed to assess the effect of different clavicular anchorage points for the Lockdown device on the reduction of acromioclavicular joint dislocations, and suggest an optimal location. We also assessed whether further stability is provided using a coracoacromial ligament transfer (a modified Neviaser technique). The acromioclavicular joint was exposed on seven fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders. The joint was reconstructed using the Lockdown implant using four different clavicular anchorage points and reduction was measured. The coracoacromial ligament was then transferred to the lateral end of the clavicle, and the joint re-assessed. If the Lockdown ligament was secured at the level of the conoid tubercle, the acromioclavicular joint could be reduced anatomically in all cases. If placed medial or 2 cm lateral, the joint was irreducible. If the Lockdown was placed 1 cm lateral to the conoid tubercle, the joint could be reduced with difficulty in four cases. Correct placement of the Lockdown device is crucial to allow anatomical joint reduction. Even when the Lockdown was placed over the conoid tubercle, anterior clavicle displacement remained but this could be controlled using a coracoacromial ligament transfer.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:1657–61.

The aim of this review is to address controversies in the management of dislocations of the acromioclavicular joint. Current evidence suggests that operative rather than non-operative treatment of Rockwood grade III dislocations results in better cosmetic and radiological results, similar functional outcomes and longer time off work. Early surgery results in better functional and radiological outcomes with a reduced risk of infection and loss of reduction compared with delayed surgery.

Surgical options include acromioclavicular fixation, coracoclavicular fixation and coracoclavicular ligament reconstruction. Although non-controlled studies report promising results for arthroscopic coracoclavicular fixation, there are no comparative studies with open techniques to draw conclusions about the best surgical approach. Non-rigid coracoclavicular fixation with tendon graft or synthetic materials, or rigid acromioclavicular fixation with a hook plate, is preferable to fixation with coracoclavicular screws owing to significant risks of loosening and breakage.

The evidence, although limited, also suggests that anatomical ligament reconstruction with autograft or certain synthetic grafts may have better outcomes than non-anatomical transfer of the coracoacromial ligament. It has been suggested that this is due to better restoration horizontal and vertical stability of the joint.

Despite the large number of recently published studies, there remains a lack of high-quality evidence, making it difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding these controversial issues.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1595–1602.