|
Giovanni Di Giacomo1, Alberto Costantini1, Nicola de Gasperis1, Andrea De Vita1, Bernard K. H. Lin1, Marco Francone2, Mario A. Rojas Beccaglia1, Marco Mastantuono2
1 Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Concordia Hospital for Special Surgery, Rome, Italy
2 Department of Radiology, Universita' di Roma La Sapienza, Rome, Italy
Correspondence Address:
Giovanni Di Giacomo
VIA Delle Sette Chiese, 90, Rome
Italy
 Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None  | 3 |
DOI: 10.4103/0973-6042.109877
Aims: One of the reason for Latarjet procedure failure may be coracoid graft osteolysis. In this study, we aimed to understand if a better compression between the coracoid process and the glenoid, using a mini-plate fixation during the Latarjet procedure, could reduce the amount of coracoid graft osteolysis.
Materials and Methods: A computed tomography scan analysis of 26 prospectively followed-up patients was conducted after modified Latarjet procedure using mini-plate fixation technique to determine both the location and the amount of coracoid graft osteolysis in them. We then compared our current results with results from that of our previous study without using mini-plate fixation to determine if there is any statistical significant difference in terms of corcacoid bone graft osteolysis between the two surgical techniques.
Results: The most relevant osteolysis was represented by the superficial part of the proximal coracoid, whereas the deep part of the proximal coracoid graft is least involved in osteolysis and has best bone healing. The current study showed a significant difference only for the deep part of the distal coracoid with our previous study (P < 0.01).
Discussion: To our knowledge, there are no studies in literature that show the causes of coracoid bone graft osteolysis after Latarjet procedure.
Conclusion: Our study suggests that there is a significant difference only for the deep part of the distal coracoid in terms of osteolysis. At clinical examination, this difference did not correspond with any clinical findings.
Level of Evidence: Level 4.
Clinical Relevance: Prospective case series, Treatment study.
[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
|
Search Pubmed for
