Read more

October 21, 2024
1 min read
Save

Fresh vs. frozen distal tibia allografts yield similar outcomes for glenoid reconstruction

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Key takeaways:

  • Both open fresh and arthroscopic frozen distal tibia allografts may yield excellent outcomes for anatomic glenoid reconstruction.
  • All patients had improved function and pain scores, with a healing rate of 100%.

SAN ANTONIO — Presented results showed open fresh vs. arthroscopic frozen distal tibia allografts yielded comparable outcomes and high rates of healing among patients who underwent anatomic glenoid reconstruction.

“Ivan Wong, MD, popularized the frozen [distal tibia allograft] option, which is more available [than fresh grafts], and an arthroscopic technique with his Halifax portal,” Justin W. Arner, MD, clinical assistant professor of orthopedic surgery at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, said in his presentation at the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Annual Meeting. “He showed it to be safe, and that it's a faster learning curve than arthroscopic Latarjet. Similarly, in midterm and early follow-up, he's found good outcome scores, low rates of complication and high rates of union.”

Graphic distinguishing meeting news
Open fresh and arthroscopic frozen distal tibia allografts may yield excellent outcomes for anatomic glenoid reconstruction. Image: Adobe Stock

Arner and colleagues performed a retrospective review of 100 patients with glenoid bone loss and recurrent anterior shoulder instability who underwent anatomic glenoid reconstruction with either open fresh (n = 50) or arthroscopic frozen (n = 50) distal tibia allografts with an average follow-up of 3.4 years.

Justin W. Arner
Justin W. Arner

“We found significant, similar improvements in the WOSI scores preoperatively vs. postoperatively and no difference in pain or recurrence [between the groups],” Arner said. “Importantly, CT scan showed a 100% healing rate, with no difference in healing rates between the groups; difference in graft angle, which was 19°; or glenoid dimensions, which was about 32 mm, between the groups.”

In addition, Arner and colleagues found one patient from the fresh group and no patients in the frozen group had recurrent instability.

Arner concluded both open fresh and arthroscopic frozen distal tibia allografts yielded clinically stable and excellent outcomes in this patient population.