Table 2.
Reported Patient Outcomes.
| Study | Outcome Measures | Results | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Buchmann et al. (2012) 6 | Satisfaction Scale, VAS, ASES, CSS, and MRI | Satisfaction Scale: 3 “Very Satisfied” and 1
“Satisfied” Mean post-op VAS: 0.3 Mean post-op Rowe (range): 91.3 (75-100) Mean post-op CSS: 83.3 (range, 69-91); Pain (14.8), ADL (16.5), ROM (31.3), Strength (15.0) |
Mean post-op ASES (range): 95.3 (83.3-100) MRI evaluation: • 75% (3) no sign of OA, 25% (1/4) sign of mild OA with a dislocated anchor • 75% (3) complete integration into border of defect |
| Camp et al. (2015) 1 | SSV, ASES, X-ray and MRI | SSV: Pre-op of 40% to post-op of 99% (59%
improvement) ASES score: Pre-op of 36 to post-op of 92 (46-point improvement) |
X-ray at 3 months: articular surface restoration. MRI at 6 months: articular surface restoration and congruity with graft incorporation |
| Frank et al. (2010) 24 | VAS, ASES, SST | Mean VAS: pre-op of 5.6 ± 1.7 vs. post-op 1.9 ± 1.4
(P < 0.001) Mean ASES: pre-op of 44.3 ± 15.3 vs. post-op of 86.3 ± 10.5 (P < 0.001) |
Mean SST: pre-op of 5.7 ± 2.1 vs. post-op of 10.3 ± 1.3 (P < 0.001) |
| Hünnebeck et al. (2017) 17 | Subjective evaluation, ROM, SSV, and X-ray | Subjective evaluation: • 48% (13/27) no pain, 44% (12) moderate pain with high activity, and 7% (2) moderate pain with normal shoulder ROM • 22% (6/27) moderate pain only at night and 11% (3/27) at rest • 59% (19/32) were “very satisfied” or “satisfied” with surgery Mean ROM: • Mean FE: pre-op 140° ± 53° to post-op 153° ± 49° (NS) • Mean ER: pre-op 45° ± 22° to post-op 49° ± 21° (NS) • Mean IR: pre-op ISJ ±32° to post-op L1 vertebral level ±11° (P = 0.03) |
Mean post-op SSV: • Operated shoulder SSV of 86 ± 13 vs. nonoperated shoulder of 88 ± 19 (P = 0.6) X-ray: • Mean Samilson OA grade pre-op of 0.8 to post-op of 1.3 • 57% (13/23) with progression of OA • Those without preoperative OA (14) had significantly less progression (P = 0.01) than those with preoperative OA (17) *Patients with preoperative OA were found to have significantly worse post-op outcome scores |
| Johnson et al. (1997) 5 | X-ray | No pain at rest or with overhead activities | X-ray displayed incorporation of allograft with trabeculae crossing the allograft-host junction |
| Kircher et al. (2009)18,a | CSS, MRI | Mean CSS (range): pre-op of 69 (66-71) vs. post-op of 94
(90-97) • Pain: pre-op of 7.7 (5-13) vs. post-op of 12.3 (10-14) • ADL: pre-op of 13.3 (10-16) vs. post-op of 19 (18-20) • ROM: pre-op of 36 (30-40) vs. post-op of 40 (40) • Strength (kg): pre-op of 5.6 (3.3-8.4) vs. post-op of 22.3 (21-25) |
MRI: • 66% (2/3) displayed joint surface congruency, 100% osteochondral graft integration X-ray: • Mean Samilson OA grade pre-op of 0.3 to final-follow up of 2.7 • 100% displayed progression of OA |
| Mima et al. (2016) 19 | ASES, X-ray, CT, and MRI | ASES score: pre-op of 63.3 to post-op of 89.2 (25.9-point improvement) | X-ray and CT scan: fragment union; MRI: healing of the osteochondral lesion with equal intensity as the humeral head. |
| Park et al. (2006) 2 | Arthroscopic evaluation | No symptoms with good functional results | Second-look arthroscopy: • Defects of both donor and recipient sites were healed and cartilage covered. • Biopsy specimen of recipient site demonstrated a normal pattern of hyaline cartilage. |
| Pham et al. (2017) 3 | VAS, SSV, CSS, and MRI | VAS score: pre-op of 10 to post-op of 0 SSV score: post-op of 70% CSS score: pre-op of 8 to post-op of 92 (84-point improvement) |
MRI: • Healing of the osteochondral defect with normal thickness of the grafted cartilage in comparison to the surrounding articular cartilage. |
| Provencher et al. (2010) 4 | VAS, ROM, and X-Ray | Mean ROM: • FE pre-op 120° to post-op 170° • Abduction pre-op 100° to post-op 170° • ER at the side pre-op 45° to post-op 45° • Abducted ER pre-op 50° to post-op 85° • Abducted IR pre-op 45° to post-op 65° |
VAS score: pre-op of 6 to post-op of
1 X-ray: • Complete incorporation of the humeral and glenoid allografts without resorption and demonstration of excellent articular conformity. |
| Riff et al. (2017) 20 | VAS, ASES, SST, SF-12, and X-ray | Mean VAS: pre-op of 5.8 to post-op of 1.9
(P < 0.001) Mean ASES: pre-op of 40.8 to post-op of 75.8 (P < 0.001) |
Mean SST: pre-op of 31.9 to post-op of 76.8
(P <
0.001) X-ray: • 90% (18/20) of grafts incorporated at an average of 14.8 months |
| Siebold et al. (2003) 21 | CSS, X-ray, MRI, and arthroscopic evaluation | Mean CSS: Pre-op of 43.4 to post-op of 81.8
(P = 0.002) • Pain: pre-op of 5 to post-op of 13.6 (P = 0.001) • ADL: pre-op of 13.6 to post-op of 18.6 • ROM: No significant change • Strength (kg): post-op average of 6.5 |
X-ray Samilson OA grading: pre 0.4 (0-1) post: 0.8
(0-2) • 60% (3/5) displayed progression of OA MRI: • Regeneration tissue covering the area of the chondral defect in 100% of patients. Second-look arthroscopy: • Performed in 60% (3 of 5) patients and revealed a significant reduction of the lesion. |
| Slabaugh et al. (2010) 22 | VAS and ASES score | VAS score: pre-op of 3 to post-op of 0 | ASES score: pre-op of 62 to post-op of 100 (38-point improvement) |
| Wang et al. (2018) 23 | VAS, SST, ASES, SANE, and SF-12 scores | Mean VAS: 6.1 pre-op to 1.5 post-op (P =
0.007) • Glenoid: 6 pre-op to 1.5 post-op; Humeral: 6.3 pre-op to 1.5 post-op Mean SST: 5.2 pre-op to 10.4 post-op (P = 0.009) • Glenoid: 5.7 pre-op to 9.8 post-op; Humeral: 4.3 pre-op to 11.5 post-op |
Mean ASES: 39.3 pre-op to 88.1 post-op (P =
0.014) • Glenoid: 42.5 pre-op to 87.5 post-op • Humeral: 39.0 pre-op to 92.5 post-op |
ADL = activities of daily living; ASES = American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder score; CMS = Constant-Murley Score; CSS = Constant Shoulder Score; CT = computed tomography; DASH = Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score; ER = external rotation; FE = forward elevation; IR = internal rotation; ISJ = iliosacral joint; MFX = microfracture; MRI = magnetic resonance imaging; OA = osteoarthritis; post-op = postoperative; pre-op = preoperative; ROM = range of motion; SANE = Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation; SF-12 = Short Form–12 (Mental and Physical); SST = Simple Shoulder Test; SSV = Subjective Shoulder Value; VAS = visual analogue score for pain.
a
Includes only patients in the study which met inclusion criteria as others had a history of glenohumeral instability.