Hand & Upper Limb

Latarjet / Coracoid Transfer for Anterior Shoulder Instability

Surgical technique guide for the Latarjet coracoid transfer procedure for anterior shoulder instability with significant glenoid bone loss β€” FRCS/FRACS exam preparation

Core Procedure
advanced
By OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

Reviewed by OrthoVellum Editorial Team

Editorial maintenance, source checking, and correction workflow β€’ Published by OrthoVellum Medical Education Team

High-yield overview

Open deltopectoral approach β€” coracoid harvest and transfer to anterior glenoid via subscapularis split β€” advanced

Surgical Imaging

Intraoperative view of open Latarjet procedure showing coracoid graft positioning
Intraoperative Latarjet procedure: the coracoid graft is positioned at the anterior glenoid rim through the deltopectoral approach. Retractors expose the subscapularis split and the graft is held in position prior to screw fixation.Credit: Habermeyer P et al., J Orthop 2014 (PMC4265481) β€” CC BY 4.0
Intraoperative close-up showing two cortical screws securing the coracoid graft to the anterior glenoid
Completed Latarjet fixation: two cortical screws (visible screw heads) secure the coracoid graft flush with the articular surface. Correct screw placement parallel to the glenoid face is critical β€” medial graft position is the most common cause of failure.Credit: Habermeyer P et al., J Orthop 2014 (PMC4265481) β€” CC BY 4.0
Cadaver dissection of coracoid region with labeled anatomy: TL trapezoid ligament, CAL coracoacromial ligament, CP coracoid process, PMI pectoralis minor insertion, CT conjoint tendon
Cadaver anatomy of the coracoid region: TL=trapezoid ligament, CAL=coracoacromial ligament, CP=coracoid process, PMI=pectoralis minor insertion, CT=conjoint tendon. The coracoclavicular ligaments (conoid + trapezoid) are preserved during the Latarjet harvest β€” only the coracoacromial ligament is divided.Credit: Gombera MM & Sekiya JK, Clin Anat 2016 (PMC5078878) β€” CC BY 4.0

Critical Exam Pitfalls β€” Latarjet Procedure

Musculocutaneous Nerve Injury

Most common nerve injury in Latarjet (0.8–8%). Enters coracobrachialis 3–8 cm from coracoid tip (mean 5.4 cm). Risk during distal dissection and retraction of conjoint tendon.

Exam answer: Test elbow flexion and lateral forearm sensation postoperatively. Avoid retraction greater than 2–3 cm distal to coracoid. Always identify and protect nerve before releasing conjoint tendon distally.

Graft Positioning β€” Medial Placement Error

Most critical technical error. Graft placed medial to glenoid articular surface fails to extend the arc and causes recurrent instability despite healed bone.

Exam answer: Graft surface must be flush with glenoid face (0–1 mm lateral). Confirm with intraoperative fluoroscopy. Medially placed graft on postoperative CT = indication for revision.

Subscapularis Split Level

Incorrect split level disrupts the sling mechanism. The split is at the junction of the LOWER two-thirds and UPPER one-third of subscapularis β€” NOT at the midpoint.

Exam answer: The lower two-thirds of subscapularis remain intact forming the critical sling, tensioning in abduction-external rotation to block anterior humeral head translation.

Screw Position and Hardware Failure

Screws placed too close to glenoid articular surface cause chondral damage. Screws in proud position abrade humeral head articular cartilage (can accelerate glenohumeral arthritis).

Exam answer: Screws should be parallel and in the midline of the graft, 25–30 mm apart, with tips not penetrating posterior cortex of glenoid. Confirm on axillary view.

Graft Lysis at 5 Years

Graft resorption on CT occurs in 15–30% at 5 years. A common exam trap β€” students panic and recommend revision.

Exam answer: Graft lysis does NOT equal failure. Sling mechanism of conjoint tendon maintains stability independent of bony union. Only revise if patient has recurrent instability symptoms AND CT confirms poor graft position.

Revision Strategy After Failed Latarjet

Recurrence after Latarjet is the highest-stakes scenario. Causes: graft lysis + sling failure, medial graft placement, hardware failure, missed posterior instability.

Exam answer: CT quantify residual bone, MRI assess conjoint tendon. Options: revision Latarjet, distal tibial allograft (Eden-Hybinette), iliac crest autograft, or reverse shoulder arthroplasty for severe arthritis.

Mnemonic

LATARJETLATARJET β€” Steps of the Procedure

Hook:Think: LATARJET = 'Looking At The Anteroinferior Rim, Just Engaging There' β€” every letter describes a step bringing the coracoid graft to the anterior glenoid rim.

Mnemonic

GRAFTGRAFT β€” Complications of Latarjet

Hook:GRAFT complications are what can go wrong WITH the graft itself β€” from the bone, the nerve, the hardware, and the tissues around it.

Indications for Latarjet β€” When to Abandon Arthroscopic Bankart

Absolute Indications (strong evidence):

  • Glenoid bone loss greater than 20–25% on 3D CT (best-fit circle method) β€” inverted pear morphology on plain radiograph is a clinical proxy
  • Off-track Hill-Sachs lesion: Hill-Sachs interval wider than glenoid track (Di Giacomo glenoid track concept) even with bone loss less than 20%
  • Failed arthroscopic Bankart with recurrent instability β€” especially with progressive bone loss
  • ISIS score 6 or greater in a contact athlete β€” 70% predicted failure rate from arthroscopic Bankart justifies primary Latarjet

Strong Relative Indications:

  • Bone loss 13.5–20% with high-demand contact athlete (rugby, football) or ISIS score 4–5
  • Epilepsy with recurrent seizure-related dislocations β€” repeated re-dislocation risk mandates durable bone reconstruction
  • Poor labral tissue quality (attenuation, absence, prior failed repair) β€” no tissue to repair arthroscopically
  • Significant Hill-Sachs lesion (greater than 25% humeral head width) where remplissage would excessively limit external rotation

Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) β€” Balg & Boileau: A 10-point pre-operative score (range 0–10). A score greater than 6 points predicts a 70% recurrence risk after arthroscopic Bankart repair, supporting primary Latarjet in these patients. Note the score caps at 10, not 11.

ISIS FactorPoints
Age less than 20 years at surgery2
Competitive sport2
Contact or forced-overhead sport1
Shoulder hyperlaxity1
Hill-Sachs visible on AP radiograph in external rotation2
Loss of inferior glenoid contour on AP radiograph2
Total (0–10)Score over 6 = consider Latarjet

Latarjet vs Bankart vs Remplissage β€” Decision Algorithm

Procedure Selection for Anterior Shoulder Instability

Evidence Base

Burkhart and De Beer (2000, PMID 11027751) β€” landmark case series of 194 arthroscopic Bankart repairs establishing bone loss as the primary determinant of failure. Patients with significant bone defects (inverted-pear glenoid or engaging Hill-Sachs) had a 67% recurrence rate vs 4% without; contact athletes with bone deficits had 89% recurrence. Introduced the "inverted pear" and "engaging Hill-Sachs" concepts and recommended Latarjet for significant glenoid loss.

Balg and Boileau (2007, PMID 17998184) β€” derived and validated the Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) in 131 patients. A pre-operative score greater than 6 points carried a 70% recurrence risk after arthroscopic Bankart, on which basis the authors recommended a Latarjet (Bristow-Latarjet) procedure instead. Changed worldwide practice toward primary bony stabilisation in high-risk patients. (Often cited as "Boileau 2005"; the validated 10-point score was published by Balg and Boileau in 2007.)

Yamamoto and Itoi (2007, PMID 17644006) β€” cadaveric study defining the glenoid track: the medial margin of the contact zone lies a mean 84% of the glenoid width medial to the rotator-cuff footprint. A Hill-Sachs lesion that extends medial to the track ("off-track") is at risk of engagement, providing the biomechanical basis for selecting bony augmentation in bipolar bone loss even with sub-critical glenoid defects.

Shah et al. (2012, PMID 22318222) β€” single-centre series of 48 Latarjet shoulders reporting early complications. Overall complication rate 25%: recurrent instability 8%, neurologic injury 10% (musculocutaneous, axillary and radial; most transient sensory neurapraxia resolving within 2 months), and superficial infection 6%. Highlights that the true early complication burden is higher than often quoted and must be included in consent.

Key Evidence β€” Verified

Traumatic glenohumeral bone defects and their relationship to failure of arthroscopic Bankart repairs: significance of the inverted-pear glenoid and the humeral engaging Hill-Sachs lesion

Level IV (Case series)
Burkhart SS, De Beer JF β€’ Arthroscopy
Clinical Implication: Bone loss, not soft-tissue technique, is the dominant driver of arthroscopic Bankart failure - the foundational rationale for choosing Latarjet in patients with critical glenoid deficiency or engaging humeral lesions.

The instability severity index score. A simple pre-operative score to select patients for arthroscopic or open shoulder stabilisation

Level II (Prospective prognostic study)
Balg F, Boileau P β€’ Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (British)
Clinical Implication: The ISIS gives a validated, reproducible pre-operative threshold (greater than 6) for offering primary Latarjet rather than arthroscopic soft-tissue repair in high-risk patients.

Contact between the glenoid and the humeral head in abduction, external rotation, and horizontal extension: a new concept of glenoid track

Level V (Cadaveric biomechanical)
Yamamoto N, Itoi E, Abe H, Minagawa H, Seki N, Shimada Y, Okada K β€’ Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
Clinical Implication: Quantifies when a humeral lesion becomes off-track, justifying bony augmentation (Latarjet) or remplissage in bipolar bone loss even when glenoid loss alone is sub-critical.

Short-term complications of the Latarjet procedure

Level IV (Case series)
Shah AA, Butler RB, Romanowski J, Goel D, Karadagli D, Warner JJP β€’ Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American)
Clinical Implication: The true early complication burden of Latarjet is substantial and must be quoted at consent; neurologic injury is the leading complication, with the musculocutaneous and axillary nerves most at risk.

Validation of the instability shoulder index score in a multicenter reliability study in 114 consecutive cases

Level II (Reliability/validation)
Rouleau DM, Hebert-Davies J, Djahangiri A, Godbout V, Pelet S, Balg F β€’ American Journal of Sports Medicine
Clinical Implication: Confirms the ISIS is reproducible between observers and institutions, supporting its global use as a decision tool for escalating from arthroscopic repair to Latarjet.

Clinical Decision Scenarios

Use these scenarios to practise clinical reasoning and management decisions

CLINICAL SCENARIOAdvanced

Scenario 1 β€” Inverted Pear on Plain Film

CLINICAL PROMPT

"A 22-year-old male rugby player presents with his fourth anterior shoulder dislocation over 18 months. He plays competitive provincial rugby as a flanker. His plain AP radiograph of the shoulder in internal rotation shows the classic 'inverted pear' appearance of the glenoid. Describe your assessment and management."

PRACTICAL APPROACH
This patient has recurrent anterior shoulder instability with radiographic evidence of critical glenoid bone loss. The inverted pear sign on plain AP radiograph indicates greater than 20% glenoid bone loss β€” the width of the inferior glenoid is less than the superior glenoid, confirming bone deficiency beyond the surgical threshold for arthroscopic Bankart repair. My management would be: (1) Confirm bone loss with 3D CT scan using best-fit circle method to quantify percentage bone loss and assess graft position planning. (2) MRI to assess labral tissue quality and identify Hill-Sachs lesion and its track. (3) Calculate ISIS score (maximum 10): age less than 20 years (0, he is 22), competitive sport (2), contact sport (1), hyperlaxity (assess, 0–1), Hill-Sachs on AP (assess, 0–2), loss of inferior glenoid contour on AP (2) β€” likely score 7–8, independently justifying Latarjet. (4) Offer Latarjet coracoid transfer as the definitive procedure. I would counsel him that arthroscopic Bankart repair in this setting has a 50–67% recurrence rate and is therefore contraindicated. Latarjet offers 92–96% stability at 5 years. Return to full contact rugby expected at 6 months. Risks include musculocutaneous nerve injury (8% transient), graft lysis (15–30% at 5 years, does not equal failure), and long-term arthritis risk (30% at 10 years).
FURTHER QUESTIONS
"What are the three mechanisms of stability after Latarjet? (1) Bone block effect: coracoid graft extends the anterior articular arc by 20–25%, widening the effective glenoid width. (2) Sling effect: conjoint tendon below subscapularis split tenses in ABER position, acting as dynamic anterior buttress. (3) Capsular reconstruction: lateral coracoacromial ligament stump sutured to residual capsule restores anterior soft-tissue restraint. The sling mechanism is the most important β€” it persists even if graft lyses completely."
CLINICAL SCENARIOAdvanced

Scenario 2 β€” Postoperative Hand Weakness

CLINICAL PROMPT

"You perform a Latarjet procedure on a 28-year-old male. On day 1 postoperatively he reports numbness and weakness in his index and middle fingers with weak elbow flexion on the right side. What nerve has been injured, why is this at risk in this procedure, and how do you manage this?"

PRACTICAL APPROACH
This presentation describes injury to the musculocutaneous nerve. The pattern β€” weak elbow flexion, weak forearm supination (biceps), and sensory loss in the lateral forearm (lateral antebrachial cutaneous nerve, the terminal branch of the musculocutaneous nerve) correlates precisely with this nerve's territory. The index and middle finger numbness may reflect median nerve overlap at the lateral forearm, but the dominant sensory deficit is the radial border of the forearm. The musculocutaneous nerve is at risk in Latarjet because it enters the coracobrachialis muscle 3–8 cm from the coracoid tip (mean 5.4 cm). During dissection and retraction of the conjoint tendon (coracobrachialis plus short head biceps), excessive distal retraction stretches the nerve at its entry point into the muscle. The injury is almost certainly a neuropraxia (stretch injury) in this acute presentation. Management: (1) Document findings thoroughly including motor power (elbow flexion 0–5/5), sensation map (lateral forearm), and absence of axillary nerve deficit (check deltoid function). (2) Conservative management β€” sling for comfort, reassurance, physiotherapy to maintain ROM and prevent contracture. (3) Electromyography and nerve conduction studies at 3–4 weeks to characterise injury (neuropraxia vs axonotmesis vs neurotmesis). (4) If no clinical recovery by 3–4 months, consider surgical exploration via deltopectoral approach to assess nerve integrity and perform neurolysis if scarred. Prognosis: greater than 90% of neuropraxic injuries recover fully within 6 months.
FURTHER QUESTIONS
"How do you prevent musculocutaneous nerve injury during Latarjet? Identify the nerve directly before releasing conjoint tendon distally. Limit retraction of conjoint tendon to less than 2–3 cm below coracoid tip. Use flat retractors placed on bone, not hooks dragging soft tissue. Avoid prolonged static retraction β€” release periodically. The nerve's entry point into coracobrachialis is variable (range 3–10 cm); in short-statured patients the nerve may be only 3 cm from the coracoid tip."
CLINICAL SCENARIOAdvanced

Scenario 3 β€” Late Recurrent Instability With Graft Lysis

CLINICAL PROMPT

"A 32-year-old male presents 3 years after Latarjet procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. CT scan shows near-complete graft lysis. He has had two more dislocation episodes in the past 6 months. What are your options?"

PRACTICAL APPROACH
This is a complex revision case requiring careful pre-revision assessment before committing to a surgical strategy. The key question is WHY he has recurrent instability despite Latarjet. Graft lysis alone does not cause instability if the sling mechanism is intact β€” his recurrence suggests either the graft was medially placed from the outset (never providing bone block benefit and perhaps the sling was not positioned correctly either), hardware failure, or sling mechanism compromise. Assessment: CT scan to assess graft remnant position and screw position (was original graft medial?), MRI to assess conjoint tendon integrity and sling position, and examination for capsular laxity. If graft position was medial originally and there is now complete lysis: the key stabilising mechanisms have been lost. Options for revision: (1) Revision Latarjet using contralateral coracoid (if ipsilateral coracoid is used up) β€” technically demanding; requires new recipient bone bed and intact conjoint tendon. (2) Eden-Hybinette procedure (iliac crest autograft or distal tibial allograft) β€” provides bone block without relying on conjoint tendon; preferred when coracoid is unavailable. (3) Distal tibial allograft β€” provides large surface area with articular cartilage analogue, particularly useful for massive bone loss. (4) If glenohumeral arthritis is established (which is possible at 3 years post-instability): shoulder arthroplasty β€” reverse TSA preferred given likely subscapularis compromise. I would counsel the patient that revision instability surgery carries significantly higher complication rates and lower success rates than primary procedures (revision recurrence 15–25% vs 5–8% primary).
FURTHER QUESTIONS
"What is the Eden-Hybinette procedure and when is it preferred over revision Latarjet? The Eden-Hybinette procedure transfers a tricortical bone block (iliac crest autograft or distal tibial allograft) to the anterior glenoid as a free bone graft, fixed with screws. It does not use a conjoint tendon sling β€” stability relies entirely on bone block and capsular reconstruction. Preferred over revision Latarjet when: (1) coracoid has been used or is deficient, (2) conjoint tendon integrity is compromised, (3) massive glenoid bone loss requiring a larger graft than coracoid provides, (4) revision of a failed Latarjet where coracoid remnant is insufficient. Distal tibial allograft has emerged as a preferred option as it provides an articular cartilage surface that may reduce glenohumeral arthritis risk compared to flat bone graft."

Latarjet / Coracoid Transfer β€” Exam Cheat Sheet

Clinical summary

References

  1. Burkhart SS, De Beer JF (2000). Traumatic glenohumeral bone defects and their relationship to failure of arthroscopic Bankart repairs: significance of the inverted-pear glenoid and the humeral engaging Hill-Sachs lesion. Arthroscopy. PMID: 11027751. DOI: 10.1053/jars.2000.17715. Case series of 194 repairs. Introduced the inverted-pear and engaging Hill-Sachs concepts. 67% recurrence with bone defects vs 4% without; 89% in contact athletes with defects.

  2. Balg F, Boileau P (2007). The instability severity index score: a simple pre-operative score to select patients for arthroscopic or open shoulder stabilisation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. PMID: 17998184. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.89B11.18962. ISIS derivation (n=131). Score over 6 = 70% recurrence risk after arthroscopic Bankart; authors recommend Bristow-Latarjet instead. (Frequently mis-cited as "Boileau 2005".)

  3. Yamamoto N, Itoi E, Abe H, et al. (2007). Contact between the glenoid and the humeral head in abduction, external rotation, and horizontal extension: a new concept of glenoid track. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. PMID: 17644006. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2006.12.012. Cadaveric study defining the glenoid track (medial margin at 84% of glenoid width); basis of the on-track/off-track Hill-Sachs concept.

  4. Shah AA, Butler RB, Romanowski J, et al. (2012). Short-term complications of the Latarjet procedure. J Bone Joint Surg Am. PMID: 22318222. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.J.01830. Case series of 48 shoulders. Overall complication rate 25%: recurrence 8%, neurologic injury 10% (mostly transient), superficial infection 6%.

  5. Rouleau DM, HΓ©bert-Davies J, Djahangiri A, et al. (2013). Validation of the instability shoulder index score in a multicenter reliability study in 114 consecutive cases. Am J Sports Med. PMID: 23271004. DOI: 10.1177/0363546512470815. Multicentre study confirming ISIS interobserver reliability (ICC 0.933).

  6. Latarjet M (1954). Treatment of recurrent dislocation of the shoulder. Lyon Chir. Original description of coracoid process transfer to the anterior glenoid rim for recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation. Foundation of all subsequent modifications of the procedure.