Can Subscapularis Augmentation Serve as an Alternative to the Remplissage Procedure? A Case Report

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The manuscript entitled "Can Subscapularis Augmentation Serve as an Alternative to the Remplissage Procedure?: A Case Report" deals with a case report and literature review regarding surgical treatment for shoulder dislocation using subscapularis augmentation.

The study is interesting and presents good scientific rigor. Only minor changes need to be addressed.

Abstract: The abstract lacks a description of the case report, results, and conclusion. Describe how the literature review was conducted (keywords, database where articles were searched). Add the patient’s main concerns and important clinical findings, the primary diagnoses, interventions, and outcomes.

Keywords: Keywords should be in alphabetical order and should not contain the same words that are within the title of the text.

Case Report: Indicate if the patient received informed consent.

 

Author Response

Thank you for your detailed feedback. I have revised it as you requested.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

As the authors pointed in the introduction, shoulder dislocation frequently leads to recurring instability and surgical intervention (e.g. arthroscopic labral repair) can dramatically reduce the risk of recurrence. Meanwhile severe bony injury is a major risk factor for poor results of conventional surgery and the authors share their experience with subscapularis augmentation for this condition. They report their case of a patient with shoulder dislocation occurred during the seizure and followed by attempts of unsuccessful closed reduction. 

Discussing the case the authors emphasize limitation in performing remplissage procedure due to the

 risk of external rotation limitation. They decided to perform subscapularis augmentation due to the high risk of fixation failure caused by anchor pullout. After the following rehabilitation they received excellent functional results.

The paper makes good impressions despite single-case based design. The case demonstrates an elegant solution in the uncertain situation which is quite possible in real clinical practice. The literature review circles the problem and possible solutions with special attention to the absence of the golden standard for these cases. The paper is well illustrated with arthroscopic figures, logically arranged and clearly narrated. 

With all the obvious limitations of the case study, the paper seems to be helpful for the readers and can give some insights into the future directions of research.

The paper is recommended for the publication in the present version.

Author Response

Thank you.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf