Is arthroscopic surgery for stabilisation of chronic shoulder instability as effective as open surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis of 62 studies including 3044 arthroscopic operations

Open Bankart repair plus inferior capsular shift versus arthroscopic Bankart repair without augmentations for traumatic anterior shoulder instability: A prospective study

PURPOSE

Arthroscopic treatment of shoulder instability has some advantages (including short surgical time, less morbidity, less postoperative pain, reduced hospitalization time, and decreased risk of complications) compared with open procedures. We performed a prospective study comparing open repair with arthroscopic repair for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The aim was to clarify the relative effectiveness of open Bankart repair plus inferior capsular shift (OBRICS) and arthroscopic Bankart (AB) repair without augmentations with approximately 5 years of follow-up.

METHODS

We investigated 32 shoulders of 30 patients (24 men and 6 women) undergoing OBRICS (15 shoulders of 17 patients; two patients were bilateral) and AB (15 shoulders of 15 patients). The average follow-up was 5 years and 2.5 months (range: 60-66 months). The clinical evaluation included recurrent instability rate, range of motion, and postoperative rehabilitation. All patients were assessed using the scoring systems of Rowe and the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) preoperatively and during the final evaluation.

RESULTS

Recurrent instability rates were significantly different between the OBRICS (0%) and AB (26.6%) groups ( p = 0.022). There were fewer limitations of external rotation (ER), ER at 90° abduction, and horizontal extension for AB than for OBRICS postoperatively ( p < 0.05). The mean Rowe and UCLA scores for both methods were not significantly different at final follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that OBRICS leads to a lower rate of recurrent instability. However, those with AB had fewer ER and horizontal extension limitations.

Risk factors for recurrent instability or revision surgery following arthroscopic Bankart repair

Aims

The factors that predispose to recurrent instability and revision stabilization procedures after arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior glenohumeral instability remain unclear. We sought to determine the rate and risk factors associated with ongoing instability in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair for instability of the shoulder.

Materials and Methods

We used the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database to identify patients with a diagnosis of anterior instability of the shoulder undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair between 2003 and 2011. Patients were followed for a minimum of three years. Baseline demographics and subsequent further surgery to the ipsilateral shoulder were analyzed. Multivariate analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for recurrent instability.

Results

A total of 5719 patients were analyzed. Their mean age was 24.9 years (sd 9.3); 4013 (70.2%) were male. A total of 461 (8.1%) underwent a further procedure involving the ipsilateral shoulder at a mean of 31.5 months (sd 23.8) postoperatively; 117 (2.1%) had a closed reduction and 344 (6.0%) had further surgery. Revision arthroscopic Bankart repair was the most common subsequent surgical procedure (223; 65.4%). Independent risk factors for recurrent instability were: age < 19 years (odds ratio 1.86), Caucasian ethnicity (hazard ratio 1.42), bilateral instability of the shoulder (hazard ratio 2.17), and a history of closed reduction(s) prior to the initial repair (hazard ratio 2.45). Revision arthroscopic Bankart repair was associated with significantly higher rates of ongoing persistent instability than revision open stabilization (12.4% vs 5.1%, p = 0.041).

Conclusion

The incidence of a further procedure being required in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior glenohumeral instability was 8.1%. Younger age, Caucasian race, bilateral instability, and closed reduction prior to the initial repair were independent risk factors for recurrent instability, while subsequent revision arthroscopic Bankart repair had significantly higher rates of persistent instability than subsequent open revision procedures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:324–30.

The effect of subscapularis tenotomy in athletes operated on for recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation

PURPOSE

Some authors consider preservation of the subscapularis tendon as one of the most important elements for a successful long-term outcome in patients operated on with open capsulorrhaphy for recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether vertical tenotomy of the subscapularis tendon might affect internal rotation strength recovery in patients operated on with open capsulorrhaphy for recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation.

METHODS

Ninety-six patients were retrospectively followed up at a mean of 72.5 months. They underwent clinical evaluation, Rowe and Walch-Duplay scoring scales, the Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and dynamometric measurements (side-to-side) of internal and external rotation, forward elevation, and abduction. All patients were athletes: 25% were practising risk-free sports, 44% contact sports, 14.5% sports with cocking of the arm, and 14.5% high-risk sports activities.

RESULTS

Five (5.2%) recurrences were registered, and all patients returned to pre-operative sports activity. The Rowe score was 98.12, the Walch-Duplay score 92.25, and the VAS score 0.1. Dynamometric assessment showed no significant differences (side-to-side) in internal rotation (p = 0.34), external rotation (p = 0.9), flexion (p = 0.7), and abduction (p = 0.7). Dominant arms showed better results than non-dominant arms (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Complete tenotomy of the subscapularis tendon does not seem to negatively affect internal rotation strength recovery or external rotation movement in athletes.

[Arthroscopic soft tissue stabilization of posttraumatic anterior shoulder instability : Techniques, limitations and long-term results]

Arthroscopic soft tissue stabilization is a well-established and broadly accepted procedure to treat posttraumatic shoulder instability. Advantages in comparison to open stabilization procedures include improved visualization of the structural damage and a less invasive approach. Technical developments in recent years have led to further improvement of the arthroscopic technique for shoulder instability. This article presents a description of principles and new developments as it contains basic techniques including patient positioning, access portals, preparation of the glenoid bone, soft tissue handling and shuttle techniques. Modern suture anchor systems to achieve arthroscopic stabilization with the corresponding advantages and disadvantages are also presented. Furthermore, the limitations and long-term results of arthroscopic soft tissue stabilization are discussed.

Recurrent Instability After Arthroscopic Bankart Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Surgical Technical Factors

PURPOSE

Recurrent instability remains of concern after arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction. We evaluated various technical factors including anchor design, anchor material, number of anchors used, and interval closure on risk of recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction.

METHODS

A systematic review of MEDLINE and Cochrane databases was conducted, following PRISMA guidelines. Extracted data were recorded on a standardized form. Methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) were used to assess study quality and risk bias. Because of study heterogeneity and low levels of evidence, meta-analysis was not possible. Pooled weighted means were calculated and individual study evaluation and comparisons (qualitative analysis) were performed for systematic review.

RESULTS

Of 2097 studies identified, 26 met criteria for systematic review. Pooled weighted means revealed 11.4% versus 15% recurrent instability with 3 or more suture anchors versus fewer than 3 anchors, 10.1% versus 7.8% with absorbable versus nonabsorbable suture anchors, respectively, and 8.0% versus 9.4% with knotless versus standard anchors, respectively. Interval closure did not qualitatively decrease recurrent instability or decrease range of motion.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review reveals that despite individual study, and previous systematic reviews pointing to the contrary, the composite contemporary published literature would support no difference in the risk of recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction with rotator interval closure, differing numbers of anchors used for the repair, use of knotless versus standard anchors, or use of bioabsorbable versus nonabsorbable anchors. We recommend surgeons focus on factors that have been shown to modify the risk factors after arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction, such as patient selection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.

EVALUATION OF SURGICAL TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH SHOULDER INSTABILITY

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the results of arthroscopic surgery in patients with traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation.

METHODS

This retrospective study analyzed 76 patients with a mean age of 28 and mean postoperative follow-up period of 62 months. Evaluation consisted of physical examination, and X-rays; results were classified according to the UCLA and Rowe scales.

RESULTS

Patients showed decrease of range of motion in all planes, except elevation and lateral rotation with 90º abduction. According to the Rowe score, significant postoperative improvement was found compared with preoperative evaluations, with 89.4% of satisfactory results. According to the UCLA score, good or excellent results were observed in 97.4% of the cases. We found a 6.5% rate of recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic treatment for traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation is effective, as long as indications are used. Level of Evidence IV, Case Series.

Combined All-arthroscopic Hill-Sachs Remplissage, Latarjet, and Bankart Repair in Patients With Bipolar Glenohumeral Bone Loss

Patients presenting with recurrent shoulder instability and bipolar glenohumeral bone loss are at risk of failed standard soft-tissue repair techniques. Even isolated bony-stabilization procedures such as the Latarjet or remplissage technique may not provide sufficient stability in the face of combined bone loss. We use a combined all-arthroscopic remplissage, Latarjet, and Bankart repair for patients with significant combined glenohumeral bone loss and/or in the revision setting. This allows reconstruction of both the Hill-Sachs and glenoid bone defects and repair of the capsulolabral complex in a minimally invasive manner. Furthermore, the use of cortical-button fixation of the coracoid bone graft may reduce the risk of hardware-related complications while still achieving excellent bone union.

Traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder

The shoulder is the most unstable joint in the human body. Traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder is a common condition, which, especially in young patients, is associated with high recurrence rates. The effectiveness of non-surgical treatments when compared to surgical ones is still controversial. The purpose of this study was to review the literature for current concepts and updates regarding the treatment of this condition.

Open versus arthroscopic surgical treatment for anterior shoulder dislocation: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis over the past 20 years

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing open and arthroscopic surgery for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability by analyzing comparative studies during 2 different time intervals during the last 20 years.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Two groups were created by dividing studies according to the year of publication, those published from 1995 to 2004 or from 2005 to 2015. Publication bias and risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tools. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies (n = 1633) met the eligibility criteria. Comparison of the pooled estimate for all of these studies demonstrated no significant differences (P = .64) in clinical outcomes between open and arthroscopic shoulder stabilization. However, studies published from 1995 through 2004 demonstrated significant differences (P = .015) in recurrence rates favoring open surgery. In contrast, no significant differences (P = .09) in recurrence rates were observed for studies published from 2005 through 2015. The pooled estimate for all studies in both groups demonstrated significant differences (P = .001) in external rotation deficits between open and arthroscopic shoulder stabilization favoring arthroscopic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Despite advances in surgical techniques and devices during the last 20 years, either open or arthroscopic surgical treatment of anterior shoulder dislocation results in similar clinical outcomes. The recurrence rate for arthroscopic surgical stabilization has only marginally decreased, from 16.8% to 14.2%. However, during the earlier decade from 1995 through 2004, patients treated with arthroscopic surgery had twice the risk of recurrence compared with an open procedure.

Controversies in the Surgical Management of Shoulder Instability: Open vs Arthroscopic Procedures

BACKGROUND

Traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder is a common condition associated with a high recurrence rate in young adults. Operative treatment reduces the risk of recurrence. Several studies have compared arthroscopic and open shoulder instability repair. The purpose of this paper is to perform a review of the literature where both techniques are compared in the repair of the anterior shoulder instability without bone loss.

METHODS

Prior to arthroscopy, recurrent dislocations were managed by open repair. There have been many studies documenting low recurrence rates after open Bankart stabilization. Initially, arthroscopic fixation reported high failure rates.

RESULTS

In the last 20 years, the development of arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent anterior instability has improved failure rates. In comparison with open techniques, arthroscopic procedures have the advantages of decreased morbidity rate, early functional rehabilitation and improved range of motion.

CONCLUSION

The available evidence does not show a statistically significant difference in outcome measures between arthroscopic and open repair for the treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Given the similar results between the 2 groups, differences in length of hospital stay and cost to the patient and society point to arthroscopic repair as the more judicious treatment approach.

Evaluation and Management of Failed Shoulder Instability Surgery

BACKGROUND

Failed shoulder instability surgery is mostly considered to be the recurrence of shoulder dislocation but subluxation, painful or non-reliable shoulder are also reasons for patient dissatisfaction and should be considered in the notion.

METHODS

The authors performed a revision of the literature and online contents on evaluation and management of failed shoulder instability surgery.

RESULTS

When we look at the reasons for failure of shoulder instability surgery we point the finger at poor patient selection, technical error and an additional traumatic event. More than 80% of surgical failures, for shoulder instability, are associated with bone loss. Quantification of glenoid bone loss and investigation of an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion are determining facts. Adequate imaging studies are determinant to assess labrum and capsular lesions and to rule out associated pathology as rotator cuff tears. CT-scan is the method of choice to diagnose and quantify bone loss. Arthroscopic soft tissue procedures are indicated in patients with minimal bone loss and no contact sports. Open soft tissue procedures should be performed in patients with small bone defects, with hiperlaxity and practicing contact sports. Soft tissue techniques, as postero-inferior capsular plication and remplissage, may be used in patients with less than 25% of glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs lesions. Bone block procedures should be used for glenoid larger bone defects in the presence of an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion or in the presence of poor soft tissue quality. A tricortical iliac crest graft may be used as a primary procedure or as a salvage procedure after failure of a Bristow or a Latarjet procedure. Less frequently, the surgeon has to address the Hill-Sachs lesion. When a 30% loss of humeral head circumference is present a filling graft should be used.

CONCLUSION

Reasons for failure are multifactorial. In order to address this entity, surgeons must correctly identify the causes and tailor the right solution.

Arthroscopic Panlabral Repair With Remplissage of Hill-Sachs Lesion

Recurrent shoulder instability in young contact athletes has been well established. The importance of bipolar bone loss in instability has come to the forefront in terms of proper management of this condition. It remains controversial, however, which patients would be better served with an arthroscopic versus open procedure and when additional procedures may reduce the risk of failure (i.e., remplissage). We present our arthroscopic technique of a panlabral repair with concomitant remplissage using the double-pulley technique. The purpose of this article is to provide insight into obtaining superior visualization while reviewing surgical pearls and pitfalls to efficiently perform a panlabral repair and remplissage.

Analysis of postoperative monitoring of patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopy for anterior instability

OBJECTIVE

Analyze the postoperative follow-up of patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopy for treatment of anterior instability and correlate with the prevalence of recurrence.

METHODS

A six-question survey was applied by phone and mail to 65 patients, seeking information on the current result of the surgical procedure. All patients were treated arthroscopically for anterior shoulder instability, with at least 12 months of postoperative time. Patients with associated posterior labial lesions and revision surgeries were not included.

RESULTS

At the time of the survey the patients had a median of 56 (IQR: 34.5-110.5) postoperative months. The mean sample age was 24.6 years (maximum = 47, minimum = 12; SD = 7.3). Complaint of pain in the shoulder was observed in 20 patients (30.7%). Dislocation recurrence was observed in 10 patients (15.3%). Forty-four patients (67.6%) considered their shoulder normal, which was more frequent in non-recurrence patients (p < 0.001). Forty-three patients (66.1%) returned to their previous level of sport and there was no difference between recurrence and non-recurrence patients (p = 0.456). It was found that the prevalence of recurrence was 5.6 (95% CI: 1.30-24.46) times higher in individuals who abandoned monitoring before six months postoperatively (p = 0.012).

CONCLUSION

The abandonment of postoperative monitoring in the early stages, when the patients receive orientation for muscle strengthening, proprioceptive education, and dangerous movements to avoid, can increase the rates of recurrent shoulder dislocation in patients treated for anterior instability by arthroscopy.

A novel flexible drill device enabling arthroscopic transosseous repair of Bankart lesions

We have developed a flexible drill device that makes arthroscopic transosseous repair possible, and report preliminary results. Twelve patients with post-traumatic anterior inferior glenohumeral instability were selected.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

the flexible drill device is inserted into the shoulder joint through the posterior portal and the guide pipe unit is placed 5mm posterior to the margin of the anterior glenoid rim. The flexible drill is driven through the glenoid with the power drill, creating a hole in the glenoid. A non-absorbable suture is passed through the hole and a sliding knot tying is performed over the capsule and labrum after completing stitches with the suture hook loaded. The same procedures are repeated in the 2, 3 and 4 o'clock positions of the glenoid. There was no recurrence of dislocation at the mean follow-up period of 52.3 months. The mean Rowe score was 89.5.

A Biomechanical Analysis of Anchor Placement for Bankart Repair: Effect of Portal Placement

During arthroscopic Bankart repair, penetration of suture anchors through the far cortex can compromise the initial biomechanical characteristics of anchor stability and repair integrity. This study compared the placement of suture anchors through a low anterior-inferior rotator interval portal (AI) vs a trans-subscapularis portal to evaluate the rate of anchor perforation as well as biomechanical strength. Ten matched pairs of cadaveric shoulders were randomized to an AI or a trans-subscapularis portal for placement of suture anchors at the 3 o'clock and 5:30 positions. The following measurements were obtained: (1) distance from the portal to the cephalic vein; (2) presence and length of anchor penetration through the inferior glenoid; and (3) ultimate failure strength of the anchors. The distance from the portal to the cephalic vein was significantly greater with the AI vs the trans-subscapularis portal across all specimens (29.9 vs 11.2 mm, P<.05). The rate of anchor penetration was significantly increased in the AI group vs the trans-subscapularis group at the 5:30 position (60% vs 10%, P=.014) but not at the 3 o'clock position (P=.33). Mean pullout strength of the anchors at the 5:30 position trended higher in the trans-subscapularis group, but the difference was not significant (132.8 vs 112.6 N, P=.18). The cephalic vein is closer to the trans-subscapularis portal than to the AI, but is at a safe distance. Both the rate and the degree of glenoid suture anchor penetration were lower with the trans-subscapularis portal compared with the AI at the 5:30 position. Placing anchors through the trans-subscapularis portal provides a safe alternative method, with improved positioning of the inferiormost anchor compared with the traditional AI.

Long-Term Restoration of Anterior Shoulder Stability: A Retrospective Analysis of Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet Procedure

BACKGROUND

Various operative techniques are used for treating recurrent anterior shoulder instability, and good mid-term results have been reported. The purpose of this study was to compare shoulder stability after treatment with the 2 commonly performed procedures, the arthroscopic Bankart soft-tissue repair and the open coracoid transfer according to Latarjet.

METHODS

A comparative, retrospective case-cohort analysis of 360 patients (364 shoulders) who had primary repair for recurrent anterior shoulder instability between 1998 and 2007 was performed. The minimum duration of follow-up was 6 years. Reoperations, overt recurrent instability (defined as recurrent dislocation or subluxation), apprehension, the subjective shoulder value (SSV), sports participation, and overall satisfaction were recorded.

RESULTS

An open Latarjet procedure was performed in 93 shoulders, and an arthroscopic Bankart repair was done in 271 shoulders. Instability or apprehension persisted or recurred after 11% (10) of the 93 Latarjet procedures and after 41.7% (113) of the 271 arthroscopic Bankart procedures. Overt instability recurred after 3% of the Latarjet procedures and after 28.4% (77) of the Bankart procedures. In the Latarjet group, 3.2% of the patients were not satisfied with their result compared with 13.2% in the Bankart group (p = 0.007). Kaplan-Meier analysis of survivorship, with apprehension (p < 0.001), redislocation (p = 0.01), and operative revision (p < 0.001) as the end points, documented the substantial superiority of the Latarjet procedure and the decreasing effectiveness of the arthroscopic Bankart repair over time. Twenty percent of the first recurrences after arthroscopic Bankart occurred no earlier than 91 months postoperatively, as opposed to the rare recurrences after osseous reconstruction, which occurred in the early postoperative period, with only rare late failures.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective cohort study, the arthroscopic Bankart procedure was inferior to the open Latarjet procedure for repair of recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation. The difference between the 2 procedures with respect to the quality of outcomes significantly increased with follow-up time.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Hill-Sachs Off-track Lesions as Risk Factor for Recurrence of Instability After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effect of "off-track" Hill-Sachs lesions, according to the glenoid track concept, as a risk factor for recurrent instability and need for revision surgery after arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 254 patients with anteroinferior glenohumeral instability who were managed with an arthroscopic stabilization procedure between 2006 and 2013. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and/or computed tomography scans were available for 100 of these patients to calculate the glenoid track and the presence of "on-track" or off-track Hill-Sachs lesions. Recurrence of instability was evaluated at a mean follow-up of 22.4 months.

RESULTS

Of 100 patients whose magnetic resonance imaging and/or computed tomography scans were available, 88 had an on-track Hill-Sachs lesion and 12 had an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion. Revision surgery for recurrent instability was performed in 5 patients (6%) with an on-track Hill-Sachs lesion and in 4 patients (33%) with an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion (odds ratio, 8.3; 95% confidence interval, 1.85-37.26; P = .006).

CONCLUSIONS

An off-track Hill-Sachs lesion is a significant and important risk factor for recurrence of instability and need for revision surgery after arthroscopic Bankart repair when compared with an on-track Hill-Sachs lesion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, prognostic case series.

Accuracy of Latarjet graft and screw position after using novel drill guide

PURPOSE

For the success of Latarjet procedure a correct graft positioning is mandatory. Furthermore, the correct screw placement is important to avoid cartilage damage and soft tissue irritation. Due to a cadaveric experimental study, the accuracy of graft and screw positioning utilizing a novel drill guide for a minimal-invasive Latarjet procedure was analyzed.

METHODS

Five human fresh-frozen shoulder specimens have been treated in accordance with the Congruent-Arc Latarjet technique using the glenoid bone loss set (Arthrex, Naples, FL, USA) with 3.75 mm cannulated screws throughout a 5 cm skin incision without detachment of the scapularis tendon. All procedures were performed by one single, experienced shoulder surgeon. The accuracy of graft and screw positioning was assessed due to a CT scan.

RESULTS

A noticeable learning curve was noted during the study period as the first surgery took 45 min and the last 33 min. All grafts were correctly positioned with regard to the articular line of the glenoid surface. Impingement with the maximum head circumference was not encountered. The screw positions did not affect the suprascapular nerve. A damage of the graft was not noticed.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors can recommend the usage of the new drill guide tested in this study. It seems to be beneficial in the Latarjet procedure and may ease correct graft positioning and prevent screw misplacement. Compared to fully arthroscopically performed Latarjet procedures it provides much steeper learning curve and seems technically easier and quicker to handle.

Evaluation and treatment of failed shoulder instability procedures

Management of the unstable shoulder after a failed stabilization procedure can be difficult and challenging. Detailed understanding of the native shoulder anatomy, including its static and dynamic restraints, is necessary for determining the patient’s primary pathology. In addition, evaluation of the patient’s history, physical exam, and imaging is important for identifying the cause for failure after the initial procedure. Common mistakes include under-appreciation of bony defects, failure to recognize capsular laxity, technical errors, and missed associated pathology. Many potential treatment options exist for revision surgery, including open or arthroscopic Bankart repair, bony augmentation procedures, and management of Hill Sachs defects. The aim of this narrative review is to discuss in-depth the common risk factors for post-surgical failure, components for appropriate evaluation, and the different surgical options available for revision stabilization.

Level of evidence Level V.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair for recurrent shoulder instability: A retrospective study of 86 cases

The purpose of our study was to retrospectively evaluate the outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair in 86 patients, who met the inclusion criteria of at least one episode of shoulder dislocation, with a minimum follow-up of one year. Outcome was measured by the use of Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) score. At the end of our study, the recurrence rate was 7%. Young age (p = 0.016) and ligamentous laxity (p = 0.003) were associated with recurrence. Arthroscopic Bankart repair is a reliable treatment method, with good clinical outcomes. Patients with younger age or with ligamentous laxity were at the greatest risk of recurrence.

Arthroscopic treatment of glenoid bone loss

Recurrent anterior instability of the glenohumeral joint has long been an arduous problem to solve surgically, owing to its difficulty to the need to restore both osseous and dynamic constraints in the unstable shoulder. Biomechanical studies have indicated that glenoid bone loss shortens the safe arc through which the glenoid can resist axial forces; in these cases, a soft tissue repair alone may be insufficient to maintain stability. Clinical studies have confirmed that major bone loss is associated with an unfavourable outcome. The benefits of using arthroscopic procedures for surgical stabilization of the shoulder include smaller incisions and less soft tissue dissection, better access for repair and, potentially, the maximum respect for the undamaged anatomical structures. The biggest disadvantage of arthroscopic procedures until recently was the inability to successfully treat a significant bone defect. Over the last 10 years, several new arthroscopic techniques have been developed, providing new surgical options for successfully treating soft tissues and bony lesions in anterior-inferior glenohumeral instability. Level of evidence V.

Evaluation of postoperative results from videoarthroscopic treatment for recurrent shoulder dislocation using metal anchors

OBJECTIVE

To clinically and radiologically evaluate the results from videoarthroscopic treatment using metal anchors in patients with recurrent shoulder dislocation and its complications.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study on 47 patients (47 shoulders) operated by the shoulder group of the orthopedic hospital between February 2010 and February 2012. A questionnaire, interview and physical and radiographic examinations were used, with the classification of Samilson and Pietro. The mean postoperative follow-up was 33 months (range 12-47 months). The statistical analysis consisted of using Fisher's exact test through the IBM SPSS 22 statistical software. The significance level used was 5%.

RESULTS

Recurrence was observed in nine cases. The patients were, on average, 26.5 years old at the first episode, and 19.1% were aged 20 years or under. Among these, 55.6% presented recurrence. In relation to age at the time of the surgical procedure, the average age was 27 years, and 12.8% were aged 20 years or under. Nineteen patients presented prominent anchors and, of these, 21% manifested arthrosis.

CONCLUSION

There was a statistically identified correlation between the recurrence rate and age less than or equal to 20 years at the times of first dislocation and the surgical procedure. Further studies should be conducted in order to compare the use of absorbable anchors, which despite higher cost, may provide lower risk of developing glenohumeral arthrosis in some cases.

International survey and surgeon's preferences in diagnostic work-up towards treatment of anterior shoulder instability

PURPOSE

Recurrent anterior shoulder instability after surgical treatment can be caused by bony defects. Several diagnostic tools have been designed to measure the extent of these bony lesions. Currently, there is no consensus which measurement tool to use and decide which type of surgery is most appropriate. We therefore performed an evaluation of agreement in surgeons' preference of diagnostic work-up and surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

An international survey was conducted amongst orthopaedic shoulder surgeons. The survey contained questions about surgeons' experience, clinical and radiological examination and the subsequent treatment for anterior shoulder instability. Descriptive statistics were used to present the data, and percentages of responding surgeons were calculated.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was completed by 197 delegates from 46 countries. 55 % of the respondents think evidence in current literature is sufficient on diagnostic work-up for anterior shoulder instability. Anamnestic, number of dislocations was most frequently asked (by 95 % of respondents), the most frequently used test is the apprehension test (91 %). For imaging, conventional X-ray in various directions was most performed, followed by MR arthrography and plane CT scan respectively. The responding surgeons perform surgery (labrum repair or Latarjet) in 51 % of the patients. A median of 25 % glenoid bone loss was given by the respondents, as cut-off from when to perform a bony repair.

CONCLUSION

Many different diagnostic examinations for assessing shoulder instability are used and a high variety is seen in the use of diagnostic tools. Also no consensus is seen in the use of different surgical options (arthroscopic and open procedures). This implies the need for more research on diagnostic imaging and the correlation with specific subsequent surgical treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Survey, level of evidence IV.

Influence of Combined Hill-Sachs and Bony Bankart Defects on Range of Motion in Anterior Instability of the Shoulder in a Finite Element Model

PURPOSE

To quantify the effect of different size combinations of Hill-Sachs defects and bony Bankart defects on shoulder instability across a broad range of motion.

METHODS

A computer-based finite element approach was used to model an intact glenohumeral joint. Defects were created for the glenoid with respect to its width (12.5%, 25%, 37.5%, and 50%). The defect sizes chosen for the humeral head were 6%, 19%, 31%, and 44% of the diameter. Simulations were analyzed using quasi-static analysis with displacement control under 50 N of medial compression. Distance to dislocation (DTD) was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Every progressive bony Bankart defect lowered the value of DTD (P < .0001). These DTD values of individual glenoid defects were the same for every abduction and rotation angle. This may be an artifact due to the glenoid's spherical-shape assumption, which was necessary for the sample-specific model and is not a completely accurate representation of specimen-specific geometry. The largest glenoid defect size had a DTD value of 0 mm, which signifies no contact between surfaces. At 90° of abduction, Hill-Sachs defect sizes 19%, 31% (P < .0001), and 44% (P < .0001) further reduced DTD values gradually after 30° of external rotation, 10° of external rotation, and 20° of internal rotation, respectively. This signifies loss of contact between articulating surfaces, resulting in reduced motion. However, at a 45° abduction angle, the loss of contact only occurred for humeral head defect sizes 31% and 44%.

CONCLUSIONS

This model shows that increasing shoulder instability is predicted by increasing humeral head and glenoid defect sizes for a broad envelope of motion. The size of glenoid defect can be used to determine the baseline stability. An additional humeral head defect can further reduce the stability when the arm is in external rotation because of loss of contact.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The data from this study will be helpful in establishing thresholds for performing bony reconstructions.

A Meta-Analysis of Arthroscopic versus Open Repair for Treatment of Bankart Lesions in the Shoulder

Background

The optimal treatment for Bankart lesion remains controversial. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of patients managed with open Bankart repair versus arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Material/Methods

After systematic review of online databases, a total of 11 trials with 1022 subjects were included. The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed using the PEDro critical appraisal tool, and non-RCTs were evaluated by Newcastle-Ottawa (NO) quality assessment tool. Outcomes of shoulder stability, range of motion (ROM), functional scales, and surgical times were analyzed.

Results

Data synthesis showed significant differences between the two strategies, with regards to stability of the shoulder (P=0.008, RR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.89 to 0.98), and ROM (P<0.001, SMD=−0.47, 95% CI: −0.72 to −0.22).

Conclusions

Open Bankart repair produced a more stable shoulder but had a relatively poor shoulder motion, compared with arthroscopic Bankart repair, for the treatment of Bankart lesion.

Utility of the Instability Severity Index Score in Predicting Failure After Arthroscopic Anterior Stabilization of the Shoulder

BACKGROUND

The redislocation rate after arthroscopic stabilization for anterior glenohumeral instability is up to 30%. The Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) was developed to preoperatively rationalize the risk of failure, but it has not yet been validated by an independent group.

PURPOSE

To assess the utility of the ISIS in predicting failure of arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization and to identify other preoperative factors for failure.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A case-control study was performed on 141 consecutive patients, comparing those who suffered failure of arthroscopic stabilization with those who had successful arthroscopic stabilization. The mean follow-up time was 47 months (range, 24-132 months). The ISIS was applied retrospectively, and an analysis was performed to establish independent risk factors for failure. A receiver operator coefficient curve was constructed to set a threshold ISIS for considering alternative surgery.

RESULTS

Of 141 patients, 19 (13.5%) suffered recurrent instability. The mean ISIS of the failed stabilization group was higher than that of the successful stabilization group (5.1 vs 1.7; P < .001). Independent risk factors for failure were Hill-Sachs lesion (P < .001), glenoid bone loss (P < .001), age <21 years at the time of surgery (P < .001), age at first dislocation (P = .01), competitive-level participation in sports (P < .001), and participation in contact or overhead sports (P = .03). The presence of glenoid bone loss carried the highest risk of failure (70%). There was a 70% risk of failure if the ISIS was ≥4, as opposed to a 4% risk of failure if the ISIS was <4.

CONCLUSION

This is the first completely independent study to confirm that the ISIS is a useful preoperative tool. It is recommended that surgeons consider alternative forms of stabilization if the ISIS is ≥4.

Imaging methods for quantifying glenoid and Hill-Sachs bone loss in traumatic instability of the shoulder: a scoping review

Background

Glenohumeral instability is a common problem following traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation. Two major risk factors of recurrent instability are glenoid and Hill-Sachs bone loss. Higher failure rates of arthroscopic Bankart repairs are associated with larger degrees of bone loss; therefore it is important to accurately and reliably quantify glenohumeral bone loss pre-operatively. This may be done with radiography, CT, or MRI; however no gold standard modality or method has been determined. A scoping review of the literature was performed to identify imaging methods for quantifying glenohumeral bone loss.

Methods

The scoping review was systematic in approach using a comprehensive search strategy and standardized study selection and evaluation. MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched. Initial selection included articles from January 2000 until July 2013, and was based on the review of titles and abstracts. Articles were carried forward if either reviewer thought that the study was appropriate. Final study selection was based on full text review based on pre-specified criteria. Consensus was reached for final article inclusion through discussion amongst the investigators. One reviewer extracted data while a second reviewer independently assessed data extraction for discrepancies.

Results

Forty-one studies evaluating glenoid and/or Hill-Sachs bone loss were included: 32 studies evaluated glenoid bone loss while 11 studies evaluated humeral head bone loss. Radiography was useful as a screening tool but not to quantify glenoid bone loss. CT was most accurate but necessitates radiation exposure. The Pico Method and Glenoid Index method were the most accurate and reliable methods for quantifying glenoid bone loss, particularly when using three-dimensional CT (3DCT). Radiography and CT have been used to quantify Hill-Sachs bone loss, but have not been studied as extensively as glenoid bone loss.

Conclusions

Radiography can be used for screening patients for significant glenoid bone loss. CT imaging, using the Glenoid Index or Pico Method, has good evidence for accurate quantification of glenoid bone loss. There is limited evidence to guide imaging of Hill-Sachs bone loss. As a consensus has not been reached, further study will help to clarify the best imaging modality and method for quantifying glenohumeral bone loss.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0607-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Functional outcome and the structural integrity of arthroscopic Bankart repair: a prospective trial

BACKGROUND

Recurrent anterior shoulder dislocations are common in young patients with Bankart lesions. Arthroscopic repair is an established treatment; however, recurrent instability occurs in up to 35% of patients. It is unclear whether recurrence is the result of a failure of the surgical repair to heal or a repeat injury. The aim of the present pilot study was to assess radiographic healing of Bankart lesions 6 months post surgical repair and identify any correlations between radiographic findings and subsequent recurrent dislocations.

METHODS

Eighteen patients underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair for recurrent instability. Magnetic resonance (MR) arthrograms were obtained both pre-operatively and 6 months postoperatively. Standard T1 and T2 views were obtained along with an abduction and external rotation (ABER) view. Patients were followed for a minimum of 4 years for the risk of recurrence, and functional outcomes were obtained, including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Subjective Shoulder Scale, Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, Oxford Shoulder Instability Score and 12-Item Short Form Health Survey. Scores were correlated with pre-operative and postoperative MR findings.

RESULTS

Six of 18 patients developed recurrent instability. We could not identify correlations between reconstructed labrum (labral bumper) position, failure at suture sites and ABER findings with recurrent instability or functional outcome. Paradoxically, there was a nonstatistically significant trend for patients with no clefts between the labrum and the glenoid at any points along the repair to have worse outcomes than patients with partial or complete clefts.

CONCLUSIONS

In our pilot study, MR arthrogram was used to evaluate the labrum in detail 6 months postoperatively. Despite its proven ability to detect labral lesions, we were unable to demonstrate any features on postoperative MR arthrogram that predicted either functional outcome or recurrent instability. At 6 months post operation, functional recovery and the risk of recurrence may not depend on the anatomical appearance of the labrum alone.

Do arthroscopic and open stabilization techniques restore equivalent stability to the shoulder in the setting of anterior glenohumeral instability? a systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses

PURPOSE

Shoulder instability frequently recurs in young patients without operative treatment. Both open and arthroscopic approaches to shoulder stabilization with labral repair and capsulorrhaphy have been described and are routinely used. Multiple trials have been conducted to compare these approaches, with multiple meta-analyses performed to synthesize these trials; however, the results remain controversial. The purpose of this study was to critically evaluate the current meta-analyses to identify the current state of the art.

METHODS

In this study we evaluate available scientific support for the ability of both arthroscopic and open soft-tissue stabilization techniques to restore stability of the shoulder by performing a systematic review of the literature for previous meta-analyses. Data were extracted for rates of recurrence and patient outcomes. Study quality was measured with the Oxman-Guyatt and QUOROM (Quality of Reporting of Meta-analyses) systems. The Jadad algorithm was applied independently by 4 authors to determine which meta-analysis provided the highest level of available evidence.

RESULTS

After application of the inclusion and exclusion criteria, 8 meta-analyses were included. Both studies published prior to 2007 concluded that open stabilization provided lower recurrence rates than arthroscopic stabilization, the 3 studies published in 2007 are discordant, and all 3 studies published after 2008 concluded that open and arthroscopic stabilization provided equivalent results. Two meta-analyses had low Oxman-Guyatt scores (<3) signifying major flaws. Four authors independently selected the same meta-analysis as providing the highest quality of evidence using the Jadad algorithm, and this meta-analysis found no difference in recurrence rates between open and arthroscopic stabilization.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses comparing arthroscopic and open shoulder stabilization suggests that according to current best available evidence, there are no significant differences in failure rates.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I through IV studies.

The Latarjet-Patte procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability in contact athletes

Recurrent anterior shoulder instability is common in contact athletes and the high-energy injuries seen in this group make them more prone to bone loss. Athletes with recurrent instability and associated bone loss have high failure rates when treated with a soft tissue reconstruction procedure. Therefore it is preferred to manage recurrent instability in contact athletes with the Latarjet-Patte procedure. In this article, the authors describe their technique. They have found this procedure to be safe and effective, with very low recurrence and early return to sport. A meticulous surgical technique is important to avoid intraoperative and postoperative complications.

Evaluation of the Instability Severity Index Score and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index as predictors of failure following arthroscopic Bankart repair

In this study we evaluated whether the Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) could detect those patients at risk of failure following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Between April 2008 and June 2010, the ISIS and WOSI were recorded pre-operatively in 110 patients (87 male, 79%) with a mean age of 25.1 years (16 to 61) who underwent this procedure for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability.

A telephone interview was performed two-years post-operatively to determine whether patients had experienced a recurrent dislocation and whether they had returned to pre-injury activity levels. In all, six (5%) patients had an ISIS > 6 points (0 to 9). Of 100 (91%) patients available two years post-operatively, six (6%) had a recurrent dislocation, and 28 (28%) did not return to pre-injury activity. No patient who dislocated had an ISIS > 6 (p = 1.0). There was no difference in the mean pre-operative WOSI in those who had a re-dislocation and those who did not (p = 0.99). The pre-operative WOSI was significantly lower (p = 0.02) in those who did not return to pre-injury activity, whereas the ISIS was not associated with return to pre-injury activity (p = 0.13).

In conclusion, neither the pre-operative ISIS nor WOSI predicted recurrent dislocation within two years of arthroscopic Bankart repair. Patients with a lower pre-operative WOSI were less likely to return to pre-injury activity.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:1688–92.

Interest of emergency arthroscopic stabilization in primary shoulder dislocation in young athletes

INTRODUCTION

The recurrence rate after primary shoulder dislocation in young subjects with high functional demand is close to 75%. The present study assessed the interest of emergency arthroscopic stabilization in this specific population.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A non-randomized prospective study included 31 athletes under 30 years of age with primary anterior shoulder dislocation. Fifteen were offered emergency stabilization; after informed consent, 14 were enrolled in the "emergency stabilization" group. This was compared to a group matched for age, sport and lesion, managed 1 year previously by "non-operative" treatment (n=17), divided into 2 subgroups: "immobilization" and "secondary stabilization". Continuous prospective assessment of recurrence, return to sport and function (QuickDASH, QDsport, Duplay and Rowe scores) enabled comparison between the 3 groups.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 19 months for the "emergency stabilization" group and 25 months for the "non-operative" group. There were no failures in the "emergency stabilization" group, compared to a 77% rate in the "non-operative" group with onset at a mean 7.5 months and a mean 2.6 episodes of recurrence. Seven (54%) of the failures of non-operative treatment required secondary stabilization. Ninety-three percent of the "emergency stabilization" group, 44% of the "immobilization" group and 71% of the "secondary stabilization" group resumed sport at least at their pre-dislocation level. Mean Quick DASH was 1.46 in the "emergency stabilization" group, versus 15.28 the "immobilization" group (P<0.05) and 16.96 in the "secondary stabilization" group. Mean Duplay and Rowe scores were respectively 92.9 and 95 in the "emergency stabilization" group, versus 59.44 and 61.1 in the "immobilization" group (P<0.05) and 85 and 93.57 in the "secondary stabilization" group.

DISCUSSION

Emergency arthroscopic stabilization limits recurrence (Kirkley et al.), with better functional results than for secondary stabilization, lesion "freshness" providing a more favorable environment for labral and ligamentary healing. These encouraging results need confirmation over longer follow-up.

The arthroscopic latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability: 5-year minimum follow-up

BACKGROUND

The arthroscopic Latarjet procedure combines the benefits of arthroscopic surgery with the low rate of recurrent instability associated with the Latarjet procedure. Only short-term outcomes after arthroscopic Latarjet procedure have been reported.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the rate of recurrent instability and patient outcomes a minimum of 5 years after stabilization performed with the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Patients who underwent the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure before June 2008 completed a questionnaire to determine whether they had experienced a dislocation, subluxation, or further surgery. The patients also completed the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI).

RESULTS

A total of 62 of 87 patients (64/89 shoulders) were contacted for follow-up. Mean follow-up time was 76.4 months (range, 61.2-100.7 months). No patients had reported a dislocation since their surgery. One patient reported having subluxations since the surgery. Thus, 1 patient (1.59%) had recurrent instability after the procedure. The mean ± standard deviation aggregate WOSI score was 90.6% ± 9.4%. Mean WOSI domain scores were as follows: Physical Symptoms, 90.1% ± 8.7%; Sports/Recreation/Work, 90.3% ± 12.9%; Lifestyle, 93.7% ± 9.8%; and Emotions, 88.7% ± 17.3%.

CONCLUSION

The rate of recurrent instability after arthroscopic Latarjet procedure is low in this series of patients with a minimum 5-year follow-up. Patient outcomes as measured by the WOSI are good.

Advances in arthroscopy-indications and therapeutic applications

Advances in optical technology, instrumentation and implants now enable arthroscopic surgery to be performed on all large joints and most small joints of the limbs. Arthroscopic techniques are usually a development of surgical procedures previously performed through a large open incision, although the critical element of each procedure (for example removal of a torn meniscus) usually remains unchanged. The smaller size of incisions and reduction in tissue damage associated with arthroscopic surgery can reduce morbidity and complications. Therapeutic arthroscopy now encompasses excision, reconstruction and replacement of damaged or abnormal tissue. Improvements in the accuracy of MRI, CT and high-definition ultrasonography have limited the use of diagnostic arthroscopy to rare indications, but in the past 10 years the rates of some arthroscopic surgeries have increased by over 7-fold. Considerable variation in the type and utilization of arthroscopic procedures exists in practice, partly explained by the slow diffusion of new techniques and technology, but also by differences in clinician and patient beliefs and expectations. This Review reflects on both the success of arthroscopy and the general lack of evidence-based assessment of the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of arthroscopic procedures-a clear sign that more clinical trials in this field are required.

The arthroscopic treatment of shoulder instability: bioabsorbable and standard metallic anchors produce equivalent clinical results

PURPOSE

To investigate whether there are any differences in clinical outcomes and complications between absorbable and nonabsorbable suture anchors in the treatment of shoulder instability.

METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search of Medline, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Embase, and the Cochrane Central Registry of Controlled Trials, from inception of the databases, using various combinations of keywords. Only studies focusing on clinical outcomes of patients who underwent arthroscopic shoulder stabilization with suture anchors were selected. Two authors (R.P. and L.D.B.) then evaluated the methodologic quality of each article using the Coleman Methodology Score.

RESULTS

Ten articles were included. Four were prospective randomized studies, 2 were prospective cohort studies, and 4 were case series. The mean modified Coleman Methodology Score was 76.2.

CONCLUSIONS

Given the overall good results reported after arthroscopic stabilization of the shoulder using different suture anchors, it is not possible to draw a definite and solid suggestion on which class of device is better advised for routine use. Thus the decision to use one of the anchor systems available may mostly depend on its cost-effectiveness, which should be the focus of future comprehensive research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.

The open latarjet procedure is more reliable in terms of shoulder stability than arthroscopic bankart repair

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet bone block procedure are widely considered mainstays for surgical treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The choice between these procedures depends mainly on surgeon preference or training rather than published evidence.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We compared patients with recurrent posttraumatic anterior shoulder instability treated with arthroscopic Bankart or open Latarjet procedure in terms of (1) frequency and timing of recurrent instability, (2) risk factors for recurrent instability, and (3) patient-reported outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective comparative study, we paired 93 patients undergoing open Latarjet procedures with 93 patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repairs over the same period for posttraumatic anterior shoulder instability by one of four surgeons at the same center. Both groups were comparable except that patients in the Latarjet group had more glenoid lesions and more instability episodes preoperatively. Minimum followup was 4 years (mean, 6 years; range, 4-10 years). Patients were assessed with a questionnaire, including stability, Rowe score, and return to sports. Recurrent instability was defined as at least one episode of recurrent dislocation or subluxation. Return to sports was evaluated using a 0% to 100% scale that patients completed after recovery from surgery. Various risk factors for recurrent instability were also analyzed.

RESULTS

At latest followup, 10% (nine of 93) in the Latarjet group and 22% (20 of 93) in the Bankart group demonstrated recurrent instability (p = 0.026; odds ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17-0.91). Ten recurrences in the Bankart group (50%) occurred after 2 years, compared to only one (11%) in the Latarjet group. Reoperation rate was 6% and 7% in the Bankart and Latarjet groups, respectively. In both groups, patients younger than 20 years had higher recurrence risk (p = 0.019). In the Bankart group, independent factors predictive for recurrence were practice of competitive sports and shoulder hyperlaxity (ie, passive external rotation > 85° in the contralateral uninjured shoulder). Although return to sports was not different between groups, the mean Rowe score was higher in the Latarjet group (78 versus 68, p = 0.018).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients who had the open Latarjet procedure had less recurrent instability and better Rowe scores over a mean 6-year followup. We now perform isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair for carefully selected patients, including patients with an Instability Severity Index Score of 3 or less.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Restoration of joint congruency and the glenoidal labrum after arthroscopic revision Bankart repair: a MRI match-paired analysis comparing primary Bankart repair and the uninjured labrum

PURPOSE

The restoration of joint congruency and labrum slope and height after arthroscopic revision Bankart repair (RB) compared to the primary arthroscopic Bankart repair (PB) remain unclear.

METHODS

Twenty-three consecutive patients after RB with minor glenoid deficits were matched to 23 patients after PB and retrospectively followed by a score system and native 1.5 T magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment. Bankart repair surgeries were performed using double-loaded knotless suture anchors. The glenoidal (GAA) and labral articulation arc (LAA), labrum slope, height index and morphology were assessed separately for the anterior and inferior glenoid and compared to 23 healthy volunteers [radiologic control group (RC)].

RESULTS

Arthroscopic revision Bankart repair showed 28.0 months post-operative equivalent anterior labral congruency (LAA, 9.3°/PB 9.9°/RC 10.1°) and inferior (LAA 9.9°/PB 9.6°/RC 10.5°). The anterior GAA remain decreased (54.6°/PB 55.7°/RC 58.0°) with an original inferior GAA (85.1°/PB 83.2°/RC 83.8°). The RB labrum was slightly decreased anteriorly (slope 22.9°/PB 23.9°/RC 24.6°; height index 2.4/PB 3.0/RC 3.2). The inferior portion had an equivalent labrum slope (23.8°/PB 24.7°/RC 25.1°), but a decreased height index (2.1/PB 2.2/RC 2.3). Morphologic labrum analysis revealed significant changes between all three groups. The clinical outcome after revision surgery was good-to-excellent, but inferior to the primary stabilization and without influence of joint congruency and labrum morphology to the clinical outcome.

CONCLUSION

A properly applied arthroscopic revision of a Bankart repair generates sufficient restoration of the anteroinferior labral joint congruency and good clinical results.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series.

Risk factors for shoulder re-dislocation after arthroscopic Bankart repair

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have shown effective clinical results after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) but have shown several risk factors for re-dislocation after surgery. We evaluated whether patients are at a risk for re-dislocation during the first year after ABR, examined the recurrence rate after ABR, and sought to identify new risk factors.

METHODS

We performed ABR using bioabsorbable suture anchors in 102 consecutive shoulders (100 patients) with traumatic anterior shoulder instability. Average patient age and follow-up period was 25.7 (range, 14-40) years and 67.5 (range, 24.5-120) months, respectively. We evaluated re-dislocation after ABR using patient telephone interviews (follow-up rate, 100%) and correlated re-dislocation with several risk factors.

RESULTS

Re-dislocation after ABR occurred in nine shoulders (8.8%), of which seven sustained re-injuries within the first year with the arm elevated at 90° and externally rotated at 90°. Of the remaining 93 shoulders without re-dislocation, 8 had re-injury under the same conditions within the first year. Thus, re-injury within the first year was a risk for re-dislocation after ABR (P < 0.001, chi-squared test). Using multivariate analysis, large Hill-Sachs lesions (odds ratio, 6.77, 95% CI, 1.24-53.6) and <4 suture anchors (odds ratio, 9.86, 95% CI, 2.00-76.4) were significant risk factors for re-dislocation after ABR.

CONCLUSIONS

The recurrence rate after ABR is not associated with the time elapsed and that repair strategies should augment the large humeral bone defect and use >3 anchors during ABR.

The Latarjet-Patte procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability in contact athletes

The Latarjet-Patte procedure satisfies all of the requirements for treating recurrent anterior instability in contact athletes and is therefore their preferred management in this patient group.

Fewer anchors achieves successful arthroscopic shoulder stabilization surgery: 114 patients with 4 years of follow-up

BACKGROUND

The shoulder is the most frequently dislocated joint, with an incidence of 10 to 20 per 100,000 each year. The optimum number of anchors to use in arthroscopic stabilization is a topic of growing interest; most surgeons use 3. Our stabilization technique is to commonly use only a single suture anchor to purse-string the capsulolabral tissue up and toward the glenoid. This study aimed to ascertain whether successful stabilization can be achieved with fewer than 3 anchors.

METHODS

Our study comprised 114 consecutive patients with anterior instability and a Bankart lesion undergoing arthroscopic stabilization with 4 years of follow-up. Outcome was measured by Oxford Instability Score (OIS) and recurrence of instability or dislocation. Patient demographics were 86.8% male, 13.2% female, mean age of 31 years, 76.3% Hill-Sachs lesions, 13.2% bony Bankart lesions, 13.2% glenoid defects, and 9.6% SLAP lesions. The majority of patients, 71 patients (62.3%), received only 1 anchor; 40 patients (35.1%) received 2 anchors, and 3 patients (2.6%) had 3 anchors.

RESULTS

The mean OIS was 44.3 preoperatively and 17.3 postoperatively (P < .0001). There was no difference in OIS improvement between the patients who received a single anchor and those who received 2 or 3 anchors (P > .05). Even with minor bony Bankart lesions and glenoid defects, a single suture anchor can be sufficient. Our failure rate of 6.1% is comparable with that of other published series.

CONCLUSION

Successful shoulder stabilization can be achieved with fewer than 3 anchors, and a single anchor is usually sufficient.

Primary open anterior shoulder stabilization: a long-term, retrospective cohort study on the impact of subscapularis muscle alterations on recurrence

Background

Post-traumatic anterior shoulder instability patients may present histopathologic lesions within the subscapularis muscle compatible with a scarring process associated with disuse atrophy. We hypothesized that such lesions identified on intraoperative biopsy at the time of primary anterior shoulder stabilization would predict a higher risk of postoperative instability recurrence.

Methods

Of 52 eligible patients (52 shoulders) who had undergone subscapularis muscle biopsy during primary anterior open labral repair and capsulorrhaphy, 35 (mean age at surgery, 27.2 years; male sex, 71.4%) were retrospectively evaluated (mean follow-up, 12.9 years; range, 10.9-14.5 years). Primary outcome was shoulder instability recurrence. Secondary outcomes included shoulder range of motion, functional scores, and radiological analysis of glenohumeral joint degenerative changes.

Results

Overall five patients (14.3%) presented shoulder instability recurrence. Twelve patients with histopathologic lesions had significantly more instability recurrence than 23 without histopathologic changes (33.3% vs. 4.3%; risk difference, 29% [95% CI 1; 57]; p = 0.038). Patients without histopathologic changes had significantly reduced external rotation with arm at side (ER1; -11.9°; p = 0.001) and with shoulder abducted to 90° (ER2; -14.9°; p = 0.001) on the operated side when compared to the contralateral side. Patients with histopathologic lesions had only ER2 significantly reduced (-8.9°; p = 0.031). There was no substantial difference regarding functional and quantitative radiological scores between both patients’ groups.

Conclusions

Histopathologic changes within the subscapularis muscle at the time of primary open labral repair and capsulorrhaphy were associated with an increased risk of shoulder instability recurrence. Further investigations are needed to assess the impact of dedicated postoperative rehabilitation programs for patients presenting these lesions. Their recognition on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging should also be investigated; non-anatomical repairs could be an option in these cases.