BACKGROUND: The Latarjet procedure has been described as a reconstructive option for instability associated with substantial glenoid bone defects. A modification, termed the Congruent-Arc, is thought to improve glenoid reconstruction through better articular congruency and greater bone reconstitution. The strengths of these techniques, however, have not been reported. Purpose/ HYPOTHESIS: To compare the fixation stability, strength, glenoid vault load transfer, and joint contact between the Classic and Congruent-Arc techniques. The authors hypothesized that the Classic Latarjet would exhibit inferior joint contact characteristics while having greater stability and strength and more normal glenoid vault strain. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Sixteen shoulder specimens (8 pairs) were tested by loading the glenohumeral joint with the glenoid intact, following creation of a 25% anterior bone defect, and after random assignment to the Classic or Congruent-Arc Latarjet techniques. Specimens were mounted to a testing apparatus that allowed concentric, centralized loading and loading 30° anterior on the glenoid rim. Cyclic loading (100 cycles at 1 Hz) was applied with a staircase protocol (50, 100, 150, and 200 N). Graft interface displacement and glenoid load transfer, quantified in terms of strain, were recorded during loading. Contact was quantified during 50-N loading using a thin pressure sensor. After cyclic loading, specimens were loaded to failure, defined as 5 mm of graft interface displacement. RESULTS: The 30° loading ≥100 N resulted in significantly greater graft displacement (P < .004) in the Congruent-Arc group as compared with the Classic (mean displacement range, 0.9-2.6 vs 0.1-0.5 mm, respectively). Failure testing yielded a significantly (P = .010) greater ultimate strength for the Classic (557 N) as compared with the Congruent-Arc (392 N). Load-transfer measurements demonstrated that neither technique's glenoid vault strain values significantly differed from intact (P ≥ .076). Both techniques resulted in contact areas significantly less than intact (P < .035); however, the Congruent-Arc trended toward better contact characteristics (P = .074). CONCLUSION: The Congruent-Arc results in significantly poorer fixation stability as compared with the Classic technique but did more closely reproduce intact joint contact, which may yield more favorable long-term outcomes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Care must be taken in balancing the consideration of initial fixation stability and joint contact for the Congruent-Arc and Classic Latarjet, as these factors have opposing implications for each of the 2 reconstructions' outcomes.
BACKGROUND: The Latarjet procedure has been described as a reconstructive option for instability associated with substantial glenoid bone defects. A modification, termed the Congruent-Arc, is thought to improve glenoid reconstruction through better articular congruency and greater bone reconstitution. The strengths of these techniques, however, have not been reported. Purpose/ HYPOTHESIS: To compare the fixation stability, strength, glenoid vault load transfer, and joint contact between the Classic and Congruent-Arc techniques. The authors hypothesized that the Classic Latarjet would exhibit inferior joint contact characteristics while having greater stability and strength and more normal glenoid vault strain. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Sixteen shoulder specimens (8 pairs) were tested by loading the glenohumeral joint with the glenoid intact, following creation of a 25% anterior bone defect, and after random assignment to the Classic or Congruent-Arc Latarjet techniques. Specimens were mounted to a testing apparatus that allowed concentric, centralized loading and loading 30° anterior on the glenoid rim. Cyclic loading (100 cycles at 1 Hz) was applied with a staircase protocol (50, 100, 150, and 200 N). Graft interface displacement and glenoid load transfer, quantified in terms of strain, were recorded during loading. Contact was quantified during 50-N loading using a thin pressure sensor. After cyclic loading, specimens were loaded to failure, defined as 5 mm of graft interface displacement. RESULTS: The 30° loading ≥100 N resulted in significantly greater graft displacement (P < .004) in the Congruent-Arc group as compared with the Classic (mean displacement range, 0.9-2.6 vs 0.1-0.5 mm, respectively). Failure testing yielded a significantly (P = .010) greater ultimate strength for the Classic (557 N) as compared with the Congruent-Arc (392 N). Load-transfer measurements demonstrated that neither technique's glenoid vault strain values significantly differed from intact (P ≥ .076). Both techniques resulted in contact areas significantly less than intact (P < .035); however, the Congruent-Arc trended toward better contact characteristics (P = .074). CONCLUSION: The Congruent-Arc results in significantly poorer fixation stability as compared with the Classic technique but did more closely reproduce intact joint contact, which may yield more favorable long-term outcomes. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Care must be taken in balancing the consideration of initial fixation stability and joint contact for the Congruent-Arc and Classic Latarjet, as these factors have opposing implications for each of the 2 reconstructions' outcomes.
Authors: Peter Brownson; Oliver Donaldson; Michael Fox; Jonathan L Rees; Amar Rangan; Anju Jaggi; Graham Tytherleigh-Strong; Julie McBernie; Michael Thomas; Rohit Kulkarni Journal: Shoulder Elbow Date: 2015-05-26
Authors: Parke W Hudson; Martim C Pinto; Eugene W Brabston; Matthew C Hess; Brent M Cone; Johnathan F Williams; William S Brooks; Amit M Momaya; Brent A Ponce Journal: Shoulder Elbow Date: 2019-09-03
Authors: Laurent B Willemot; Ross Wodicka; Adrian Bosworth; Alessandro Castagna; Joseph Burns; Olivier Verborgt Journal: Shoulder Elbow Date: 2017-04-29