Clinical Validation of the Glenoid Track Concept in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Gracitelli,Mauro Emilio Conforto
Data de Publicação: 2022
Outros Autores: Lobo,Frederico Lafraia, Malavolta,Eduardo Angeli, Assunção,Jorge Henrique, Andrade-Silva,Fernando Brandão de, Ferreira Neto,Arnaldo Amado
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
Texto Completo: http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162022000400612
Resumo: Abstract Objective To evaluate the correlation of the glenoid track and glenoidal bone loss with the recurrence dislocation rate and the Rowe score. Methods Retrospective study that assessed the glenoid track and glenoidal bone loss through preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Patients undergoing primary arthroscopic repair of anterior Bankart were included. Patients with glenoidal bone loss greater than 21%, rotator cuff tear, scapular waist fracture, and posterior or multidirectional instability were not included. Rowe score were the primary outcome, and the recurrence rate was the secondary outcome. Results One hundred and two patients were included. Postoperative recurrent instability was reported by 8 patients (7.8%). Four patients (50%) in the group with recurrence presented glenoidal bone loss greater than 13.5% against 24 (25.5%) in the group without recurrence (p= 0.210), with a negative predictive value of 94.6%. Three patients (37.5%) in the recurrence group were considered off-track, against 13 (13.8%) in the group without recurrence (p= 0.109), with a negative predictive value of 94.2%. Patients with absolute glenoid track value ≤ 1.5 mm had worse results in relation to the recurrence group, with 6 patients (75%) presenting recurrence (p= 0.003). Conclusion Off-track injury and glenoidal bone loss greater than the subcritical are not related to the recurrence rate and Rowe score, despite the high negative predictive value. The cut of the absolute value of the glenoid track at 1.5 mm had a significant relationship with the recurrence rate.
id SBOT-2_c8ee612282da5786640d92c89720555a
oai_identifier_str oai:scielo:S0102-36162022000400612
network_acronym_str SBOT-2
network_name_str Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Clinical Validation of the Glenoid Track Concept in Anterior Glenohumeral InstabilityBankart lesionsglenoid cavityshoulder dislocationAbstract Objective To evaluate the correlation of the glenoid track and glenoidal bone loss with the recurrence dislocation rate and the Rowe score. Methods Retrospective study that assessed the glenoid track and glenoidal bone loss through preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Patients undergoing primary arthroscopic repair of anterior Bankart were included. Patients with glenoidal bone loss greater than 21%, rotator cuff tear, scapular waist fracture, and posterior or multidirectional instability were not included. Rowe score were the primary outcome, and the recurrence rate was the secondary outcome. Results One hundred and two patients were included. Postoperative recurrent instability was reported by 8 patients (7.8%). Four patients (50%) in the group with recurrence presented glenoidal bone loss greater than 13.5% against 24 (25.5%) in the group without recurrence (p= 0.210), with a negative predictive value of 94.6%. Three patients (37.5%) in the recurrence group were considered off-track, against 13 (13.8%) in the group without recurrence (p= 0.109), with a negative predictive value of 94.2%. Patients with absolute glenoid track value ≤ 1.5 mm had worse results in relation to the recurrence group, with 6 patients (75%) presenting recurrence (p= 0.003). Conclusion Off-track injury and glenoidal bone loss greater than the subcritical are not related to the recurrence rate and Rowe score, despite the high negative predictive value. The cut of the absolute value of the glenoid track at 1.5 mm had a significant relationship with the recurrence rate.Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia2022-08-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersiontext/htmlhttp://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162022000400612Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia v.57 n.4 2022reponame:Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)instacron:SBOT10.1055/s-0041-1741022info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGracitelli,Mauro Emilio ConfortoLobo,Frederico LafraiaMalavolta,Eduardo AngeliAssunção,Jorge HenriqueAndrade-Silva,Fernando Brandão deFerreira Neto,Arnaldo Amadoeng2022-08-26T00:00:00Zoai:scielo:S0102-36162022000400612Revistahttp://www.rbo.org.br/https://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||rbo@sbot.org.br1982-43780102-3616opendoar:2022-08-26T00:00Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Clinical Validation of the Glenoid Track Concept in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability
title Clinical Validation of the Glenoid Track Concept in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability
spellingShingle Clinical Validation of the Glenoid Track Concept in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability
Gracitelli,Mauro Emilio Conforto
Bankart lesions
glenoid cavity
shoulder dislocation
title_short Clinical Validation of the Glenoid Track Concept in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability
title_full Clinical Validation of the Glenoid Track Concept in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability
title_fullStr Clinical Validation of the Glenoid Track Concept in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability
title_full_unstemmed Clinical Validation of the Glenoid Track Concept in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability
title_sort Clinical Validation of the Glenoid Track Concept in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability
author Gracitelli,Mauro Emilio Conforto
author_facet Gracitelli,Mauro Emilio Conforto
Lobo,Frederico Lafraia
Malavolta,Eduardo Angeli
Assunção,Jorge Henrique
Andrade-Silva,Fernando Brandão de
Ferreira Neto,Arnaldo Amado
author_role author
author2 Lobo,Frederico Lafraia
Malavolta,Eduardo Angeli
Assunção,Jorge Henrique
Andrade-Silva,Fernando Brandão de
Ferreira Neto,Arnaldo Amado
author2_role author
author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Gracitelli,Mauro Emilio Conforto
Lobo,Frederico Lafraia
Malavolta,Eduardo Angeli
Assunção,Jorge Henrique
Andrade-Silva,Fernando Brandão de
Ferreira Neto,Arnaldo Amado
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Bankart lesions
glenoid cavity
shoulder dislocation
topic Bankart lesions
glenoid cavity
shoulder dislocation
description Abstract Objective To evaluate the correlation of the glenoid track and glenoidal bone loss with the recurrence dislocation rate and the Rowe score. Methods Retrospective study that assessed the glenoid track and glenoidal bone loss through preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Patients undergoing primary arthroscopic repair of anterior Bankart were included. Patients with glenoidal bone loss greater than 21%, rotator cuff tear, scapular waist fracture, and posterior or multidirectional instability were not included. Rowe score were the primary outcome, and the recurrence rate was the secondary outcome. Results One hundred and two patients were included. Postoperative recurrent instability was reported by 8 patients (7.8%). Four patients (50%) in the group with recurrence presented glenoidal bone loss greater than 13.5% against 24 (25.5%) in the group without recurrence (p= 0.210), with a negative predictive value of 94.6%. Three patients (37.5%) in the recurrence group were considered off-track, against 13 (13.8%) in the group without recurrence (p= 0.109), with a negative predictive value of 94.2%. Patients with absolute glenoid track value ≤ 1.5 mm had worse results in relation to the recurrence group, with 6 patients (75%) presenting recurrence (p= 0.003). Conclusion Off-track injury and glenoidal bone loss greater than the subcritical are not related to the recurrence rate and Rowe score, despite the high negative predictive value. The cut of the absolute value of the glenoid track at 1.5 mm had a significant relationship with the recurrence rate.
publishDate 2022
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2022-08-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162022000400612
url http://old.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0102-36162022000400612
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 10.1055/s-0041-1741022
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv text/html
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia v.57 n.4 2022
reponame:Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
instname:Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)
instacron:SBOT
instname_str Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)
instacron_str SBOT
institution SBOT
reponame_str Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
collection Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Ortopedia (Online) - Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (SBOT)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||rbo@sbot.org.br
_version_ 1752122363583922176