Publications by authors named "Lukas P E Verweij"

12 Publications

  • Page 1 of 1

Greater tuberosity fractures are not a continuation of Hill-Sachs lesions, but do they have a similar etiology?

JSES Int 2022 May 12;6(3):396-400. Epub 2022 Jan 12.

Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Joint Research, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Background: It is unclear whether greater tuberosity fractures (GTF) in the setting of a shoulder dislocation are due to an avulsion of the rotator cuff or a result of an extensive Hill-Sachs lesion (HSL). To explore whether these lesions have similar etiology, the primary aim of this study is to compare the postinjury morphology of the proximal humerus after GTF and HSL.

Methods: Computed tomography scans of 19 patients with HSL and 18 patients with GTF after first-time shoulder dislocations were analyzed. We assessed the location by measuring height in relation to the highest point of the humerus and angles for the origin (most medial point of lesion), center, and endpoint (most lateral point of lesion) between GTF and HSL and the bicipital groove. For both GTF and HSL, we assessed whether infraspinatus and supraspinatus insertions were involved and whether they were off-track or on-track.

Results: Measured from the bicipital groove, HSLs and GTFs have different origins (153˚ vs. 110˚;  < .0001, respectively), centers (125˚ vs. 60˚;  < .0001, respectively), and endpoints (92˚ vs. 37˚;  < .0001, respectively). HSLs had a higher position (0.76 cm vs. 1.71 cm;  < .0001), involved the supraspinatus footprint less often (16% vs. 72%;  = .0008), and were less likely to be off-track (31% vs. 94%;  = .0002). Half of the GTF were on the lateral side of the glenoid track and thus extra-capsular, versus 0% of HSL.

Conclusion: HSLs and GTFs have different anatomical characteristics and thus GTFs are likely to be distinct from extensive HSLs.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jseint.2021.11.018DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9091784PMC
May 2022

Bony reconstruction after failed labral repair is associated with higher recurrence rates compared to primary bony reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 1319 shoulders in studies with a minimum of 2-year follow-up.

J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2022 Apr 14. Epub 2022 Apr 14.

Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands; Department of Human Movement Sciences, Faculty of Behavioural and Movement Sciences, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam Movement Sciences, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Background: There is uncertainty with regard to the optimal revision procedure after failed labral repair for anterior shoulder instability. An overview of outcomes of these procedures with quantitative analysis is not available in literature. The aim of this review is (1) to compare recurrence rates after revision labral repair (RLR) and revision bony reconstruction (RBR), both following failed labral repair. In addition, (2) recurrence rates after RBR following failed labral repair and primary bony reconstruction (PBR) are compared to determine if a previous failed labral repair influences the outcomes of the bony reconstruction.

Methods: Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies with a minimum follow-up of 2 years and reporting recurrence rates of (1) RBR following failed labral repair and PBR and/or (2) RLR following failed labral repair and RBR following failed labral repair were identified by searching PubMed, Embase/Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Wiley, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials/Wiley, and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics.

Results: Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and comprised 1319 shoulders. Meta-analyses showed that RBR has a significantly higher recurrence rate than PBR (risk ratio [RR] 0.51, P < .008) but found no significant difference in the recurrence rates for RLR and RBR (RR 1.40, P < .49). Also, no significant differences were found between PBR and RBR in return to sport (RR 1.07, P < .41), revision surgery (RR 0.8, P < .44), and complications (RR 0.84, P < .53). Lastly, no significant differences between RLR and RBR for revision surgery (RR 3.33, P < .19) were found.

Conclusion: The findings of this meta-analyses show that (1) RBR does not demonstrate a significant difference in recurrence rates compared with RLR and that (2) RBR has a significantly higher recurrence rate than PBR.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2022.02.044DOI Listing
April 2022

Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment Following First-Time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

JBJS Rev 2021 09 23;9(9). Epub 2021 Sep 23.

Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Background: There is an ongoing debate about whether to perform operative or nonoperative treatment following a first-time anterior dislocation or wait for recurrence before operating. The aim of this systematic review is to compare recurrence rates following operative treatment following first-time anterior dislocation (OTFD) with recurrence rates following (1) nonoperative treatment (NTFD) or (2) operative treatment after recurrent anterior dislocation (OTRD).

Methods: A literature search was conducted by searching PubMed (Legacy), Embase/Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Wiley, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials/Wiley, and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics from 1990 to April 15, 2020, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The revised tool to assess risk of bias in randomized trials (RoB 2) developed by Cochrane was used to determine bias in randomized controlled trials, and the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) was used to determine the methodological quality of non-randomized studies. The certainty of evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach using GRADEpro software.

Results: Of the 4,096 studies for which the titles were screened, 9 comparing OTFD and NTFD in a total of 533 patients and 6 comparing OTFD and OTRD in a total of 961 patients were included. There is high-quality evidence that OTFD is associated with a lower rate of recurrence (10%) at >10 years of follow-up compared with NTFD (55%) (p < 0.0001). There is very low-quality evidence that patients receiving OTFD had a lower recurrence rate (11%) compared with those receiving OTRD (17%) (p < 0.0001).

Conclusions: There is high-quality evidence showing a lower recurrence rate at >10 years following OTFD compared with NTFD (or sham surgery) in young patients. There is evidence that OTFD is more effective than OTRD, but that evidence is of very low quality.

Level Of Evidence: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.RVW.20.00232DOI Listing
September 2021

Recurrence in traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations increases the prevalence of Hill-Sachs and Bankart lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2022 Jun 6;30(6):2130-2140. Epub 2022 Jan 6.

Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Joint Research, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Purpose: The extent of shoulder instability and the indication for surgery may be determined by the prevalence or size of associated lesions. However, a varying prevalence is reported and the actual values are therefore unclear. In addition, it is unclear whether these lesions are present after the first dislocation and whether or not these lesions increase in size after recurrence. The aim of this systematic review was (1) to determine the prevalence of lesions associated with traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations, (2) to determine if the prevalence is higher following recurrent dislocations compared to first-time dislocations and (3) to determine if the prevalence is higher following complete dislocations compared to subluxations.

Methods: PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Web of Science were searched. Studies examining shoulders after traumatic anterior dislocations during arthroscopy or with MRI/MRA or CT published after 1999 were included. A total of 22 studies (1920 shoulders) were included.

Results: The proportion of Hill-Sachs and Bankart lesions was higher in recurrent dislocations (85%; 66%) compared to first-time dislocations (71%; 59%) and this was statistically significant (P < 0.01; P = 0.05). No significant difference between recurrent and first-time dislocations was observed for SLAP lesions, rotator-cuff tears, bony Bankart lesions, HAGL lesions and ALPSA lesions. The proportion of Hill-Sachs lesions was significantly higher in complete dislocations (82%) compared to subluxations (54%; P < 0.01).

Conclusion: Higher proportions of Hill-Sachs and Bankart were observed in recurrent dislocations compared to first-time dislocations. No difference was observed for bony Bankart, HAGL, SLAP, rotator-cuff tear and ALPSA. Especially when a Hill-Sachs or Bankart is present after first-time dislocation, early surgical stabilization may need to be considered as other lesions may not be expected after recurrence and to limit lesion growth. However, results should be interpreted with caution due to substantial heterogeneity and large variance.

Level Of Evidence: IV.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06847-7DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9165262PMC
June 2022

Antihypertensive drugs demonstrate varying levels of hip fracture risk: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Injury 2022 Mar 28;53(3):1098-1107. Epub 2021 Sep 28.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery & Trauma Surgery, Amsterdam Movement Sciences (AMS), Amsterdam University Medical Centre, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam 1105AZ, the Netherlands. Electronic address:

Objective: By aggregating the literature, we evaluated the association between use of specific antihypertensive drugs and the risk of hip fractures compared with nonuse.

Study Design And Setting: We systematically searched the Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception of each database until July 30, 2020 to identify articles including patients 18 years of age or older reporting on the association between antihypertensive drugs and the risk of hip fracture. Antihypertensive drugs were restricted to thiazides; beta-blockers; calcium-channel blockers; angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors; and angiotensin receptor blockers. Nonusers encompass all patients that are not using the specific antihypertensive drug that has been reported. Unadjusted odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of the association between antihypertensive drug use and hip fractures were reported. Meta-analysis was performed when a minimum of five studies were identified for each antihypertensive drug class. Quality assessment was done using ROBINS-I tool. The GRADE approach was used to evaluate the certainty of the evidence.

Results: Of 962 citations, 22 observational studies were included; 9 studies had a cohort design and 13 studies were case-control studies. No randomized controlled trials were identified. We found very low certainty of evidence that both thiazides (pooled odds ratio: 0.85, 95% CI 0.73 to 0.99, p = 0.04) as well as beta-blockers (pooled odds ratio: 0.88, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.98, p = 0.02) were associated with a reduced hip fracture risk as compared to specific nonuse. One study, reporting on angiotensin receptor blockers, also suggested a protective effect for hip fractures, whereas we found conflicting findings in four studies for calcium-channel blockers and in two studies for ACE inhibitors.

Conclusion: Among 22 observational studies, we found very low certainty of evidence that, compared to specific nonuse of antihypertensive drugs, use of thiazides, beta-blockers, and angiotensin receptor blockers were associated with a reduced protective hip fracture risk, while conflicting findings for calcium-channel blockers and ACE inhibitors were found. Given the low quality of included studies, further research -randomized controlled trials- are needed to definitively assess the causal relationship between specific antihypertensive drug classes and (relatively infrequent) hip fractures.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.injury.2021.09.036DOI Listing
March 2022

Age, participation in competitive sports, bony lesions, ALPSA lesions, > 1 preoperative dislocations, surgical delay and ISIS score > 3 are risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 4584 shoulders.

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2021 Dec 22;29(12):4004-4014. Epub 2021 Aug 22.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Shoulder and Elbow Unit, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Purpose: Determining the risk of recurrent instability following an arthroscopic Bankart repair can be challenging, as numerous risk factors have been identified that might predispose recurrent instability. However, an overview with quantitative analysis of all available risk factors is lacking. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to identify risk factors that are associated with recurrence following an arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Methods: Relevant studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase/Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Wiley, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials/Wiley, CINAHL/Ebsco, and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics from inception up to November 12th 2020. Studies evaluating risk factors for recurrence following an arthroscopic Bankart repair with a minimal follow-up of 2 years were included.

Results: Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria and comprised a total of 4582 shoulders (4578 patients). Meta-analyses were feasible for 22 risk factors and demonstrated that age ≤ 20 years (RR = 2.02; P < 0.00001), age ≤ 30 years (RR = 2.62; P = 0.005), participation in competitive sports (RR = 2.40; P = 0.02), Hill-Sachs lesion (RR = 1.77; P = 0.0005), off-track Hill-Sachs lesion (RR = 3.24; P = 0.002), glenoid bone loss (RR = 2.38; P = 0.0001), ALPSA lesion (RR = 1.90; P = 0.03), > 1 preoperative dislocations (RR = 2.02; P = 0.03), > 6 months surgical delay (RR = 2.86; P < 0.0001), ISIS > 3 (RR = 3.28; P = 0.0007) and ISIS > 6 (RR = 4.88; P < 0.00001) were risk factors for recurrence. Male gender, an affected dominant arm, hyperlaxity, participation in contact and/or overhead sports, glenoid fracture, SLAP lesion with/without repair, rotator cuff tear, > 5 preoperative dislocations and using ≤ 2 anchors could not be confirmed as risk factors. In addition, no difference was observed between the age groups ≤ 20 and 21-30 years.

Conclusion: Meta-analyses demonstrated that age ≤ 20 years, age ≤ 30 years, participation in competitive sports, Hill-Sachs lesion, off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, glenoid bone loss, ALPSA lesion, > 1 preoperative dislocations, > 6 months surgical delay from first-time dislocation to surgery, ISIS > 3 and ISIS > 6 were risk factors for recurrence following an arthroscopic Bankart repair. These factors can assist clinicians in giving a proper advice regarding treatment.

Level Of Evidence: Level IV.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-021-06704-7DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8595227PMC
December 2021

Accurate Assessment of the Hill-Sachs Lesion: There Is No Information About the Accuracy of Quantification of These Lesions.

Arthroscopy 2021 02;37(2):432-433

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis Ziekenhuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2020.10.021DOI Listing
February 2021

Arthroscopic and open debridement in primary elbow osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

EFORT Open Rev 2020 Dec 4;5(12):874-882. Epub 2020 Dec 4.

Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Primary osteoarthritis (OA) of the elbow can cause disabling symptoms of pain, locking, stiffness, and a limitation in the range of motion. There is no consensus regarding the role of open and arthroscopic debridement in the treatment of symptomatic primary elbow OA. The aim of this study is to systematically review the outcome of surgical debridement. A preoperative/postoperative comparison will be made between the two surgical procedures.All studies reporting on debridement as treatment for primary elbow OA with a minimum of one-year follow-up were included. Outcome parameters were functional results, complications, and performance scores.Data were extracted from 21 articles. The arthroscopic group consisted of 286 elbows with a weighted mean follow-up of 40 ± 17 months (range, 16-75). The open group consisted of 300 elbows with a weighted mean follow-up of 55 ± 20 months (range, 19-85). Both procedures showed improvement in Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), range of motion (ROM) flexion-extension, and ROM pronation-supination. Only in ROM flexion was a statistically significant difference in improvement seen between the groups in favour of the open group. The arthroscopic group showed improvement in pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores. Nothing could be stated about pain VAS scores in the open group due to a lack of data. In the arthroscopic group 18 complications (6%) were described, in the open group 29 complications (12%).Surgical debridement is an effective treatment for the disabling symptoms of primary elbow OA with an acceptable complication rate. Cite this article: 2020;5:874-882. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.5.190095.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2058-5241.5.190095DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7784140PMC
December 2020

Treatment type may influence degree of post-dislocation shoulder osteoarthritis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2021 Jul 16;29(7):2312-2324. Epub 2020 Sep 16.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Purpose: Age at primary dislocation, recurrence, and glenoid bone loss are associated with development of osteoarthritis (OA). However, an overview of OA following traumatic anterior shoulder instability is lacking and it is unclear to what degree type of surgery is associated with development of OA in comparison to non-operative treatment. The aim of this study was to determine the degree of OA at long-term follow-up after non-operative and operative treatments for patients with anterior shoulder instability. Surgery is indicated when patients experience recurrence and this is associated with OA; therefore, it was hypothesized that shoulders show a higher proportion or degree of OA following operative treatment compared to non-operative treatment.

Methods: A literature search was performed in the PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Articles reporting the degree of OA that was assessed with the Samilson-Prieto or Buscayret OA classification method after non-operative and operative treatment for anterior shoulder instability with a minimum of 5 years follow-up were included.

Results: Thirty-six articles met the eligibility criteria of which 1 reported the degree of OA for non-operative treatment and 35 reported the degree of OA for 9 different operative procedures. A total of 1832 patients (1854 shoulders) were included. OA proportions of non-operative and operative treatments are similar at any point of follow-up. The Latarjet procedure showed a lower degree of OA compared to non-operative treatment and the other operative procedures, except for the Bristow procedure and Rockwood capsular shift. The meta-analyses showed comparable development of OA over time among the treatment options. An increase in OA proportion was observed when comparing the injured to the contralateral shoulder. However, a difference between the operative subgroups was observed in neither analysis.

Conclusion: Non-operative and operative treatments show similar OA proportions at any point of follow-up. The hypothesis that shoulders showed a higher proportion or degree of OA following operative treatment compared to non-operative treatment is not supported by the data. Operative treatment according to the Latarjet procedure results in a lower degree of OA compared to other treatments, including non-operative treatment.

Level Of Evidence: IV.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00167-020-06263-3DOI Listing
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8225537PMC
July 2021

Accuracy of Currently Available Methods in Quantifying Anterior Glenoid Bone Loss: Controversy Regarding Gold Standard-A Systematic Review.

Arthroscopy 2020 08 21;36(8):2295-2313.e1. Epub 2020 Apr 21.

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Purpose: To determine the accuracy of glenoid bone loss-measuring methods and assess the influence of the imaging modality on the accuracy of the measurement methods.

Methods: A literature search was performed in the PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, and Cochrane databases from 1994 to June 11, 2019. The guidelines and algorithm of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) were used. Included for analysis were articles reporting the accuracy of glenoid bone loss-measuring methods in patients with anterior shoulder instability by comparing an index test and a reference test. Furthermore, articles were included if anterior glenoid bone loss was quantified using a ruler during arthroscopy or by measurements on plain radiograph(s), computed tomography (CT) images, or magnetic resonance images in living humans. The risk of bias was determined using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool.

Results: Twenty-one studies were included, showing 17 different methods. Three studies reported on the accuracy of methods performed on 3-dimensional CT. Two studies determined the accuracy of glenoid bone loss-measuring methods performed on radiography by comparing them with methods performed on 3-dimensional CT. Six studies determined the accuracy of methods performed using imaging modalities with an arthroscopic method as the reference. Eight studies reported on the influence of the imaging modality on the accuracy of the methods. There was no consensus regarding the gold standard. Because of the heterogeneity of the data, a quantitative analysis was not feasible.

Conclusions: Consensus regarding the gold standard in measuring glenoid bone loss is lacking. The use of heterogeneous data and varying methods contributes to differences in the gold standard, and accuracy therefore cannot be determined.

Level Of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level II, III, and IV studies.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2020.04.012DOI Listing
August 2020

Remplissage With Bankart Repair in Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review of the Clinical and Cadaveric Literature.

Arthroscopy 2019 04;35(4):1257-1266

Shoulder and Elbow Unit, Joint Research, OLVG, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Purpose: To compare the clinical and biomechanical results of an arthroscopic Bankart repair alone with an arthroscopic Bankart repair combined with remplissage.

Methods: A literature search was performed on May 1, 2018, in PubMed and Embase for studies comparing an isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair and an arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage. The quality of the studies was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach and the Cochrane Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) checklist. Results regarding failures, biomechanical properties, and shoulder function were extracted.

Results: We included 13 studies (6 clinical and 7 biomechanical studies), and their overall quality was very low to low. In the biomechanical studies, adding a remplissage to the Bankart repair prevented engagement in all cadavers, resulted in more stiffness, and impaired the range of motion. Among clinical studies, all reported lower recurrence rates and most showed better shoulder function after a Bankart repair with remplissage compared with an isolated Bankart repair. The return-to-sport rates were mostly similar, whereas the loss of range of motion was often higher after a Bankart repair with remplissage.

Conclusions: The addition of a remplissage procedure to a Bankart repair for managing small to medium Hill-Sachs lesions might be beneficial in reducing the risk of recurrent instability and improving shoulder function, without increasing the risk of complications.

Level Of Evidence: Level III, systematic review of Level II and III studies.
View Article and Find Full Text PDF

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2018.10.117DOI Listing
April 2019
-->