Autologous distal clavicle versus autologous coracoid bone grafts for restoration of anterior-inferior glenoid bone loss: a biomechanical comparison

被引:20
|
作者
Petersen, Steve A. [1 ]
Bernard, Johnathan A. [1 ]
Langdale, Evan R. [1 ]
Belkoff, Stephen M. [1 ]
机构
[1] Johns Hopkins Univ, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Baltimore, MD USA
关键词
Coracoid transfer; distal clavicle autograft; glenoid bone loss; Latarjet; shoulder instability; LATARJET PROCEDURE; SHOULDER INSTABILITY; CONTACT PRESSURES; BRISTOW PROCEDURE; COMPLICATIONS; DISLOCATION; RECONSTRUCTION; DEFECT; ALLOGRAFTS; STABILITY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jse.2015.10.023
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Treating anterior glenoid bone loss in patients with recurrent shoulder instability is challenging. Coracoid transfer techniques are associated with neurologic complications and neuroanatomic alterations. The purpose of our study was to compare the contact area and pressures of a distal clavicle autograft with a coracoid bone graft for the restoration of anterior glenoid bone loss. We hypothesized that a distal clavicle autograft would be as effective as a coracoid graft. Methods: In 13 fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulder specimens, we harvested the distal 1.0 cm of each clavicle and the coracoid bone resection required for a Latarjet procedure. A compressive load of 440 N was applied across the glenohumeral joint at 30 degrees and 60 degrees of abduction, as well as 60 degrees of abduction with 90 degrees of external rotation. Pressure-sensitive film was used to determine normal glenohumeral contact area and pressures. In each specimen, we created a vertical, 25% anterior bone defect, reconstructed with distal clavicle (articular surface and undersurface) and coracoid bone grafts, and determined the glenohumeral contact area and pressures. We used analysis of variance for group comparisons and a Tukey post hoc test for individual comparisons (with P < .05 indicating a significant difference). Results: The articular distal clavicle bone graft provided the lowest mean pressure in all testing positions. The coracoid bone graft provided the greatest contact area in all humeral positions, but the difference was not significant. Conclusion: An articular distal clavicle bone graft is comparable in glenohumeral contact area and pressures to an optimally placed coracoid bone graft for restoring glenoid bone loss. (C) 2016 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees.
引用
收藏
页码:960 / 966
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Comparison between autologous bone grafts and acrylic (PMMA) implants - A retrospective analysis of 286 cranioplasty procedures
    Vince, G. H.
    Kraschl, J.
    Rauter, H.
    Stein, M.
    Grossauer, S.
    Uhl, E.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL NEUROSCIENCE, 2019, 61 : 205 - 209
  • [42] Open Latarjet Versus Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for the Treatment of Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Instability in High-Demand Patients With Minimal Glenoid Bone Loss
    Genena, Ahmed
    Hashem, Mohamed
    Waly, Ahmed
    Hegazy, Mohamed O.
    CUREUS JOURNAL OF MEDICAL SCIENCE, 2023, 15 (04)
  • [43] Arthroscopic Autologous Iliac Bone Grafting With Double-Row Elastic Fixation and Double Antirotating Anchors for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Dislocation With Massive Glenoid Bone Defect
    Wang, Dazhi
    Ni, Jianlong
    Wang, Dongjian
    Wei, Wang
    Li, Ruiying
    Feng, Meng
    Shi, Zhibin
    ARTHROSCOPY TECHNIQUES, 2024, 13 (05):
  • [44] Bone union rate with recombinant human bone morphogenic protein-2 versus autologous iliac bone in PEEK cages for anterior lumbar interbody fusion
    Charles-Henri Flouzat-Lachaniette
    Amir Ghazanfari
    Charlie Bouthors
    Alexandre Poignard
    Philippe Hernigou
    Jérôme Allain
    International Orthopaedics, 2014, 38 : 2001 - 2007
  • [45] Bone union rate with recombinant human bone morphogenic protein-2 versus autologous iliac bone in PEEK cages for anterior lumbar interbody fusion
    Flouzat-Lachaniette, Charles-Henri
    Ghazanfari, Amir
    Bouthors, Charlie
    Poignard, Alexandre
    Hernigou, Philippe
    Allain, Jerome
    INTERNATIONAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2014, 38 (09) : 2001 - 2007
  • [46] Clinical and radiographic outcomes of primary vs. revision arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction with distal tibial allograft for anterior shoulder instability with bone loss
    Karpyshyn, Jillian
    Murphy, Ryland
    Sparavalo, Sara
    Ma, Jie
    Wong, Ivan
    JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2024, 33 (12) : 2867 - 2877
  • [47] A Comparison and Cost Analysis of Cranioplasty Techniques: Autologous Bone Versus Custom Computer-Generated Implants
    Gilardino, Mirko S.
    Karunanayake, Mihiran
    Al-Humsi, Taghreed
    Izadpanah, Ali
    Al-Ajmi, Hasan
    Marcoux, Judith
    Atkinson, Jeffrey
    Farmer, Jean-Pierre
    JOURNAL OF CRANIOFACIAL SURGERY, 2015, 26 (01) : 117 - 121
  • [48] Outcomes are comparable using free bone block autografts versus allografts for the management of anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis of “The Non-Latarjet”
    Ron Gilat
    Stephanie E. Wong
    Ophelie Lavoie-Gagne
    Eric D. Haunschild
    Derrick M. Knapik
    Michael C. Fu
    Jorge Chahla
    Brian Forsythe
    Brian J. Cole
    Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2021, 29 : 2159 - 2174
  • [49] Biomechanical comparison shows increased stability of an arthroscopic subscapular sling procedure compared to an open Latarjet reconstruction for anterior shoulder instability in specimens with major glenoid bone defect
    Vagstad, Terje
    Klungsoyr, Jan Arild
    Bjerknes, Christian
    Klungsoyr, Petter
    Skrede, Aleksander
    Dalen, Andreas
    Drogset, Jon Olav
    Myklebust, Tor age
    Hermansen, Erland
    JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL ORTHOPAEDICS, 2024, 11 (03)
  • [50] Craniofacial vertical bone augmentation: A comparison between 3D printed monolithic monetite blocks and autologous onlay grafts in the rabbit
    Tamimi, Faleh
    Torres, Jesus
    Gbureck, Uwe
    Lopez-Cabarcos, Enrique
    Bassett, David C.
    Alkhraisat, Mohammad H.
    Barralet, Jake E.
    BIOMATERIALS, 2009, 30 (31) : 6318 - 6326