AzTrials
AzTrials

Shoulder DislocationNCT04952636

A Prospective Comparative Study of Arthroscopic and Open Surgery in Cuistow Procedure

A study testing arthroscopic Cuistow and open Cuistow in people with Shoulder Dislocation, run by Peking University Third Hospital at 1 site in China.

Unknown status

Status not confirmed. The sponsor has not verified this record for over two years, so it may be out of date.

Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic and open Chinese Unique Inlay Bristow procedure in treating recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Any age
Conditions the study is for
Shoulder Dislocation
What is being tested?
arthroscopic Cuistow and open Cuistow
Type of treatment
Surgery or procedure
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
70 participants
Where
1 siteChina
Study dates
6 Nov 2021to 30 Dec 2023
Phase
Interventional
Are there results?
None posted in the registry

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages Any age
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Child, Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • a glenoid defect ≥10%
  • contact sport athletes with a glenoid defect < 10%
  • failure after Bankart repair.

Who cannot join

  • epilepsy
  • multidirectional shoulder instability
  • concomitant other lesions including rotator cuff tear, symptomatic acromioclavicular joint pathology or pathological involvement of the long head of the biceps

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country.

China1 site, 1 recruiting
  • PekingUTH

    Beijing, Beijing Municipality

    Guoqing Cui, professor

    Recruiting

Other trials in China

About this study

Official title: A Prospective Comparative Study of Arthroscopic and Open Surgery in Chinese Unique Inlay Bristow Procedure

To evaluate the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic and open Chinese Unique Inlay Bristow procedure in treating recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

Read the detailed description

Recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder joint is a common disorder of the shoulder joint. Patients with recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder severely affect movement and quality of life, and severe cases can lead to severe dysfunction of the shoulder joint. Nowadays, arthroscopic Bankart surgery is routinely used to treat such patients. However, the recurrence rate of shoulder dislocation with conventional arthroscopic Bankart repair is high in professional athletes with very high levels of athleticism and in complex patients with large glenoid bone defects. For this population, coracoid transfer surgery (Bristow-Latarjet procedure) is currently considered to have better efficacy.

The Latarjet procedure is now relatively well established internationally; however, this technique has a large osteotomy block and uses two hollow screws to fix the bone block. This is very traumatic and cannot be used in patients with small coracoid, and there is a high incidence of postoperative bone resorption of the bone block, and in the event of severe bone resorption, the screws left behind are more damaging to the subscapularis tendon. In contrast, the Bristow procedure is relatively less invasive, but the early healing rate of the grafted bone block is lower than that of the Latarjet procedure. In response to this problem, the group improved the Bristow procedure in a previous clinical study by using an embedded technique to fix the bone block, which is the first of its kind in the world, and the investigators named it the Chinese Unique Inlay Bristow (Cuistow) procedure. The description and clinical results of this procedure have been accepted by the American Journal of Sports Medicine, and the technique is now a routine procedure in our department.

There is still some debate as to whether the classical coracoid procedure should be performed arthroscopically or open. Open surgery is more traumatic, but relatively easy to perform, with a shorter operative time and a shorter learning curve to master the technique; arthroscopic surgery is less traumatic, with faster recovery, but relatively more expensive and requires higher surgical skills. Some studies have concluded that there is no significant difference between the two in terms of long-term postoperative outcomes and complications. In our previous study, the investigators found that the use of our first " Mortise and Tenon structure " bone displacement fixation resulted in better early postoperative stability and higher postoperative bone healing rates than the traditional coracoid transfer procedure. However, it is unknown whether there is a difference in clinical outcomes and postoperative bone healing rates using open surgery compared to arthroscopic surgery.

In this study, a prospective observational study was conducted in which the advantages and disadvantages of arthroscopic and open surgery for Cuistow procedure were explained to the patient before surgery, and then the patient chose one of the surgical approaches according to his or her own wishes. The functional recovery and bone resorption of the two groups were compared, and the two surgical approaches were evaluated to determine whether there were significant differences in postoperative bone healing rates and clinical outcomes between the two surgical approaches.

In conclusion, the aim of this study was to evaluate the advantages and disadvantages of the two surgical approaches through a comparative study. The investigators wish to provide a complete systematic solution for the treatment of difficult and complex recurrent anterior shoulder dislocations, and to provide an effective remedy for cases of recurrence after Bankart surgery.

Being tested
arthroscopic Cuistow, open Cuistow
Keywords
recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation, Bristow-Latarjet procedure, arthroscopy
Medical subject headings
Shoulder Dislocation

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • arthroscopic CuistowProcedure or surgery

    peforming the Cuistow Procedure under arthroscopy

  • open CuistowProcedure or surgery

    peforming the Cuistow Procedure with the traditional open process

Study groups in NCT04952636
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
Arthroscopic CuistowExperimentalPatients who receive arthroscopic Cuistow procedure
Receives: Procedure: arthroscopic Cuistow
Open CuistowExperimentalPatients who receive open Cuistow procedure
Receives: Procedure: open Cuistow

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. ASES score

    The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score is the most commonly used score to describe the function of patients' shoulder joints, ranging from 0 to 100. The higher the score, the better the function of patients' shoulder joints.

    Measured: 2 years after surgery

  2. pain VAS score

    The visual analog scale (VAS) for pain score is the most commonly used to describe pain levels in patients, ranging from 0 to 10, with a higher score indicating more intense pain.

    Measured: 2 years after surgery

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Active shoulder ranges of motion

    internal rotation at the side, and external and internal rotation at 90° of abduction

    Measured: 2 years after surgery

  2. Bone block position

    Bone block position was evaluated using postoperative CT scans.The ideal position of the bone block was defined as flush to the anterior glenoid rim in the axial view and 4 o'clock in the En face view. The bone block was considered too lateral if it went beyond the glenoid rim by more than 5 mm and it was judged to be too medial if it was medial to the rim by more than 5 mm.

    Measured: immediately after surgery

  3. Bone union

    Graft union with the glenoid was assessed using postoperative CT scans. ''Bony union'' of the transplant was defined as no radiolucent zone; ''fibrous union,'' when the transplant had a radiolucent zone of less than 5 mm; and ''migration,'' when the zone

    Measured: 3 months after surgery

  4. Bone union

    Graft union with the glenoid was assessed using postoperative CT scans. ''Bony union'' of the transplant was defined as no radiolucent zone; ''fibrous union,'' when the transplant had a radiolucent zone of less than 5 mm; and ''migration,'' when the zone

    Measured: 2 years after surgery

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted7 Jul 2021
  2. Study start6 Nov 2021
  3. Primary completion30 Dec 2022 (estimated)
  4. Study completion30 Dec 2023 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase N/A
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Non-randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
70 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT04952636
Sponsor's protocol ID
M2020294
Status last verified
Jul 2021
First submitted
27 Jun 2021
Last updated
9 Dec 2021
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A study testing arthroscopic Cuistow and open Cuistow in people with Shoulder Dislocation, run by Peking University Third Hospital at 1 site in China.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Dec 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in China. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

Are results available for this study?

Results are not available in the source record.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact Shuhan Zhang (86-15336331337, shuhan.zhang@bjmu.edu.cn), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

ASES score (time frame: 2 years after surgery). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Dec 2021.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in