Revision instability surgery.

O A Barron; L U Bigliani

Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 8582008

Revision instability surgery.

O A Barron·L U Bigliani

View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Revision instability is a complex clinical problem. A successful outcome is dependent on several factors, including an accurate diagnosis clearly delineating the different pathologic conditions contributing to the failure. Also, from a technical aspect, an attempt should be made to restore the normal anatomic relationships while achieving glenohumeral stability in a functional range of motion. The purpose of this article is to assist the clinician in the evaluation and treatment of failed instability surgery by combining the authors' personal experience with an extensive review of the literature.

Explore related subjects

Arm Injuries Humans Joint Instability Physical Examination Reoperation Shoulder Injuries Shoulder Joint Treatment Failure Journal Article Review

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeX RIS

O A Barron, L U Bigliani. 1995. Revision instability surgery.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8582008/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed1998

[Epiperiostal, percutaneous plate osteosynthesis. A new minimally invasive technique with reference to "biological osteosynthesis"].

Conservation of bone perfusion, protection of the soft tissue envelope and reduction of systemic stress by strengthening the host defence mechanism are general and essential aspects of a biological osteosynthesis. The minimal invasive operating techniques with the use of technical aids and tricks form the necessary presupposition for successful bone healing with a low complication rate. For an epiperiosteal, percutaneous plate osteosynthesis, the technique using a sliding tip and a manipulation handle is demonstrated.

Arm Injuries↗

PubMed1998

[Proximal and distal biceps tendon rupture--an indication for surgery?].

We reviewed 77 conservatively and 164 operatively treated cases of rupture of the long head of the biceps documented in the literature. Refixation offers a small but relatively constant improvement of flexion and supination power and thus reduces the number of cases with remaining light or marked weakness by one third. Deformity by the slipped muscle can be corrected effectively. As complications are uncommon surgery should be recommended to young and active patients and should at least be offered to less active patients. Thirteen patients were re-examined after operative repair for distal biceps tendon avulsion and 277 reported cases were reviewed. After conservative management (n = 20) the power of flexion remains reduced by 30%-40%, that of supination by more than 50%. The loss of flexion power, as well as the deformity can be nicely diminished by attachment of the distal biceps to the brachialis muscle (n = 22). There are no complications documented regarding this procedure. The anatomic reinsertion (n = 248) additionally reduces the loss of supination power to 0%-25%, but bears a higher risk of complications. The double-incision technique (n = 105 of 248) does not necessarily decrease this risk. There are as many nerve injuries reported as with the single-anterior approach. Additionally we are faced with the problem of radioulnar synostosis. The use of suture anchors provides a nice way of fixation of the tendon but does not facilitate the approach to the tuberosity. The distal biceps tendon rupture should be treated operatively. The adequate method of repair is to be determined individually.

Arm Injuries↗

PubMed1998

Pediatric sports injuries: when to refer or x-ray.

When any athlete presents for evaluation of an injury, the history and physical examination is of paramount importance in establishing a differential diagnosis. A radiograph is often used to confirm a diagnosis or to reassess an injury following treatment failure. There are certain drawbacks involved with getting a radiograph including cost, inconvenience, radiation exposure, and misinterpretation. Therefore, the radiographic evaluation of the injured athlete should be used only as clinically necessary. The benefits of getting a radiograph, to allow assessment of the severity of the injury, and thereby allow a more appropriate and aggressive treatment and rehabilitation program. The skills of history taking and physical examination presented in this article should make it easier to decide when the child athlete needs a more comprehensive and aggressive evaluation including radiographic studies.

Arm Injuries↗