Browse the corpus
Walk the evidence base by book and chapter — the raw source passages that ground Ask, Differential, and the rest.
1 passage
PURPOSE: This study systematically reviewed the literature for outcomes following revision surgery for a failed prior Latarjet procedure. METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on PRISMA guidelines using the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library databases. Studies in which the Latarjet procedure was performed as a revision procedure following failed prior shoulder instability surgery were included. Clinical outcomes analyzed were: 1. functional outcomes, 2. recurrent instability, 3. range of motion, and 4. COMPLICATIONS: Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS. RESULTS: There were seven studies with 161 patients (162 shoulders) included. Four studies used a bone-block procedure, three used arthroscopic soft-tissue stabilization, and the mean follow-up was 49.8 months. The most commonly reported functional outcome measure was the Rowe score, with a weighted mean average of 79.7, with 82.9% of patients having good to excellent outcomes. Return to play was possible for 73.8% of patients, with 64.2% of those returning to at least the same level of competition. The overall recurrence rate was 9.5%, with 3.6% and 5.9% experiencing recurrent dislocations and subluxations, respectively. The overall revision rate was 4.2%, with all patients undergoing revisions due to recurrence. There were no reported neurovascular complications. Instability arthropathy was reported in 43.3% of patients. CONCLUSION: Surgical management following a failed Latarjet procedure results in moderate rates of recurrent instability and has a low intraoperative and postoperative complication rate. Additionally, the results across all techniques appear similar, with no procedure being identified as the gold-standard in the literature. However, there was a concerning rate of instability arthropathy, which may be related to the failure of a bony procedure.