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
Review
. 2024 May 6;32(spe1):e273366.
doi: 10.1590/1413-785220243201e273366. eCollection 2024.

RANGE OF MOTION AFTER BONE BLOCK PROCEDURES FOR SHOULDER INSTABILITY: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Paulo Henrique Schmidt Lara  1 , Leandro Masini Ribeiro  1 , Carlos Vicente Andreoli  1 , Alberto de Castro Pochini  1 , Paulo Santoro Belangero  1 , Benno Ejnisman  1
Affiliations
Review

RANGE OF MOTION AFTER BONE BLOCK PROCEDURES FOR SHOULDER INSTABILITY: SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Paulo Henrique Schmidt Lara et al. Acta Ortop Bras. .

Abstract
in English, Portuguese

Objective: to determine the surgical indications for glenoid bone grafting associated with better postoperative ranges of motion.

Methods: This systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA. The included studies were subdivided according to the criteria used to indicate glenoid bone graft surgery: group for radiological indications only (Group R), group for radiological indications associated with clinical indications (Group R + C), and group for arthroscopic indications (Group A). The extracted and evaluated data were the range of motion of the shoulder.

Results: in the electronic search conducted in October 2022, 1567 articles were selected. After applying the inclusion criteria, 14 articles were selected for the systematic review. Regarding the ranges of motion, group A had the highest number of statistically positive results together with group R. Group A showed positive results in elevation parameters, loss of lateral rotation in adduction, and medial rotation in abduction. Group R showed positive results in lateral rotation in adduction and loss of lateral rotation in adduction. On the other hand, Group R + C was the one that presented the highest number of statistically negative results, in the following parameters: elevation, lateral rotation in abduction, loss of lateral rotation in adduction, and medial rotation in abduction.

Conclusion: the subgroups presented variable results in the evaluated parameters; however, the groups with arthroscopic and radiological indications showed the highest number of positive results, with the latter group showing the best results regarding lateral rotation. Level of Evidence II, Systematic Reviews.

Objetivo: Determinar as indicações cirúrgicas de enxertia óssea da glenoide associadas aos melhores arcos de movimento no pós-operatório.

Métodos: De acordo com o Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), 14 artigos de um total de 1.567, selecionados em busca eletrônica, foram escolhidos para a revisão sistemática. Os estudos incluídos foram subdivididos de acordo com os critérios de indicação da cirurgia: indicações somente radiológicas (grupo R), indicações radiológicas associadas a indicações clínicas (grupo R + C) e indicações artroscópicas (grupo A). Os dados avaliados foram os arcos de movimento do ombro.

Resultados: Em relação aos arcos de movimento, os grupos que apresentaram a maior quantidade de resultados estatisticamente positivos foram o A – parâmetros elevação, perda de rotação lateral em adução e rotação medial em abdução – e o R – parâmetros rotação lateral em adução e perda de rotação lateral em adução. O grupo R + C apresentou a maior quantidade de resultados estatisticamente negativos nos parâmetros elevação, rotação lateral em abdução, perda de rotação lateral em adução e rotação medial em abdução.

Conclusão: Os grupos de indicações artroscópicas e radiológicas apresentaram a maior quantidade de resultados positivos, sendo que o último apresentou os melhores resultados em relação à rotação lateral. Nível de Evidência II, Revisão Sistemática.

Keywords: Orthopedic Surgery; Shoulder; Systematic Review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

All authors declare no potential conflict of interest related to this article.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Flowchart based on the International Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA).
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

References

    1. Olds M., Ellis R., Donaldson K., Parmar P., Kersten P. Risk factors which predispose first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations to recurrent instability in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Br J Sports Med. 2015;49(14):913–22. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Robinson C. M., Howes J., Murdoch H., Will E., Graham C. Functional outcome and risk of recurrent instability after primary traumatic anterior dislocation in young patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(11):2326–36. - PubMed
    1. Berendes T. D., Pilot P., Nagels J., Vochteloo A. J. H., Nelissen R. G. H. H. Survey on the management of acute first-time anterior shoulder dislocation amongst Dutch public hospitals. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2015;135(4):447–54. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Chong M., Karataglis D., Learmonth D. Survey of the management of acute traumatic first-time anterior shoulder dislocation among trauma clinicians in the UK. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2006;88(5):454–8. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Petrera M., Patella V., Patella S., Theodoropoulos J. A meta-analysis of open versus arthroscopic Bankart repair using suture anchors. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2010;18(12):1742–7. - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources