Improvement of Coracoid Process Union Rates: A Comparative Study of Conventional Open and Arthroscopic-assisted Bristow Procedures for Treating Anterior Shoulder Instability in Rugby Players.

Makoto Tanaka,Takehito Hirose,Hiroto Hanai,Yuki Kotani,Kosuke Kuratani,Hidekazu Nakai,Kenji Hayashida
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2024.02.041
IF: 3.507
2024-04-11
Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
Abstract:Background The Bristow coracoid transfer procedure is a reliable technique for treating anterior shoulder instability in patients with large glenoid bone loss or those involved in collision sports. However, its success is marred by its inferior bone union rate of the coracoid process as compared to the Latarjet procedure. This study aimed to evaluate whether arthroscopic confirmation of the secured coracoid fixation during the Bristow procedure improves the bone union rate and clinical outcomes as compared to the open procedure. Methods We retrospectively reviewed 104 rugby players (n = 111 shoulders) who underwent an open (n = 66 shoulders) or arthroscopy-assisted (AS-assisted; n = 45 shoulders) Bristow procedure at our center from 2007 to April 2019. In the AS-assisted group, the screw fixation and coracoid stability and contact were confirmed under arthroscopic visualization. Graft union was evaluated through computed tomography at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year postoperatively. Patient-reported outcome measures were assessed based on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Rowe score, and satisfaction rate. Recurrence, the rate of return to play (RTP), and the frequency of pain after RTP were also assessed. Results The mean follow-up period was 73.5 (range: 45–160) months for the open group and 32.3 (range: 24–56) months for the AS-assisted group. In the former, the rates of bone union were 50%, 72.7%, and 88.9% at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year, respectively. In contrast, the AS-assisted group had significantly greater bone union rates–88.9%, 93.3%, and 95.6% at 3 months, 6 months, and 1 year, respectively. Both groups showed significant improvement in the ASES and Rowe scores compared to preoperative values as well as high satisfaction rates (open: 92%; AS-assisted: 95.7%). There were no statistically significant differences in the recurrence and RTP rates as well as the frequency of pain after RTP between the two groups. Conclusion The AS-assisted procedure allows early and high bone healing without compromising the clinical outcomes.
surgery,orthopedics,sport sciences
What problem does this paper attempt to address?