编辑评论:对于有骨Bankart骨折或约10%关节盂骨丢失的接触性运动员,推荐使用开放式Bankart手术治疗前肩不稳定。

IF 4.4 1区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Albert Lin, Tyler M Hauer
{"title":"编辑评论:对于有骨Bankart骨折或约10%关节盂骨丢失的接触性运动员,推荐使用开放式Bankart手术治疗前肩不稳定。","authors":"Albert Lin, Tyler M Hauer","doi":"10.1016/j.arthro.2025.02.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Recurrent anterior shoulder instability with subcritical bone loss is a challenging clinical scenario. Many treatment options have been described, including arthroscopic Bankart repair, arthroscopic Bankart repair plus remplissage, open Bankart repair, and the Latarjet procedure. Arthroscopic Bankart repair alone has higher rates of failure in high-risk patient populations, especially at long-term follow-up. These high-risk populations include patients with significant glenoid bone loss (>20%), bipolar bone loss (including subcritical bone loss and off-track or \"near-track\" [8-10 mm] Hill-Sachs lesions), and demographic risk factors including young age, hyperlaxity, contact sports participation, and number of prior dislocations. Treatment algorithms favor arthroscopic Bankart repair plus remplissage or the Latarjet procedure for high-risk patients, but they go from \"A\" (arthroscopy) to \"C\" (coracoid transfer) and forget about \"B\" (open Bankart repair). Open Bankart repair has decreased in use by 65% across the United States since 2008, whereas the popularity of the Latarjet procedure has risen by 250% over the same time frame. With its reported success at long-term follow-up (1.6%-17.5% failure rates at 17-21 years), open Bankart repair must be reconsidered for properly indicated patients. Ongoing large-scale multicenter trials such as the Open Versus Arthroscopic Surgery for Shoulder Instability (OASIS) trial are looking at arthroscopic Bankart repair with or without remplissage versus open Bankart repair versus the Latarjet procedure in the setting of 10% to 20% anterior glenoid bone loss. We highly recommend open Bankart repair in contact athletes with an acute bony Bankart fracture and thoughtfully consider open Bankart repair in contact athletes with approximately 10% glenoid bone loss.</p>","PeriodicalId":55459,"journal":{"name":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editorial Commentary: Open Bankart Procedure for Anterior Shoulder Instability Is Recommended for Contact Athletes With Bony Bankart Fractures or Approximately 10% Glenoid Bone Loss.\",\"authors\":\"Albert Lin, Tyler M Hauer\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.arthro.2025.02.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Recurrent anterior shoulder instability with subcritical bone loss is a challenging clinical scenario. Many treatment options have been described, including arthroscopic Bankart repair, arthroscopic Bankart repair plus remplissage, open Bankart repair, and the Latarjet procedure. Arthroscopic Bankart repair alone has higher rates of failure in high-risk patient populations, especially at long-term follow-up. These high-risk populations include patients with significant glenoid bone loss (>20%), bipolar bone loss (including subcritical bone loss and off-track or \\\"near-track\\\" [8-10 mm] Hill-Sachs lesions), and demographic risk factors including young age, hyperlaxity, contact sports participation, and number of prior dislocations. Treatment algorithms favor arthroscopic Bankart repair plus remplissage or the Latarjet procedure for high-risk patients, but they go from \\\"A\\\" (arthroscopy) to \\\"C\\\" (coracoid transfer) and forget about \\\"B\\\" (open Bankart repair). Open Bankart repair has decreased in use by 65% across the United States since 2008, whereas the popularity of the Latarjet procedure has risen by 250% over the same time frame. With its reported success at long-term follow-up (1.6%-17.5% failure rates at 17-21 years), open Bankart repair must be reconsidered for properly indicated patients. Ongoing large-scale multicenter trials such as the Open Versus Arthroscopic Surgery for Shoulder Instability (OASIS) trial are looking at arthroscopic Bankart repair with or without remplissage versus open Bankart repair versus the Latarjet procedure in the setting of 10% to 20% anterior glenoid bone loss. We highly recommend open Bankart repair in contact athletes with an acute bony Bankart fracture and thoughtfully consider open Bankart repair in contact athletes with approximately 10% glenoid bone loss.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55459,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2025.02.001\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Arthroscopy-The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2025.02.001","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

复发性肩前路失稳伴亚临界骨丢失是一个具有挑战性的临床情况。许多描述的治疗方案包括关节镜Bankart修复、关节镜Bankart修复加复位、开放式Bankart和Latarjet。关节镜下Bankart单独修复在高风险患者中失败率较高,特别是在长期随访中。这些高危人群包括有严重的盂骨丢失(约20%)、双相骨丢失(包括亚临界骨丢失和偏离或“接近”[8-10mm] Hill-Sachs病变),以及人口统计学危险因素包括年轻、过度松弛、参与接触性运动和许多先前脱位。对于高危患者,治疗算法倾向于采用关节镜下Bankart修复+再灌注或Latarjet,但从“A”(关节镜)到“C”(冠状动脉转移),而忘记了“B”(开腹Bankart)。自2008年以来,Open Bankart在美国的使用率下降了65%,而Latarjet的普及率在同一时间段内上升了250%。由于Bankart在长期随访中取得了成功(17-21岁时失败率为1.6-17.5%),对于有适当适应症的患者,必须重新考虑开放式Bankart修复。正在进行的大规模多中心试验,如OASIS试验,在10%-20%前盂骨丢失的情况下,观察有或没有复发的关节镜Bankart、开放式Bankart和Latarjet。我们强烈建议对急性骨性Bankart骨折的接触性运动员进行Bankart手术,并考虑对关节盂骨丢失约10%的接触性运动员进行Bankart手术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Editorial Commentary: Open Bankart Procedure for Anterior Shoulder Instability Is Recommended for Contact Athletes With Bony Bankart Fractures or Approximately 10% Glenoid Bone Loss.

Recurrent anterior shoulder instability with subcritical bone loss is a challenging clinical scenario. Many treatment options have been described, including arthroscopic Bankart repair, arthroscopic Bankart repair plus remplissage, open Bankart repair, and the Latarjet procedure. Arthroscopic Bankart repair alone has higher rates of failure in high-risk patient populations, especially at long-term follow-up. These high-risk populations include patients with significant glenoid bone loss (>20%), bipolar bone loss (including subcritical bone loss and off-track or "near-track" [8-10 mm] Hill-Sachs lesions), and demographic risk factors including young age, hyperlaxity, contact sports participation, and number of prior dislocations. Treatment algorithms favor arthroscopic Bankart repair plus remplissage or the Latarjet procedure for high-risk patients, but they go from "A" (arthroscopy) to "C" (coracoid transfer) and forget about "B" (open Bankart repair). Open Bankart repair has decreased in use by 65% across the United States since 2008, whereas the popularity of the Latarjet procedure has risen by 250% over the same time frame. With its reported success at long-term follow-up (1.6%-17.5% failure rates at 17-21 years), open Bankart repair must be reconsidered for properly indicated patients. Ongoing large-scale multicenter trials such as the Open Versus Arthroscopic Surgery for Shoulder Instability (OASIS) trial are looking at arthroscopic Bankart repair with or without remplissage versus open Bankart repair versus the Latarjet procedure in the setting of 10% to 20% anterior glenoid bone loss. We highly recommend open Bankart repair in contact athletes with an acute bony Bankart fracture and thoughtfully consider open Bankart repair in contact athletes with approximately 10% glenoid bone loss.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
9.30
自引率
17.00%
发文量
555
审稿时长
58 days
期刊介绍: Nowhere is minimally invasive surgery explained better than in Arthroscopy, the leading peer-reviewed journal in the field. Every issue enables you to put into perspective the usefulness of the various emerging arthroscopic techniques. The advantages and disadvantages of these methods -- along with their applications in various situations -- are discussed in relation to their efficiency, efficacy and cost benefit. As a special incentive, paid subscribers also receive access to the journal expanded website.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信