Biomechanical evaluation of knotless anterior and posterior Bankart repairs

Recurrent bilateral atraumatic shoulder dislocation in a young patient with bilateral shoulder multidirectional instability: Treatment consideration and description of a surgical technique

INTRODUCTION

Multidirectional instability is defined as symptomatic glenohumeral joint subluxation or dislocation occurring in more than one direction. Multidirectional shoulder instability with recurrent shoulder dislocation is a rare condition with controversies in the literature about the best treatment strategy. Physiotherapy remains the initial treatment of choice, and surgical intervention should be performed only if debilitating symptoms continue to be experienced.

CASE PRESENTATION

A young healthy male presented with bilateral shoulder multidirectional instability and recurrent shoulders atraumatic dislocation. The patient was treated with a supervised physiotherapy regimen, which succeeded on his non-dominant shoulder but failed on the contralateral dominant side. A surgical technique aimed at reducing the right shoulder capsule volume to gain stability was performed and described in detail in this paper. Patient was able to return to his normal daily activities, including sports, without new complaints.

DISCUSSION

The aim of surgery is to restore passive stability by reducing the shoulder capsular volume. Common surgical techniques for Multidirectional instability include an inferior capsular shift and open or arthroscopic capsular plication with variable outcomes have been proposed in the literature.

CONCLUSION

Surgical management should be individualized to address the anatomical cause of instability and should only be considered if conservative treatment with supervised physiotherapy fails. Using an arthroscopic grasper to apply appropriate capsule traction and tension while performing the plication and using an extra superior anchor contributed to attaining optimal capsular volume reduction.

Clinical Results of Knot-tying Versus Knotless Suture Anchors in Arthroscopic Anteroinferior Labral Repair

Background Arthroscopic repair of glenohumeral instability is becoming an increasingly common procedure. These repairs can be undertaken using knot-tying and knotless suture anchors; there is currently no clear consensus in the literature about what type of repair is most cost-effective and provides superior outcomes. The purpose of this study is to examine postoperative outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic anteroinferior labral repair (AALR) with either knot-tying or knotless anchors. Methods A single institution retrospective observational cohort study of 122 patients undergoing AALR from January 2014 to June 2021 was conducted. Univariate statistics were used to assess differences in demographics, operative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes between repair types; multivariate analysis was used to evaluate risk factors for recurrent instability and reoperation. Results Patients undergoing AALR with knotless anchors had a shorter case duration than those with knot-tying anchors (112.64 vs. 89.86 minutes, p<0.001). There were no significant differences between groups in the size of labral tear, presence of a glenoid bone defect, or Hill-Sachs lesion. After controlling for age, BMI, sex, glenoid bone defect, number of preoperative dislocations, and fixation type, only age (OR=0.896, p=0.010) and female sex (OR=5.341, p=0.008) were independent risk factors for recurrent instability and no factors were independent predictors of reoperation. Conclusion Patients undergoing AALR experienced similar rates of reoperation and recurrent instability regardless of whether a knot-tying or knotless repair was performed. The use of knotless suture anchors may improve cost-effectiveness due to decreased surgical time without diminishing postoperative outcomes.

Clinical Outcomes After Arthroscopic Pancapsular Shift for the Treatment of Multidirectional Glenohumeral Instability at a Mean Follow-up of 9 Years

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic treatment of multidirectional instability (MDI) of the shoulder is being increasingly performed, but there is a paucity of studies with minimum 5-year follow-up.

PURPOSE

To report on survivorship and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after arthroscopic pancapsulorraphy (APC) for MDI with a minimum 5-year follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Institutional review board approval was obtained before initiation of this retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Patients were included if they had a minimum of follow-up 5 years after APC for MDI. PROs included the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Component Summary; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation; shortened version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand; and patient satisfaction. Preoperative, short-term (1-2 years), and final follow-up PROs were compared. Recurrent instability, dislocation, and reoperation were collected, and survivorship analysis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 49 shoulders in 44 patients (15 male, 29 female) treated between October 2005 and November 2015 were included in the study. MDI onset was atraumatic in 27 shoulders and traumatic in 22. Rotator interval closure was performed in 17 patients. Overall, 14 of 49 (29%) patients reported feelings of instability in the shoulder, of whom 5 (10.2%) underwent revision surgery at a mean of 1.5 years. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a survivorship rate of 88% at 5 years and 82% at 8 years, with failure defined as requiring revision surgery or postoperative feelings of instability with ASES score <65. Final outcome analysis was performed on 41 shoulders with a mean follow-up of 9.0 years (range, 5.1-14.6 years). All PROs demonstrated significant improvement from preoperative baseline (P < .05) and remained significantly improved at both short-term and long-term final follow-up. There was no difference in PROs based on \\ atraumatic versus traumatic onset, or patients treated with a rotator interval closure. There was a significant difference in PROs between patients who had continued instability.

CONCLUSION

APC for the treatment of MDI provided reasonable, durable long-term PROs that persisted from short-term follow-up. Although 29% of patients experienced feelings of instability at final follow-up, most of these patients still had high postoperative satisfaction and acceptable PROs.

Arthroscopic Posterior Labral Repair and Capsular Closure via Single Working Portal for Posterior Shoulder Instability

Posterior shoulder instability (PSI) is a relatively less common form of instability that frequently affects young overhead or contact athletes. The etiology of PSI may be traumatic or atraumatic, with establishment of the diagnosis being more difficult in cases of atraumatic instability. Surgical management of PSI has evolved from open techniques to arthroscopic techniques. Posterior stabilization has commonly been performed with 2 posterior working portals with the patient in the lateral decubitus position. The objective of this Technical Note is to describe a technique for posterior labral repair using all-suture anchors with the patient in the beach-chair position via 1 working portal with capsular closure.

Ability to Retension Knotless Suture Anchors: A Biomechanical Analysis of Simulated Bankart Lesions

Background:

Knotless suture anchors are gaining popularity in arthroscopic glenohumeral labral repairs. The ability to retension knotless designs after initial anchor placement has been reported; however, no studies have quantified this claim or investigated the biomechanical consequence of retensioning.

Purpose/Hypothesis:

To determine whether knotless and knotted suture anchors have biomechanical or anatomic differences with regard to labral repairs and to determine whether retensioning of knotless suture anchors affects capsular tension, labral height, and capsular shift. We hypothesized that retensioning of knotless anchors would result in improved capsular tension compared with conventional knotted suture anchors.

Study Design:

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods:

A total of 18 fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders with a mean age of 56 years were dissected to the capsule and disarticulated at the humeral capsular insertion. The scapula was potted and placed in a custom shoulder simulator to tension the capsule via braided sutures localized to the anteroinferior glenohumeral ligament. Specimens were randomized into 3 groups: (1) Knotted (KT), (2) Knotless with end retensioning (KL_end), and (3) Knotless with stepwise retensioning (KL_stepwise). All repairs were completed using all-suture anchors placed at the 5-, 4-, and 3-o’clock positions. KL_stepwise was used to simulate an intraoperative technique. Resultant mean capsular tension under 5 mm of displacement (subfailure loading) was measured for each anchor placement and retensioning step. Labral height and capsular shift were measured using a MicroScribe digitizer.

Results:

The intact, defect, 1-anchor, 2-anchor, and 3-anchor tensions were not significantly different between the KT and KL_end groups. For the latter, retensioning of all knotless anchors increased capsular tension by 2.1 N compared with its 3-anchor state, although this was not statistically significant (P = .081). The KL_stepwise group explored an alternative method to retension the capsule using knotless anchors, with similar final capsular tensions compared with the other groups. All repairs had similar improvements in capsulolabral height and superior capsular shift.

Conclusion:

Knotted and knotless suture anchors provided similar overall restorations in anteroinferior glenohumeral ligament tension. However, knotless devices were capable of small but statistically insignificant improvements in capsular tension with retensioning.

Clinical Relevance:

Retensioning of knotless anchors allows the surgeon to tighten regions of the glenohumeral capsule that remain lax after repair.

Biomechanical Studies for Glenoid Based Labral Repairs With Suture Anchors Do Not Use Consistent Testing Methods: A Critical Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate variability in biomechanical testing protocols for laboratory-based studies using suture anchors for glenohumeral shoulder instability and SLAP lesion repair.

METHODS

A systematic review of Medline, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar using Covidence software was performed for all biomechanical studies investigating labral-based suture anchor repair for shoulder instability and SLAP lesions. Clinical studies, technical notes or surgical technique descriptions, or studies treating glenoid bone loss or capsulorrhaphy were excluded. Risk of bias (ROB) was assessed with the ROBINS-I tool. Study quality was assessed with the Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies. Heterogeneity was assessed with the I² statistic.

RESULTS

A total of 41 studies were included. ROB was serious and critical in 27 studies, moderate in 13, and low in 1; 6 studies had high quality, 21 good quality, 10 moderate quality, 2 low quality, and 2 very low quality. Thirty-one studies used and 22 studies included cyclic loading. Angle of anchor insertion was reported by 33 studies. The force vector for displacement varied. The most common directions were perpendicular to the glenoid (n = 9), and anteroinferior or anterior (n = 8). The most common outcome measures were load to failure (n = 35), failure mode (n = 23), and stiffness (n = 21). Other outcome measures included load at displacement, displacement at failure, tensile load at displacement, translation, energy absorbed, cycles to failure, contact pressure, and elongation.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review demonstrated a clear lack of consistency in those cadaver studies that investigated biomechanical properties after surgical repair with suture anchors for shoulder instability and SLAP lesions. Testing methods between studies varied substantially with no universally applied standard for preloading, load to failure and cyclic loading protocols, insertion angles of suture anchors, or direction of loading. To allow comparability between studies standardization of testing protocols is strongly recommended.

Excellent Functional Outcomes and Low Complication Rates Following Knotless Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review of Clinical and Biomechanical Studies

PURPOSE

To provide a comprehensive review of the current clinical and biomechanical evidence for the use of knotless suture anchors during arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of 5 electronic databases from inception to July 2020 was performed for clinical and biomechanical studies in English evaluating outcomes following arthroscopic Bankart repair using knotless suture anchors. Two independent reviewers assessed articles for inclusion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORs) criteria. Clinical outcomes of interest and key findings from biomechanical studies were summarized.

RESULTS

Ten clinical studies (430 knotless repairs), including 4 cohort studies directly comparing knotless (N = 117) to knot-tying repairs (N = 192), were deemed eligible. Four biomechanical studies were also identified. Heterogeneity and the lack of randomized studies precluded data pooling and quantitative meta-analysis. Rates of redislocation ranged from 2.2% to 14.7% and 1.5% to 23.8% for knot-tying and knotless repair, respectively. Both knot-tying and knotless repair demonstrated excellent postoperative functional outcome, as assessed by visual analog scale, Constant-Murley, Rowe, and QuickDASH scores, with 80% to 94% of patients returning to sports participation. Biomechanical studies showed similar stiffness and load to failure between knot-tying and knotless repairs, with the most common mode of failure being retear at the suture-soft tissue interface.

CONCLUSIONS

Current level II to IV clinical and biomechanical evidence supports knotless arthroscopic Bankart repair as an effective procedure with excellent functional outcomes and low rates of complication and reoperation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of level II to IV studies.

A comparative study on use of two versus three double-loaded suture anchors in arthroscopic Bankart repair

Objectives

This study aims to compare clinical results of repair using two versus three double-loaded suture anchors in arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Patients and methods

Between July 2012 and December 2017, a total of 40 patients (38 males, 2 females; mean age: 31.6±8.1; range: 17 to 47 years) who underwent Bankart arthroscopic surgery and were followed for minimum two years were retrospectively analyzed. Group 1 (n=17) underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair with two double-loaded suture anchors, while Group 2 (n=23) underwent repair with three double-loaded suture anchors. Clinical outcomes of the patients and recurrences were compared.

Results

At the final postoperative follow-up, a significant improvement was observed in the functional outcomes in all patients. No statistically significant difference was found (p>0.05) in the mean clinical scores of the Constant Shoulder Score between Group 1 (94.2±7.8) and Group 2 (95.4±4.1). There was no significant difference in the mean Rowe scores (Group 1: 95.6±4.6 vs. Group 2: 96.3±3.8, respectively) and external rotation loss (at neutral Group 1: 1.9o vs. Group 2: 2.2o, respectively). Three of our patients had recurrent dislocation during a major traumatic event (n=2 in Group 1 and n=1 in Group 2).

Conclusion

Our study results suggest that stability is not correlated with the use of either two versus three double-loaded suture anchors in arthroscopic Bankart repairs.

Anterior Shoulder Instability in the Professional Athlete: Return to Competition, Time to Return, and Career Length

Background:

Anterior shoulder instability is a common condition in professional athletes, yet little is known about the success of surgery. Return to competition (RTC) is a metric indicative of a successful outcome for professional athletes who undergo anterior shoulder stabilization surgery.

Purpose:

To determine the rate of RTC, time to RTC, recurrence rate, and length of career after surgery in professional athletes who had undergone surgical treatment for anterior shoulder instability.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

We evaluated professional athletes who underwent surgical treatment for anterior shoulder instability by a single surgeon between 2007 and 2018. Data from patients’ medical records, a patient data registry, basic search engines, sports websites, and individual team websites were used to determine length of professional play before injury, duration of career after surgery, and RTC level.

Results:

Overall, 23 professional athletes (25 shoulders from 12 contact and 13 noncontact athletes) were identified. The mean age at the time of surgery was 24.3 ± 4.9 years (range, 16-35 years). Primary procedures included arthroscopic Bankart repair (76%; 19/25), open Latarjet (20%; 5/25), and bony Bankart repair (4%; 1/25). Of the 23 athletes, 22 returned to their previous level of competition (96%; 95% CI, 78%-100%). The mean time between surgery and RTC was 4.5 months (range, 3-8 months). There was no difference in time to RTC between contact and noncontact athletes (4.1 vs 4.4 months). There was no difference in RTC rates and time to return for players who received a Bankart repair versus a Latarjet procedure (4.6 vs 4.2 months). A total of 12 participants were still actively engaged in their respective sport at an average of 4.3 years since surgery, while 11 athletes went on to retire at an average of 4.8 years. Duration of play after surgery was 3.8 years for contact athletes and 5.8 years for noncontact athletes (P > .05).

Conclusion:

In this series, professional athletes who underwent surgical shoulder stabilization for the treatment of anterior glenohumeral instability returned to their presurgical levels of competition at a high rate. No differences in RTC rate or time to RTC were observed for contact versus noncontact athletes or for those who received arthroscopic Bankart repair versus open Latarjet. However, contact athletes had shorter careers after surgery than did noncontact athletes.

Differences in Failure Mode Between Simple and Mattress Suture Configuration in Arthroscopic Bankart Repairs: A Cadaveric Study

Background

Traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations disrupt the anteroinferior labrum (Bankart lesion), leading to high rates of instability and functional disability, necessitating stabilization.

Purpose

To investigate modes and locations of repair failure between simple and horizontal mattress suture configurations after arthroscopic Bankart repair using suture anchors in a cadaveric model.

Study Design

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods

A total of 48 fresh-frozen human cadaveric shoulders from 48 specimens underwent creation of Bankart lesions from either the 3:00 to 6:00 o'clock position on the right glenoid or the 6:00 to 9:00 o'clock position on the left glenoid. Shoulder laterality between specimens was alternated and randomized to either simple or mattress suture repair configurations. In each shoulder, anchors were placed on the glenoid at the 3:00, 4:30, and 6:00 o'clock positions on the right or 6:00, 7:30, and 9:00 o'clock positions on the left and were secured via standard arthroscopic knot-tying techniques. Specimens were tested in the supine anterior apprehension position using a servohydraulic testing machine that was loaded to failure, simulating a traumatic anterior dislocation. After dislocation, open inspection of specimens was performed, and failure mode and location were documented. Differences in failure mode and location were compared using nominal multivariate generalized estimating equations.

Results

Simple suture repairs most frequently failed at the labrum, while mattress suture repair failed at the capsule. Regardless of configuration, repairs failed most commonly at the 3:00 o'clock position on the right shoulder and 9:00 o'clock position on the left shoulder. Compared with mattress suture repairs, simple suture repairs failed at a significantly higher rate at the 6:00 o'clock position.

Conclusion

Traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation after arthroscopic Bankart repair in a cadaveric model resulted in simple suture configuration repairs failing most commonly via labral tearing compared with capsular tearing in mattress repairs. Both repair configurations failed predominately at the anterior anchor position, with simple suture repairs failing more commonly at the inferior anchor position.

Clinical Relevance

Horizontal mattress suture configurations create a larger area of repair, decreasing the risk of repair failure at the labrum. The extra time required for mattress suture placement at the inferior anchor position is used effectively, resulting in lower biomechanical failure rates.

Biomechanical Comparison of Knotless All-Suture Anchors and Knotted All-Suture Anchors in Type II SLAP Lesions: A Cadaveric Study

PURPOSE

To compare the biomechanical performance of knotless versus knotted all-suture anchors for the repair of type II SLAP lesions with a simulated peel-back mechanism.

METHODS

Twenty paired cadaveric shoulders were used. A standardized type II SLAP repair was performed using knotless (group A) or knotted (group B) all-suture anchors. The long head of the biceps (LHB) tendon was loaded in a posterior direction to simulate the peel-back mechanism. Cyclic loading was performed followed by load-to-failure testing. Stiffness, load at 1 and 2 mm of displacement, load to repair failure, load to ultimate failure, and failure modes were assessed.

RESULTS

The mean load to repair failure was similar in groups A (179.99 ± 58.42 N) and B (167.83 ± 44.27 N, P = .530). The mean load to ultimate failure was 230 ± 95.93 N in group A and 229.48 ± 78.45 N in group B and did not differ significantly (P = .958). Stiffness (P = .980), as well as load at 1 mm (P = .721) and 2 mm (P = .849) of displacement, did not differ significantly between groups. In 16 of the 20 specimens (7 in group A and 9 in group B), ultimate failure occurred at the proximal LHB tendon. Failed occurred through slippage of the labrum in 1 specimen in each group and through anchor pullout in 2 specimens in group A.

CONCLUSIONS

Knotless and knotted all-suture anchors displayed high initial fixation strength with no significant differences between groups in type II SLAP lesions. Ultimate failure occurred predominantly as tears of the proximal LHB tendon.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

All-suture anchors have a smaller diameter than solid anchors, can be inserted through curved guides, preserve bone stock, and facilitate postoperative imaging. There is a paucity of literature investigating the biomechanical capacities of knotless versus knotted all-suture anchors in type II SLAP repair.

Biomechanical Evaluation of Knotless and Knotted All-Suture Anchor Repair Constructs in 4 Bankart Repair Configurations

PURPOSE

To evaluate the biomechanical performance of Bankart repair using 1.8-mm knotless all-suture anchors in comparison to 1.8-mm knotted all-suture anchors with both simple and horizontal mattress stitch configurations.

METHODS

Thirty fresh-frozen human cadaveric shoulders were dissected to the capsule, leaving the glenoid and humeral capsular insertions intact. A standardized anteroinferior labral tear was created and repaired using 3 anchors. A 2 × 2 factorial design was implemented, with 6 matched pairs randomized between knotless and knotted anchor repairs and 6 matched pairs randomized into simple and horizontal mattress stitch configurations. In addition, 6 unpaired shoulders were used to evaluate the native capsulolabral state. First failure load, ultimate load, and stiffness were assessed. Linear mixed-effects modeling was used to compare endpoints. Digital image correlation was used to evaluate capsular strain throughout testing. Failure modes were reported qualitatively.

RESULTS

The knotless all-suture anchor repair showed similar biomechanical strength to the knotted all-suture anchors for first failure load (coefficient, 142 N; 95% confidence interval [CI], -30 to 314 N; P = .12), ultimate load (coefficient, 11.1 N; 95% CI, -104.9 to 127.2 N; P = .847), and stiffness (coefficient, 3.4 N/mm²; 95% CI, -14.1 to 20.9 N/mm²; P = .697) when stitch configuration was held constant. No statistically significant differences were found on comparison of simple and mattress stitch configurations for first failure load (coefficient, -31 N; 95% CI, -205 to 143 N; P = .720), ultimate load (coefficient, 112 N; 95% CI, -321 to 97 N; P = .291), and stiffness (coefficient, -9.6 N/mm²; 95% CI, -27.3 to 8.1 N/mm²; P = .284) when anchor type was held constant. Specimens with knotless anchors and simple stitch techniques resulted in lower stiffness compared with the native state (P = .030). The knotless-mattress configuration resulted in significantly lower strain than the knotted-mattress (P = .037) and knotless-simple (P = .019) configurations and was the only configuration that did not result in a significant increase in strain compared with the intact specimens (P = .216). Fewer instances of suture slippage (loss of loop security) were observed with knotless anchors versus knotted anchors (11% vs 30%), and less soft-tissue failure was observed with the mattress stitch configuration versus the simple stitch configuration (36% vs 47%).

CONCLUSIONS

Knotless and knotted all-suture anchor repairs with simple and mattress stitch configurations showed similar values of ultimate load, first failure load, and stiffness. However, the horizontal mattress stitch configuration proved to decrease capsular strain more similarly to the native state compared with the simple stitch configuration. Ultimate load and first failure load for all repairs were similar to those of the native state.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Knotless all-suture anchors have a smaller diameter than solid anchors, can be inserted through curved guides, and preserve glenoid bone stock. This study presents knotless, tensionable all-suture anchor repair for labral tears that displays high biomechanical fixation strength, similar to the native capsulolabral state.

Can capsular plication compensate the lack of one suture anchor in an arthroscopic three suture anchor Bankart repair? A comparative study

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the complication rates and clinical results of labral repair with two suture anchors and capsular plication, and labral repair with three suture anchor fixation in artroscopic Bankart surgery.

Methods

Sixty-nine patients (60 males, 9 females; mean age: 28.2 ± 7.8 years (range: 16–50)) who had undergone arthroscopic repair of a labral Bankart lesion were evaluated. Group A underwent an arthroscopic Bankart repair with three knotless suture anchors, while group B underwent a modified arthroscopic Bankart repair with two knotless suture anchors and an additional capsular plication procedure. The mean follow-up was 52.5 months. Constant Shoulder Score (CSS), Rowe Score (RS), modified UCLA Shoulder Score (mUSS) and range of motion (ROM) were used as outcome measures.

Results

In both groups, a significant improvement was detected in functional outcomes at postoperative last follow-up compared to the preoperative period. No statistically significant difference was found (p > 0.05) in clinical scores (CSS; Group A: 89.7, Group B: 80.2) (RS; Group A: 88.2, Group B: 80.2) (mUSS; Group A: 26.3, Group B: 25.7) external rotation loss (At neutral; Group A: 4.5°, Group B: 5.2°. At abduction; Group A: 4.3°, Group B: 5.7°) and recurrence rates (Group A: 13.3%, Group B: 20.8%). Although the difference was not statistically significant, the recurrence rate was higher in group B (20.8%), compared to group A (13.3%), despite the shorter average follow-up time of group B (p = 0.417).

Conclusions

Arthroscopic repair of labral Bankart lesions with both techniques showed good functional outcomes and stability at the latest follow-up. Higher recurrence rate despite the shorter average follow-up of group B suggests that two anchor usage might not be sufficient for Bankart repair in terms of better stability and less recurrence risk.

Level of evidence

Level III, Therapeutic Study.

Failure following arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic anteroinferior instability of the shoulder: is a glenoid labral articular disruption (GLAD) lesion a risk factor for recurrent instability?

BACKGROUND

Recurrent instability is a frequent complication following arthroscopic Bankart repair. The purpose of this study was to investigate risk factors for poor patient-reported clinical outcome scores and failure rates.

METHODS

Patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair at least 2 years earlier were included. Preoperative and postoperative Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation; Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons; and satisfaction scores were collected. The relationship of the following factors with outcomes and failure rates was assessed: (1) previous arthroscopic stabilization, (2) 3 or more dislocations prior to surgery, (3) glenoid labral articular disruption (GLAD) lesion, (4) concurrent superior labral anterior-to-posterior tear repair, and (5) concurrent biceps tenodesis.

RESULTS

The study included 72 patients with a median age of 23 years (range, 14-49 years). Subsequent revision was required in 9 (12.5%); 1 additional patient (1.4%) had recurrent dislocation. Outcome data were available at a median follow-up of 3 years (range, 2-9 years). All scores significantly improved from preoperatively to postoperatively (P <.05); the mean patient satisfaction score was 9, with a median of 10 (range, 1-10). None of the analyzed factors were associated with worse postoperative outcome scores. GLAD lesions were significantly associated with a higher rate of failure (P = .007). No other analyzed factors had a significant association with failure rates (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic anteroinferior shoulder instability had excellent outcomes, even in the context of previous arthroscopic stabilization surgery, 3 or more dislocations prior to surgery, concurrent superior labral anterior-to-posterior tear repair, or concurrent biceps tenodesis. However, GLAD lesions were associated with higher rates of failure, and the presence of a GLAD lesion may herald the presence of changes in the articular version or other as-yet-undetermined factors that could predispose patients to failure.

Anterior Shoulder Stabilization Using a Single Portal Technique With Suture Lasso

Open Bankart repair was the standard technique used in the past, but the request for less invasiveness, always pursued by every surgeon, pushed the development of the arthroscopic procedure. Nowadays the stabilization of the anteroinferior labrum is usually performed with an arthroscopic technique that uses the classic posterior portal and 2 anterior working portals. Because arthroscopy is progressing steadily under every aspect, there is now the chance to use only one working portal with the aid of a suture passer. One less portal not only means less invasiveness but also less postoperative pain and possible shorter operative time. This Technical Note is focalized in the description of a Bankart repair technique with a single working portal and the aid of a suture lasso.

[Diagnostics and treatment concepts for anteroinferior shoulder instability : Current trends]

Shoulder instability arises when static or dynamic stabilizers deviate from the natural equilibrium. The most common form of shoulder instability is in an anteroinferior direction, affects young athletes in contact sports and can lead to permanent impairment of shoulder function and early degeneration of the joint. Conservative as well as operative therapy options have been controversially discussed for years. This article describes the current state of diagnostics, current trends in therapy decisions and relevant therapy options for anterior shoulder instability.

Outcomes After Arthroscopic Pancapsular Capsulorrhaphy With Suture Anchors for the Treatment of Multidirectional Glenohumeral Instability in Athletes

BACKGROUND

Outcomes after arthroscopic pancapsular capsulorrhaphy (APC) with suture anchors for multidirectional instability (MDI) of the shoulder are not widely reported.

PURPOSE

To compare intraoperative findings and midterm outcomes of APC with suture anchors for MDI between female and male athletes and between a classic, atraumatic onset versus clinical onset of MDI after a traumatic event.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Patients who underwent APC with suture anchors for MDI and were at least 2 years out from surgery were included. Data were prospectively collected and retrospectively reviewed and included the onset of MDI, intraoperative pathoanatomic findings, level of sports participation, and patient satisfaction as well as the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), and Short Form-12 Physical Component Summary (SF-12 PCS) scores. Information regarding shoulder instability and return to sport was collected, and Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients (45 shoulders; 25 male, 20 female), consecutively treated between October 2006 and January 2013, were included. The onset of MDI was atraumatic in 22 shoulders and traumatic in 23 shoulders. At surgery, 29 of 45 (64.4%) had labral detachment. Seven shoulders (16.7%) experienced instability episodes postoperatively, and 3 of these underwent revision surgery. The mean follow-up was 3.3 years (range, 2.0-6.6 years). All subjective outcome scores improved significantly from preoperative levels (P < .005). At final follow-up, the mean ASES score was 92.0, and 76.7% (23/30) indicated that they had returned to sports participation equal to or slightly below their preinjury level. Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a survivorship rate of 87% at 3 years. Male patients were 2.3 times more likely to have a traumatic onset of instability (68% vs 30%, respectively; P = .017) and were 2.1 times more likely to have concomitant lesions (84% vs 40%, respectively; P = .004) than female patients. Furthermore, male patients demonstrated a higher mean postoperative ASES score than female patients (97.0 ± 4.7 vs 85.5 ± 16.4, respectively; P = .023). Female patients were 6.9 times more likely to undergo an additional rotator interval closure (RIC) procedure (58% vs 4.7%, respectively; P < .001) and to experience postoperative subluxations (40% vs 22%, respectively; P = .035) than male patients. A traumatic onset of MDI was associated with a higher mean postoperative ASES score (96.4 ± 6.9 vs 87.0 ± 15.7, respectively; P = .048), higher median satisfaction score (10 vs 9, respectively; P = .029), and higher return-to-sport rate (83% vs 44%, respectively; P = .030) than an atraumatic onset.

CONCLUSION

APC with suture anchors can be an effective and safe treatment for patients with MDI. Labral tears were commonly found, even in patients with a classic, atraumatic onset. Male patients and patients with a traumatic onset of MDI had more favorable outcomes. Female patients may be more challenging to treat as they were more likely to undergo an additional RIC procedure and experience postoperative subluxations.

Maximum load to failure and tensile displacement of an all-suture glenoid anchor compared with a screw-in glenoid anchor

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the biomechanical behavior of an all-suture glenoid anchor in comparison with a more conventional screw-in glenoid anchor, with regard to maximum load to failure and tensile displacement.

METHODS

All mechanical testing was performed using an Instron ElectroPuls E1000 mechanical machine, with a 10 N pre-load and displacement rate of 10 mm/min. Force-displacement curves were generated, with calculation of maximum load, maximum displacement, displacement at 50 N and stiffness. Pretesting of handset Y-Knots in bone analog models revealed low force displacement below 60 N of force. Subsequently, three groups of anchors were tested for pull out strength in bovine bone and cadaver glenoid bone: a bioabsorbable screw-in anchor (Bio Mini-Revo, ConMed Linvatec), a handset all-suture anchor (Y-Knot, ConMed Linvatec) and a 60 N pre-tensioned all-suture anchor (Y-Knot). A total of 8 anchors from each group was tested in proximal tibia of bovine bone and human glenoids (age range 50-90).

RESULTS

In bovine bone, the Bio Mini-Revo displayed greater maximum load to failure (206 ± 77 N) than both the handset (140 ± 51 N; P = 0.01) and the pre-tensioned Y-Knot (135 ± 46 N; P = 0.001); no significant difference was seen between the three anchor groups in glenoid bone. Compared to the screw-in anchors, the handset all-suture anchor displayed inferior fixation, early displacement and greater laxity in the bovine bone and cadaveric bone (P < 0.05). Pre-tensioning the all-suture anchor to 60 N eliminated this behavior in all bone models.

CONCLUSIONS

Handset Y-Knots display low force anchor displacement, which is likely due to slippage in the pilot hole. Pre-tensioning the Y-Knot to 60 N eliminates this behavior.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

[Shoulder dislocation in athletes]

BACKGROUND

Shoulder dislocation is a common injury in athletes. Surgical and non-surgical therapy options are still the subject of controversial debate.

STUDY AIM

This article presents important considerations for decision-making and current concepts for the therapy of shoulder dislocation in athletes.

METHODS

A selective literature search was carried out in PubMed.

RESULTS

Surgical and non-surgical therapy options are described in the literature without yet defining a gold standard.

CONCLUSION

Early surgical stabilization is currently recommended in young athletes. For decision-making numerous sport and patient-related factors need to be considered. Most athletes are able to return to the pre-injury level after surgical stabilization.