Arthroscopic Treatment of Acetabular Retroversion With Acetabuloplasty and Subspine Decompression: A Matched Comparison With Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Treatment for Focal Pincer-Type Femoroacetabular Impingement.

BackgroundGlobal acetabular retroversion is classically treated with open reverse periacetabular osteotomy. Given the low morbidity and recent success associated with the arthroscopic treatment of femoroacetabular impingement (FAI), there may also be a role for arthroscopic treatment of acetabular retroversion. However, the safety and outcomes after hip arthroscopic surgery for retroversion need further study, and the effect of impingement from the anterior inferior iliac spine (subspine) in patients with retroversion is currently unknown.HypothesisArthroscopic treatment for global acetabular retroversion will be safe, and patients will have similar outcomes compared with a matched group undergoing arthroscopic treatment for focal pincer-type FAI.Study designCohort study; Level of evidence, 2.MethodsPatients undergoing hip arthroscopic surgery for symptomatic global acetabular retroversion were prospectively enrolled and compared with a matched group of patients undergoing arthroscopic surgery for focal pincer-type FAI. Both groups underwent the same arthroscopic treatment protocol. All patients were administered patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures, including the 12-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-12) Physical Component Summary (PCS) and a Mental Component Summary (MCS), modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Hip disability and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (HOOS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively.ResultsThere were no differences in age, sex, or body mass index between 39 hips treated for global acetabular retroversion and 39 hips treated for focal pincer-type FAI. There were no major or minor complications in either group. Patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment for global acetabular retroversion demonstrated similar significant improvements in postoperative PRO scores (scores increased by 17 to 43 points) as patients who underwent arthroscopic treatment for focal pincer-type FAI. Patients treated for retroversion who also underwent subspine decompression had greater improvement than patients who did not undergo subspine decompression for the HOOS-Pain (33.7 ± 15.3 vs 22.5 ± 17.6, respectively; P = .046) and HOOS-Quality of Life (49.7 ± 18.8 vs 34.6 ± 22.0, respectively; P = .030) scores.ConclusionArthroscopic treatment for acetabular retroversion is safe and provides significant clinical improvement similar to arthroscopic treatment for pincer-type FAI. Patients with acetabular retroversion who also underwent arthroscopic subspine decompression demonstrated greater improvements in pain and quality of life outcomes than those who underwent arthroscopic treatment without subspine decompression

Cadaveric and three-dimensional computed tomography study of the morphology of the scapula with reference to reversed shoulder prosthesis

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Purpose</p> <p>The purpose of this study is to analyze the morphology of the scapula with reference to the glenoid component implantation in reversed shoulder prosthesis, in order to improve primary fixation of the component.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Seventy-three 3-dimensional computed tomography of the scapula and 108 scapular dry specimens were analyzed to determine the anterior and posterior length of the glenoid neck, the angle between the glenoid surface and the upper posterior column of the scapula and the angle between the major craneo-caudal glenoid axis and the base of the coracoid process and the upper posterior column.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The anterior and posterior length of glenoid neck was classified into two groups named "short-neck" and "long-neck" with significant differences between them. The angle between the glenoid surface and the upper posterior column of the scapula was also classified into two different types: type I (mean 50°–52°) and type II (mean 62,50°–64°), with significant differences between them (p < 0,001). The angle between the major craneo-caudal glenoid axis and the base of the coracoid process averaged 18,25° while the angle with the upper posterior column of the scapula averaged 8°.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Scapular morphological variability advices for individual adjustments of glenoid component implantation in reversed total shoulder prosthesis. Three-dimensional computed tomography of the scapula constitutes an important tool when planning reversed prostheses implantation.</p