Article

Are there advantages of the combined latissimus-dorsi transfer according to L'Episcopo compared to the isolated latissimus-dorsi transfer according to Herzberg after a mean follow-up of 6 years? A matched-pair analysis

ATOS-Klinik Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany. Electronic address: .
Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery / American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons ... [et al.] (Impact Factor: 1.93). 04/2012; 21(11):1499-507. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.01.002
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of the study was to evaluate differences of clinical results between the latissimus-dorsi transfer combined with teres-major transfer (G1) and the isolated latissimus-dorsi transfer (G2) for the treatment of massive irreparable postero-superior rotator cuff tears.
We performed the combined latissimus-dorsi/teres-major transfer in 17 patients at a mean age of 57 years. Furthermore, 17 patients at a mean age of 61 years were treated using the isolated latissimus-dorsi transfer. Both groups were followed-up clinically, radiologically, and with surface electromyography using the same study protocol.
The Constant score (CS) improved significantly from 48.3 points pre-op to 69.5 points post-op after a follow-up of 58 months in G1. The active range of motion improved in G1 sig. for flexion (124° pre-op, 166.5° post-op) and for abduction (117° pre-op, 163° post-op). The CS improved significantly from 45.1 points pre-op to 74.2 points post-op after a follow-up of 51 months in G2. The flexion and abduction increased significantly from 133.3° pre-op to 176° post-op, resp. from 113.3° pre-op to 173° post-op. The comparison of both surgical techniques showed a significant better active flexion and abduction for G2.
Both techniques achieved good functional results but the isolated latissimus-dorsi transfer produced a better active abduction and flexion, whereas the combined latissmus-dorsi/teres-major transfer achieved an increase in abduction strength. In contrast to the combined latissimus-dorsi/teres-major transfer, a progression of cuff tear arthropathy was not observed with the isolated latissimus-dorsi transfer.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
137 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Transfer of the latissimus dorsi tendon to the posterosuperior part of the rotator cuff is an option in active patients with massive rotator cuff tears to restore shoulder elevation and external rotation. However, it is unknown whether this treatment prevents progression of cuff tear arthropathy.
    Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 07/2014; 472(12). DOI:10.1007/s11999-014-3770-z · 2.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: The purpose of this study was to investigate coactivation (CoA) testing as a clinical tool to monitor motor learning after latissimus dorsi tendon transfer. Methods: We evaluated 20 patients clinically with the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Uni-versity of California–Los Angeles (UCLA) outcomes scores, visual analog scale, active external rotation (aER), and isometric strength testing in abduction and external rotation. Measurements of aER were performed while the latissimus dorsi was activated in its new function of external rotation with concomitant activation (coactivation) of its native functions (adduction and extension). Bilateral surface electromyographic (EMG) activity was recorded during aER measurements and the strength testing procedure (EMG activity ratio: with/without CoA). Patients were divided into two groups (excellent/good vs fair/poor) according to the results of the ASES and UCLA scores. Results: The mean follow-up was 57.8 AE 25.2 months. Subdivided by clinical scores, the superior outcome group lost aER with CoA, whereas the inferior outcome group gained aER (UCLA score: À2.2 AE 7.4 vs þ4.3 AE 4.1 ; P ¼ .031). Patients with inferior outcomes in the ASES score showed higher latissimus dorsi EMG activity ratios (P ¼.027), suggesting an inadequate motor learning process. Isometric strength testing revealed that the latissimus dorsi transfer had significantly greater activity compared with the contralateral side (external rotation, P ¼ .008; abduction, P ¼ .006) but did not have comparable strength (external rotation, P ¼ .017; abduction, P ¼ .009). Conclusions: Patients with inferior clinical results were more likely to be dependent on CoA to gain external rotation. Therefore, CoA testing may be used as a tool to evaluate the status of postoperative motor learning after latissimus dorsi transfer. Level of evidence: Basic Science, Electromyography. Ó 2013 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees.
    Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 02/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2013.11.005 · 2.37 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Sehnentransferoperationen wurden in den letzten Jahrzehnten für den jüngeren Patienten mit nichtrekonstruierbarer Rotatorenmanschettenläsion etabliert.Indikation, prädiktive Faktoren und klinische Ergebnisse von Sehnentransferoperationen in der Rotatorenmanschettenchirurgie sowie mögliche Technik-Modifikationen sollen besprochen werden.Aktuelle Literatur und Grundlagenarbeiten sowie Expertenempfehlungen werden ausgewertet und im Zusammenhang mit eigenen Fällen diskutiert.In den letzten Jahren konnten für den M.-latissimus-dorsi-Transfer für posterosuperiore Defekte sowie den M.-pectoralis-major-Transfer für anteriore Defekte eine Vielzahl von prädiktiven, bei der Indikationsstellung zu beachtenden Faktoren herausgearbeitet werden. Da die Indikation im Zeitintervall zwischen noch rekonstruierbarer Ruptur und fortgeschrittener Defektarthropathie jedoch sehr eng gestellt werden muss, sind die Fallzahlen limitiert. Die klinischen Ergebnisse aktueller Fallserien zeigen bei exakter Indikationsstellung im Durchschnitt eine signifikante Funktionsverbesserung der Schulter, jedoch keine komplette Wiederherstellung der Schulterfunktion. In der Literatur liegen größere Fallserien des M.-latissimus-dorsi-Transfers vor. Mit dieser Technik werden postoperativ bessere funktionelle Ergebnisse erzielt.Zusammenfassend bietet der Muskeltransfer im Zeitintervall zwischen noch rekonstruierbarer Ruptur und fortgeschrittener Defektarthropathie eine zusätzliche therapeutische Option, die klinischen Ergebnisse sind jedoch stark von der korrekten Indikationsstellung abhängig.
    Arthroskopie 02/2014; 27(1). DOI:10.1007/s00142-013-0770-z