Shoulder dislocation is frequently encountered by orthopedists, and closed manipulation is often sufficient to treat the injury in an acute setting. Although most dislocations are diagnosed and managed promptly, there are rare cases that are missed or neglected, leading to a chronically dislocated state of the joint. They are usually irreducible and cause considerable pain and functional disability in most affected patients, prompting the need to find a surgical method to reverse the worsening conditions caused by the dislocated joint. However, there are cases of even greater rarity in which chronic shoulder dislocations are asymptomatic with minimal functional or structural degeneration in the joint. These patients are usually left untreated, and most show good tolerance to their condition without developing disabling symptoms or significant functional loss over time. We report on one such patient who had a chronic shoulder dislocation for more than 2 years without receiving treatment.
Accidental Falls ; Aged ; Humans ; Magnetic Resonance Imaging ; Male ; Radiography ; Range of Motion, Articular ; Recurrence ; *Rotator Cuff Injuries/diagnosis/diagnostic imaging/physiopathology ; *Shoulder/diagnostic imaging/pathology/physiopathology ; *Shoulder Dislocation/diagnosis/diagnostic imaging/physiopathology

Background: The risk of device thrombosis and device-oriented clinical outcomes with bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BVS) was reported to be significantly higher than with contemporary drug-eluting stents (DESs). However, optimal device implantation may improve clinical outcomes in patients receiving BVS. The current study evaluated mid-term safety and efficacy of Absorb BVS with meticulous device optimization under intravascular imaging guidance. Methods: The SMART-REWARD and PERSPECTIVE-PCI registries in Korea prospectively enrolled 390 patients with BVS and 675 patients with DES, respectively. The primary endpoint was target vessel failure (TVF) at 2 years and the secondary major endpoint was patientoriented composite outcome (POCO) at 2 years. Results: Patient-level pooled analysis evaluated 1,003 patients (377 patients with BVS and 626 patients with DES). Mean scaffold diameter per lesion was 3.24 ± 0.30 mm in BVS group.Most BVSs were implanted with pre-dilatation (90.9%), intravascular imaging guidance (74.9%), and post-dilatation (73.1%) at proximal to mid segment (81.9%) in target vessel.Patients treated with BVS showed comparable risks of 2-year TVF (2.9% vs. 3.7%, adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 1.283, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.487–3.378, P = 0.615) and 2-year POCO (4.5% vs. 5.9%, adjusted HR, 1.413, 95% CI, 0.663–3.012,P = 0.370) than those with DES. The rate of 2-year definite or probable device thrombosis (0.3% vs. 0.5%, P = 0.424) was also similar. The sensitivity analyses consistently showed comparable risk of TVF and POCO between the 2 groups. Conclusion With meticulous device optimization under imaging guidance and avoidance of implantation in small vessels, BVS showed comparable risks of 2-year TVF and device thrombosis with DES.