Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Multicenter Study
. 2022 Jul;30(7):2500-2509.
doi: 10.1007/s00167-022-06883-x. Epub 2022 Jan 29.

Conservative treatment of acute traumatic posterior shoulder dislocations (Type A) is a viable option especially in patients with centred joint, low gamma angle, and middle or old age

Affiliations
Multicenter Study

Conservative treatment of acute traumatic posterior shoulder dislocations (Type A) is a viable option especially in patients with centred joint, low gamma angle, and middle or old age

Christian Festbaum et al. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2022 Jul.

Abstract

Purpose: Purpose of this study was to evaluate the mid- to long-term outcome after conservatively treated first-time posterior shoulder dislocations and to determine structural defects associated with failure.

Methods: In this multi-centric retrospective study, 29 shoulders in 28 patients with first-time acute posterior shoulder dislocation (Type A1 or A2 according to the ABC classification) and available cross-sectional imaging were included. Outcome scores as well as radiological and magnetic resonance imaging were obtained at a mean follow-up of 8.3 ± 2.7 years (minimum: 5 years). The association of structural defects with redislocation, need for secondary surgery, and inferior clinical outcomes were analysed.

Results: Redislocation occurred in six (21%) shoulders and nine shoulders (31%) underwent secondary surgery due to persistent symptoms. The posttraumatic posterior glenohumeral subluxation was higher in the redislocation group compared to the no redislocation group; however, statistical significance was not reached (61.9 ± 12.5% vs. 50.6 ± 6.4%). Furthermore, a higher adapted gamma angle was observed in the failed conservative treatment group versus the conservative treatment group, similarly without statistically significant difference (97.8° ± 7.2°, vs. 93.3° ± 9.7°). The adapted gamma angle was higher than 90° in all patients of failed conservative therapy and the redislocation group. An older age at the time of dislocation showed a significant correlation with better clinical outcomes (SSV: r = 0.543, p = 0.02; ROWE: r = 0.418, p = 0.035 and WOSI: r = 0.478, p = 0.045). Posterior glenohumeral subluxation after trauma correlated with a worse WOSI (r = - 0.59, p = 0.02) and follow-up posterior glenohumeral decentring (r = 0.68, p = 0.007). The gamma angle (r = 0.396, p = 0.039) and depth of the reverse Hill-Sachs lesion (r = 0.437, p = 0.023) correlated significantly with the grade of osteoarthritis at follow-up.

Conclusion: Conservative treatment is a viable option in patients with an acute traumatic posterior shoulder dislocation with good outcome after mid- and long-term follow-up especially in patients with centred joint, low gamma angle, and middle or old age.

Level of evidence: IV.

Keywords: Conservative therapy; Posterior shoulder instability; Reverse Hill–Sachs lesion; Shoulder dislocation.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Radiological measuring of the glenohumeral centring and gamma angle of the RHSL. a To determine the centring of the humeral head in relation to the glenoid, a best-fit circle was placed on the remainder of the intact humeral articulating surface. A tangential line was drawn on the bony glenoid width, with two perpendicular lines starting from the anterior and posterior glenoid rims (dashed lines). Distances from the centre of the circle to the anterior dashed line was measured in relation to the distance from the anterior to the posterior dashed line and expressed as a percentage according to a previously published technique [1, 32]. Therefore, values > 50% represent a posterior glenohumeral decentring and values < 50% an anterior decentring, respectively. In this figure, the posterior glenohumeral decentring value is 21.8/38.3 = 56.9%. b Similar to the measurement of the glenohumeral centring, a best-fit circle was placed on the humeral head and lines were drawn from the posterior edge of the reverse Hill–Sachs defect to the centre of the circle and from the bicipital sulcus to the centre of the circle. The angle between both lines is the gamma angle which provides information on the size and localisation of the RHSL
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Subgroup corresponding adapted Gamma angle. Values of adapted gamma angle of all four subgroups. Dotted red lines present 90°
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Morphological change in RHSL. Axial MRI images illustrating the change of the RHSL from posttraumatic imaging (a) to final follow-up imaging and (b) after 5 years of conservative treatment. A decrease in the depth of the defect and a consolidation of the posterior bony Bankart lesion can be seen; however, the posterior glenohumeral decentring apparently remained
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
ABC classification. The ABC classification of posterior shoulder instability according to Moroder et al. [21]. There is a gradual transition from type 1 to type 2 and vice versa as well as the possibility of progression from type A2 to Type B2 to Type C2

References

    1. Akgün D, Siegert P, Danzinger V, Plachel F, Minkus M, Thiele K, et al. Glenoid vault and humeral head alignment in relation to the scapular blade axis in young patients with pre-osteoarthritic static posterior subluxation of the humeral head. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2021;30:756–762. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.08.004. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Antosh IJ, Tokish JM, Owens BD. Posterior shoulder instability. Sports Health. 2016;8:520–526. doi: 10.1177/1941738116672446. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baudi P, Righi P, Bolognesi D, Rivetta S, Rossi Urtoler E, Guicciardi N, et al. How to identify and calculate glenoid bone deficit. Chir Organ Mov. 2005;90:145–152. - PubMed
    1. Beighton P, Solomon L, Soskolne CL. Articular mobility in an African population. Ann Rheum Dis. 1973;32:413–418. doi: 10.1136/ard.32.5.413. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bois AJ, Fening SD, Polster J, Jones MH, Miniaci A. Quantifying glenoid bone loss in anterior shoulder instability: reliability and accuracy of 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional computed tomography measurement techniques. Am J Sports Med. 2012;40:2569–2577. doi: 10.1177/0363546512458247. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources