Arthroscopic glenoid resurfacing with meniscal allograft: a minimally invasive alternative for treating glenohumeral arthritis.

Orthopaedic Surgeons of Wisconsin, Franklin, Wisconsin 53132, USA.
Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery (Impact Factor: 3.1). 01/2006; 21(12):1517-20. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2005.10.001
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The chronically painful arthritic glenohumeral joint recalcitrant to nonsurgical treatment modalities generally has been treated with an open arthroplasty type of procedure. Certain patients may benefit from a less invasive surgical technique in which a meniscal allograft is used to resurface the glenoid, resulting in decreased pain and increased function. We describe an arthroscopic method of glenoid resurfacing with a meniscal allograft to aid in the restoration of function by providing pain relief to patients debilitated by arthritic conditions of the glenohumeral joint.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Glenohumeral arthritis in the athlete can be managed nonsurgically with medications, injections, physical therapy, and modification of activity. When surgical intervention is warranted, the patient is more definitively served with open resurfacing or replacement procedures. However, arthroscopy can be used as an intervening step to mitigate symptoms of glenohumeral arthritis. Arthroscopic interventions include glenohumeral debridement of delaminating articular surfaces, debridement of displaced degenerative labral tears, removal of osteocartilaginous or foreign bodies, and capsular release. These procedures address the pain, mechanical locking, or loss of motion associated with glenohumeral arthritis.
    Operative Techniques in Sports Medicine 01/2008; 16(1):9-13. · 0.21 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The development of degenerative joint disease in the young active patient is an increasing and difficult problem. In this review, evidence for the role of nonoperative and operative treatment strategies is assessed with the objective of establishing guidelines for management, and identifying areas for future research. Glucosamine and chondroitin supplements, as well as steroid and hyaluronan injections are probably useful early in the disease. Arthroscopic debridement, capsular release, and microfracture are temporizing measures that can provide pain relief and defer more invasive surgery. Attempts to restore the cartilage surface with osteochondral autologous transplants or autologous chondrocyte implantation may be suitable as second-line therapy for focal defects, although resurfacing of more extensive lesions with biological membranes has proven more difficult. Because prosthetic arthroplasty is relatively contraindicated in young patients, particularly contact athletes, the search for an ideal solution remains elusive, and more clinical and basic science research is needed.
    Shoulder & Elbow 01/2010; 2(1):1-8.
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Glenohumeral arthritis remains a growing problem in the young, athletic population. This is especially prominent in the military population, as these individuals strenuously and often repetitively load the shoulder joint in ways not commonly encountered in the general population. Many etiologies of glenohumeral arthritis have been described, yet making the diagnosis and choosing among a variety of treatment options remains challenging. Especially important is recognizing lesions that are incidental in nature and distinguishing those from truly symptomatic cartilage defects. On account of continuous advances in both surgical techniques and biologic treatment options, the treatment algorithm is constantly evolving, and choosing appropriate nonoperative as well as surgical treatment options remains a challenge. As always, proper patient selection, regardless of the ultimate operative intervention, is of utmost importance. The purposes of this study are to review the diagnostic challenges presented by these patients, provide a comprehensive discussion of the available palliative, reparative, restorative, and reconstructive surgical options, and finally to discuss clinical outcomes associated with these options.
    Techniques in Orthopaedics 11/2010; 25(4):176–188.