Arthroscopic shoulder stabilization: is there ever a need to open?

Current Trends and Outcomes for Open vs. Arthroscopic Latarjet

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This paper aims to analyze and compare the existing research on open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures for treating anterior shoulder instability. The review will assess different factors such as graft positioning, functional outcomes, complications, and return-to-play rates for both approaches. The study's primary goal is to establish which technique yields superior outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have suggested that arthroscopic Latarjet surgery can produce outcomes similar to open surgery regarding functional scores and patient satisfaction. Some research indicates that arthroscopy may even provide slightly better results. Both techniques have similar complication rates, but arthroscopy requires a longer learning curve and operating time. It is crucial to ensure the proper placement of the graft, and some studies suggest that arthroscopy may be better at achieving accurate positioning. Both open and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures are equally effective in treating shoulder instability. While arthroscopy offers a faster recovery time and causes less soft tissue damage, it requires surgeons to undergo a steeper learning curve. The optimal graft position for both techniques is still debated. More long-term data is needed to establish superiority. Future research should compare approaches in larger cohorts and identify outcome-affecting factors to improve the treatment of shoulder instability. Both techniques are promising, but arthroscopy may be a better option as the procedure evolves into a less invasive reconstruction.

Arthroscopic Autologous Iliac Bone Grafting With Double-Row Elastic Fixation and Double Antirotating Anchors for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Dislocation With Massive Glenoid Bone Defect

The management of recurrent anterior shoulder dislocations with massive glenoid bone defects typically involves arthroscopic intervention. Autologous iliac bone grafting with double-row elastic fixation reportedly yields excellent outcomes. In this article, we introduce a specialized technique for iliac bone grafting that uses double-row elastic fixation and double antirotating anchors. Implementation of this technique prevents the occurrence of iliac graft rotation.

Outcomes of Arthroscopic Latarjet as a Revision Surgery After Failed Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

BACKGROUND

The role of arthroscopic Latarjet as a revision surgery after failed arthroscopic Bankart repair has yet to be established.

PURPOSE

To compare clinical outcomes, recurrences, and complication rates of arthroscopic Latarjet as a revision procedure after failed arthroscopic Bankart repair versus arthroscopic Latarjet as a primary procedure.

DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study of prospectively collected data of patients who were diagnosed with anterior shoulder instability and underwent arthroscopic Latarjet stabilization between 2009 and 2018. Patients were separated into 2 groups depending on whether Latarjet was performed after a previous instability surgery (revision) or as a primary surgery (primary). Rowe score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), Constant-Murley Shoulder Outcome (CMSO) score, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) were assessed pre- and postoperatively with a minimum 24 months of follow-up. In addition, pre- and postoperative levels of sports activity, dislocations, subluxations, and complications were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 97 patients (n = 62 revision; n = 35 primary), with a mean age of 31.0 ± 8.8 and 29.4 ± 7.6 years old in the revision and primary Latajet group, respectively, met the inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up in the revision group was 32 months (24-53) and 35.5 months (27.7-42.2) in the primary Latarjet group. No significant differences between groups were observed in Rowe score (revision = 91.4, primary = 94.1; P = .223), CMSO score (revision = 90.7, primary = 94; P = .105), and SANE (revision = 85.8, primary = 87.3; P = .683) postoperatively. However, the postoperative difference in the WOSI score between the revision and primary Latarjet groups was nearly significant (510 ± 334 vs 403 ± 343, respectively; P = .05). Four (6.4%) postoperative dislocations were reported in the revision and 1 (2.8%) in the primary Latarjet group (P = .14). Patients in the revision group had a lower return to the previous level of sports participation (P = .008) and decreased external rotation with the arm by the side compared with the primary Latarjet group (P = .000).

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic Latarjet as a revision surgery is a reasonable surgical option in failed Bankart repair cases. The decision to perform arthroscopic Latarjet stabilization as a revision surgery should not be influenced by the potential risk of future complications as it provides comparable clinical outcomes to the primary Latarjet procedure with a low postoperative recurrence rate. However, a decreased level of postoperative sports participation and external rotation with the arm by the side can be expected.

Characterizing the Practices of Canadian Orthopedic Surgeons in the Management of patients With Anterior Glenohumeral Instability

OBJECTIVE

To determine the practice patterns of Canadian orthopedic surgeons in the management of patients with anterior glenohumeral instability (AGHI).

DESIGN

Cross-sectional survey.

SETTING

Canada.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

Canadian orthopedic surgeons with membership in the Canadian Orthopedic Association or Canadian Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon group who had managed at least 1 patient with AGHI in the previous year.

INTERVENTIONS

A survey including demographics and questions on the management of patients with AGHI was completed. Statistical comparisons (χ 2 ) were completed with responses stratified using the instability severity index score (ISIS) in practice, years of practice, and surgical volumes.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Summary statistics were compiled, and response frequencies were considered for consensus (75%). Case series responses were stratified on use of the ISIS in practice, years of experience, and annual procedure volumes (χ 2 , P < 0.05).

RESULTS

Eighty orthopedic surgeons responded, with consensus on areas of diagnostic workup of AGHI, nonoperative management, and operative techniques. There was no consensus on indications for soft tissue and bony augmentation or postoperative management. There was no difference in practices based on the use of ISIS, years in practice, or surgical volumes.

CONCLUSIONS

Canadian orthopedic surgeons manage AGHI consistently with consensus achieved in preoperative diagnostics and operative techniques, although debate remains as to the indications for soft tissue and bony augmentation procedures.

Revision Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Anterior Shoulder Instability After a Failed Arthroscopic Soft-Tissue Repair Yields Comparable Failure Rates to Primary Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The management of recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair remains challenging. Of the various treatment options, arthroscopic revision repairs are of increasing interest due to improved visualization of pathology and advancements in arthroscopic techniques and instrumentation.

PURPOSE

We sought to assess the indications, techniques, outcomes, and complications for patients undergoing revision arthroscopic Bankart repair after a failed index arthroscopic soft-tissue stabilization for anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of studies identified by a search of Medline, Embase, and PubMed. Our search range was from data inception to April 29, 2020. Outcomes include clinical outcomes and rates of complication and revision. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) was used to assess study quality. Data are presented descriptively.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were identified, comprising 279 patients (281 shoulders) with a mean age of 26.1 ± 3.8 years and a mean follow-up of 55.7 ± 24.3 months. Patients had improvements in postoperative outcomes (eg, pain and function). The overall complication rate was 29.5%, the most common being recurrent instability (19.9%).

CONCLUSION

With significant improvements postoperatively and comparable recurrent instability rates, there exists a potential role in the use of revision arthroscopic Bankart repair where the glenoid bone loss is less than 20%. Clinicians should consider patient history and imaging findings to determine whether a more rigorous stabilization procedure is warranted. Large prospective cohorts with long-term follow-up and improved documentation are required to determine more accurate failure rates.

Comparison of Interface Pressure, Contact Surface Area, and Percent Area of Coverage Between Two Suture Configurations for Hill-Sachs Remplissage

Purpose:

To compare maximum contact pressure, contact surface area, and the percent area of coverage of the bone-tendon interface in the remplissage procedure between two different suture configurations (independent mattress versus double-pulley).

Methods:

A sample size of seven specimens per group was defined by a 96% power analysis.

Hill-Sachs lesions were created in all fourteen ex vivo ovine shoulders, corresponding to a 30% defect of the axial diameter of the humeral head (significant lesion according to literature). The defects were repaired using the remplissage technique applying one of the two randomly chosen suture configurations: two independent mattress sutures or a double-pulley. The contact pressure and contact surface area, as well as percent defect coverage, were recorded using a film sensitive to these parameters. Independent nonparametric tests (Mann-Whitney) were used for the statistical analysis.

Results:

The double-pulley group exhibited an average pressure of 0.128 ± 0.018 mPa, the contact surface of 0.199 ± 0.044 cm2, and 41.97 ± 9.8% defect coverage. The independent mattress group showed an average pressure of 0.102 ± 0.01 mPa, the contact surface of 0.081 ± 0.041 cm2, and defect coverage of 15.6 ± 8.1%. All three parameters were statistically superior in the double-pulley group (p=0.038, p=0.008, and p=0.008, respectively)

Conclusion:

The remplissage technique using the double-pulley configuration, presented superior biomechanical characteristics, in terms of contact pressure, contact area, and percent coverage of the defect, compared to the simple independent mattress configuration.

Instability severity index score values below 7 do not predict recurrence after arthroscopic Bankart repair

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of the Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) in predicting an increased recurrence risk after an arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

Retrospective review of a cohort of patients operated in three different centres. The inclusion criteria (recurrent anterior instability [dislocation or subluxation] with or without hyperlaxity, arthroscopic Bankart repair) and the exclusion criteria (concomitant rotator cuff lesion, acute first-time dislocation, surgery after a previous anterior stabilization, surgery for an unstable shoulder without true dislocation or subluxation; multidirectional instability) were those used in the study that defined the ISIS score. The medical records and a telephone interview were used to identify the six variables that define the ISIS and identify recurrences.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-three shoulders met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 140 subjects (22 females/118 males; mean age 35.5 ± 7.9) with 142 (89.0%) shoulders were available for follow-up after 5.3 (1.1) (range 3.1-7.4) years. There were 20 recurrences (14.1%). The mean (SD) preoperative ISIS was 1.8 (1.6) in the patients without recurrence and 1.8 (1.9) in the patients with recurrence (n.s.). In the 117 subjects with ISIS between 0 and 3 the recurrence rate was 12.8%; in the 25 with ISIS 4 to 6 the rate was 20% (n.s.).

CONCLUSION

For subjects with anterior shoulder instability in which an arthroscopic Bankart repair is being considered, the use of the ISIS, when the values obtained are ≤ 6 was not useful to predict an increased recurrence risk in the midterm in this retrospectively evaluated case series. The efficacy of the ISIS score in defining a group of subjects with a preoperative increased risk of recurrence after an arthroscopic Bankart instability repair is limited in lower risk populations (with ISIS scores ≤ 6).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective case series, Level IV.

[Research progress of surgical treatment for anterior shoulder dislocation and combined injuries]

Objective

To summarize the research progress of surgical treatment for anterior shoulder dislocation and combined injuries.

Methods

The related literature was reviewed, and the surgical treatment options for the anterior shoulder dislocation and its combined injuries were summarized.

Results

Anterior shoulder dislocation can combine with anteroinferior capsular ligament complex injury (Bankart injury), bony Bankart defect, and Hill-Sachs lesion. For Bankart and bony Bankart injuries, arthroscopic repair or coracoid osteotomy combined with bony graft reconstruction can be performed. For Hill-Sachs lesion, conservative treatment, soft tissue repair, or bony reconstruction should be selected based on the extent of the bone defect. For bipolar injury, the Bankart repair, Remplissage, or arthroplasty should be selected based on the extent of the glenoid defect.

Conclusion

With the development of arthroscopy and the improvement of the surgical concept, there is a complete set of surgical options for various injuries of the anterior shoulder dislocation. When choosing a surgical procedure, the patient's specific injury and age, exercise level, and other relating factors should be comprehensively assessed in order to achieve the best results.

Using the "Hill-Sachs interval to glenoid track width ratio" for prediction of recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair

INTRODUCTION

The glenoid track concept was used to confirm the engaging Hill-Sachs lesion (HSL) as a risk factor for recurrent instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR). However, the post-operative condition of soft tissue in vivo was not comparable to that designed in the intact condition in vitro in the original study of the glenoid track concept. Herein, the possibility of engagement may be underestimated.

HYPOTHESIS

A threshold of the Hill-Sachs interval to glenoid track width ratio (H/G ratio) that is related to recurrent instability after ABR could be found, in order to adjust the original glenoid track concept.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent ABR with minimum 24-months follow-up were reviewed retrospectively. The primary outcome was evaluated with the recurrent instability. The H/G ratio of individual patients was used to calculate the sensitivity, specificity, and a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve, which aimed to establish a H/G ratio threshold related to recurrent instability after ABR.

RESULTS

From June 2005 to December 2013, 160 patients with a mean age of 27.7years were enrolled. The mean follow-up period was 77.2 months. The ROC curve indicated that H/G ratio≥0.7 had the sensitivity and specificity of 0.74 and 0.71, respectively, in predicting recurrent instability. On univariate logistic regression analysis, the H/G ratio≥0.7 was a significant predictor of higher risk for recurrent instability (p<0.001).

DISCUSSION

H/G ratio seems to be a reliable parameter for predicting recurrent instability. H/G ratio≥0.7 may be considered as a positive predictor for recurrent instability after ABR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV: retrospective diagnostic study.

Posterior shoulder dislocation with associated reverse Hill-Sachs lesion: treatment options and functional outcome after a 5-year follow up

Background

The current study describes several surgical techniques for the treatment of the reverse Hill - Sachs lesion after posterior shoulder dislocation; we also aimed to present long term results followed for a minimum of five years.

Methods

This study is a prospective case series of 17 patients who were treated in our clinic between 2008 and 2011. Patients with a defect size smaller than 25% of the articular surface were treated conservatively. An endoprosthesis of the glenohumeral joint was implanted in patients with a defect size bigger than 40%. All remaining patients were treated by a variety of operative techniques, depending on the quality of the bone and size of the defect.

Results

Twelve of seventeen patients had a defect size of the humeral articular surface between 25% and 40% with a mean age of 39 years. Depending on the defect size these patients were treated with retrograde chondral elevation, antegrade cylindrical graft or a graft of the iliac bone crest with an open approach. All the procedures showed fair results, e.g. the open approach with a graft of the iliac bone crest (2010: Dash 3.89, Constant 90.33, Rowe 86.67; 2015: Dash 2.22, Constant 92.00, Rowe 93.33).

Conclusion

The open approach is not a disadvantage for the functional outcome. The treatment algorithm should involve the superficial size of the defect as well as the depth of the defect and the time interval between the dislocation and the surgical treatment.

Trial registration

223/2012BO2, 02 August 2010.

The Influence of Surgical Stabilization on Glenohumeral Abduction Using 3-Dimensional Computed Tomography in Patients With Shoulder Instability

PURPOSE

This study compared the amount of glenohumeral abduction during arm abduction in the affected and unaffected shoulders of 3 groups of patients with shoulder instability: failed surgical stabilization, successful surgical stabilization, and unstable shoulder with no prior surgical intervention.

METHODS

All patients underwent bilateral shoulder computed tomography scans in 3 positions: 0° of abduction and 0° of external rotation (0-0 position), 30° of abduction and 30° of external rotation (30-30 position), and arms maximally abducted (overhead position). Three-dimensional computed tomography reconstruction was performed for both shoulders in all 3 positions. A specialized coordinate system marked specific points and directions on the humerus and glenoid of each model. These coordinates were used to calculate the glenohumeral abduction for the normal and affected sides in the 0-0, 30-30, and overhead positions.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients with shoulder instability were included, of whom 14 had failed surgical repairs, 10 had successful surgical repairs, and 15 had unstable shoulders with no prior surgical intervention. In the overhead position, patients with failed surgical intervention had significantly less glenohumeral abduction in the failed shoulder (95.6° ± 12.7°) compared with the normal shoulder (101.5° ± 12.4°, P = .02). Patients with successfully stabilized shoulders had significantly less glenohumeral abduction in the successfully stabilized shoulder (93.6° ± 10.8°) compared with the normal shoulder (102.1° ± 12.5°, P = .03). Unstable shoulders with no prior surgical intervention (102.1° ± 10.3°) did not differ when compared with the normal shoulders (101.9° ± 10.9°, P = .95).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical intervention, regardless of its success, limits the amount of abduction at the glenohumeral joint.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Treatment of glenohumeral instability in rugby players

Rugby is a high-impact collision sport, with impact forces. Shoulder injuries are common and result in the longest time off sport for any joint injury in rugby. The most common injuries are to the glenohumeral joint with varying degrees of instability. The degree of instability can guide management. The three main types of instability presentations are: (1) frank dislocation, (2) subluxations and (3) subclinical instability with pain and clicking. Understanding the exact mechanism of injury can guide diagnosis with classical patterns of structural injuries. The standard clinical examination in a large, muscular athlete may be normal, so specific tests and techniques are needed to unearth signs of pathology. Taking these factors into consideration, along with the imaging, allows a treatment strategy. However, patient and sport factors need to be also considered, particularly the time of the season and stage of sporting career. Surgery to repair the structural damage should include all lesions found. In chronic, recurrent dislocations with major structural lesions, reconstruction procedures such as the Latarjet procedure yields better outcomes. Rehabilitation should be safe, goal-driven and athlete-specific. Return to sport is dependent on a number of factors, driven by the healing process, sport requirements and extrinsic pressures. Level of evidence V.

Clinical outcomes following revision anterior shoulder arthroscopic capsulolabral stabilization

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally surgeons have treated failed shoulder instability with open capsulolabral repair. Despite improved instrumentation, technique and familiarity in shoulder arthroscopy, few studies have reported the outcomes of arthroscopic revision shoulder instability repair. The purpose of this study was to assess clinical outcomes in patients following revision shoulder arthroscopic anterior capsulolabral stabilization.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty-two patients (63 shoulders) with failure of primary instability repairs were treated with revision arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization at a mean follow-up of 46.9 ± 16.8 months (range 18-78). Clinical outcomes were evaluated using validated patient-reported outcome questionnaires including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test, visual analog pain scale and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index. In addition, patients were queried for recurrent instability events (subluxation or dislocation) or revision surgery.

RESULTS

At final follow-up, the mean postoperative Western Ontario Shoulder Instability normalized score was 80.1 ± 18.7 (range 15.0-100). There were clinically significant improvements in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, Simple Shoulder Test scores and ten-point visual analog scale for pain (P < 0.001). Recurrent instability occurred in 12 shoulders (19.0 %), with number of prior surgeries and hyperlaxity found to be significant risk factor for failure (P < 0.001 and P = 0.04, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Revision arthroscopic anterior stabilization of the shoulder can result in satisfactory outcomes in appropriately selected patients who have failed previous capsulolabral repair. An increased number of prior surgeries and hyperlaxity are predictive of poor outcome.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series, LOE IV.

Anterior Glenoid Rim Fracture Following Use of Resorbable Devices for Glenohumeral Stabilization

BACKGROUND

Resorbable anchors are widely used in arthroscopic stabilization of the shoulder as a means of soft tissue fixation to bone. Their function is to ensure repair stability until they are replaced by host tissue. Complications include inflammatory soft tissue reactions, cyst formation, screw fragmentation in the joint, osteolytic reactions, and enhanced glenoid rim susceptibility to fracture.

PURPOSE

To evaluate resorption of biodegradable screws and determine whether they induce formation of areas with poor bone strength that may lead to glenoid rim fracture even with minor trauma.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

This study evaluated 12 patients with anterior shoulder instability who had undergone arthroscopic stabilization with the Bankart technique and various resorbable anchors and subsequently experienced redislocation. The maximum interval between arthroscopic stabilization and the new dislocation was 52 months (mean, 22.16 months; range, 12-52 months). The mean patient age was 31.6 years (range, 17-61 years). The persistence or resorption of anchor holes; the number, area, and volume of osteolytic lesions; and glenoid erosion/fracture were assessed using computed tomography scans taken after redislocation occurred.

RESULTS

Complete screw resorption was never documented. Osteolytic lesions were found at all sites (mean diameter, 5.64 mm; mean depth, 8.09 mm; mean area, 0.342 cm(2); mean volume, 0.345 cm(3)), and all exceeded anchor size. Anterior glenoid rim fracture was seen in 9 patients, even without high-energy traumas (75% of all recurrences).

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic stabilization with resorbable devices is a highly reliable procedure that is, however, not devoid of complications. In all 12 patients, none of the different implanted anchors had degraded completely, even in patients with longer follow-up, and all induced formation of osteolytic areas. Such reaction may lead to anterior glenoid rim fracture according to the literature and as found in 75% of the study patients with local osteolysis (9/12). Reducing anchor number and/or size may reduce the risk of osteolytic areas and anterior glenoid rim fracture.

Outcomes of arthroscopic Hill-Sachs remplissage and anterior Bankart repair: a retrospective controlled study including ultrasound evaluation of posterior capsulotenodesis and infraspinatus strength assessment

BACKGROUND

Hill-Sachs lesions are compression fractures that result from shoulder dislocation. They involve "engaging" the humeral head on the anterior glenoid rim when the arm is abducted and externally rotated. The defect grows as the number of dislocations increases.

HYPOTHESIS

Arthroscopic remplissage and anterior Bankart repair do not significantly affect infraspinatus strength while ensuring healing of the capsulotenodesis.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Sixty-one patients with traumatic anterior shoulder instability treated by arthroscopic Bankart repair and Hill-Sachs remplissage at least 24 months previously were compared with a control group of 40 healthy participants. Preoperative imaging included magnetic resonance imaging for Bankart lesion identification and computed tomography to quantify the humeral head defect. Active range of motion and clinical scores (Walch-Duplay, Constant-Murley, and Rowe) were assessed. External rotation (ER) and internal rotation (IR) were measured with arm at the side (ER1 and IR1) and abducted at 90° (ER2 and IR2). Infraspinatus strength was assessed with the scapula free (infraspinatus strength test [IST]) and retracted (infraspinatus scapula retraction test [ISRT]). Infraspinatus tenodesis and posterior capsulodesis healing were evaluated by ultrasound (US).

RESULTS

The follow-up median was 39.5 months (range, 24-56 months). One patient experienced a recurrence of instability at 34 months. In the remplissage patients, ER1 was significantly lower in the affected compared with the unaffected shoulder (P < .001). Mean IST and ISRT strength values did not show differences between sides. The mean Constant-Murley score rose from 62.9 ± 7.1 to 90 ± 5.2 (P < .0001). The Walch-Duplay and Rowe scores were excellent in 23 (78.6%), good in 6 (17.8%), and poor in 1 patient (both scores). The remplissage group had significantly lower ER1 (P < .001), ER2 (P < .001), and IR2 (P < .01) values compared with the control group. Differences in IST and ISRT between the groups were not significant. Capsulotenodesis healing and filling of the Hill-Sachs defect were confirmed by dynamic US in all subjects.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic remplissage is a reliable approach to Hill-Sachs lesions. The ER and IR restriction does not significantly affect quality of life. Infraspinatus strength recovery is satisfactory even compared with healthy subjects. Ultrasound examination allows accurate evaluation of capsulotenodesis healing.

Identification and treatment of existing copathology in anterior shoulder instability repair

Recurrent anterior instability is a common finding after traumatic glenohumeral dislocation in the young, athletic patient population. A variety of concomitant pathologies may be present in addition to the classic Bankart lesion, including glenoid bone loss; humeral head bone loss; rotator interval pathology; complex/large capsular injuries including humeral avulsions of the glenohumeral ligaments (HAGL lesions), SLAP tears, near circumferential labral tears, and anterior labral periosteal sleeve avulsions (ALPSA lesions); and rotator cuff tears. Normal anatomic variations masquerading as pathology also may be present. Recognition and treatment of these associated pathologies are necessary to improve function and symptoms of pain and to confer anterior shoulder stability. This review will focus on the history, physical examination findings, imaging findings, and recommended treatment options for common sources of copathology in anterior shoulder instability repair.

Biomechanical evaluation of knotless anterior and posterior Bankart repairs

PURPOSE

The value of modern tape-like suture materials and the influence of the number of anchors inserted for arthroscopic Bankart repairs compared to the intact state have yet to be investigated. It was hypothesised: (1) suture-tape repairs will show higher biomechanical strength than common suture repairs, (2) four anchors will be stronger than three, and (3) the strength of the native capsulolabral complex will be greater than repairs.

METHODS

Six matched-paired cadaveric shoulders received Bankart lesions/reconstructions and three underwent intact state testing. Anteroinferior repairs compared suture and suture-tape repairs using three anchors, while posteroinferior repairs compared three and four suture anchors using common sutures. An established testing protocol was run for biomechanical testing.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the maximum loads, loads at 2 mm displacement, stiffness or energy between repair groups or between repairs and the intact state (n.s.). However, failure modes were different: 16/24 (66.7%) of the repair groups showed glenoid labrum detachment compared to 2/12 (16.7%) within the intact state group (P = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

While biomechanical parameters of repairs and intact states showed equivalence, failure-mode analysis reaffirms previous findings that capsulolabrum complex refixation is weaker than the native attachment. Therefore, in daily clinical practice, type of suture is secondary and insertion of a fourth anchor will be unlikely to add strength but may confer additional risk and cost.

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.

Complications of shoulder arthroscopy

Over the past 20 to 30 years, arthroscopic shoulder techniques have become increasingly popular. Although these techniques have several advantages over open surgery, surgical complications are no less prevalent or devastating than those associated with open techniques. Some of the complications associated with arthroscopic shoulder surgery include recurrent instability, soft-tissue injury, and neurapraxia. These complications can be minimized with thoughtful consideration of the surgical indications, careful patient selection and positioning, and a thorough knowledge of the shoulder anatomy. Deep infection following arthroscopic shoulder surgery is rare; however, the shoulder is particularly susceptible to Propionibacterium acnes infection, which is mildly virulent and has a benign presentation. The surgeon must maintain a high index of suspicion for this infection. Thromboemoblic complications associated with arthroscopic shoulder techniques are also rare, and studies have shown that pharmacologic prophylaxis has minimal efficacy in preventing these complications. Because high-quality studies on the subject are lacking, minimal evidence is available to suggest strategies for prevention.

Humeral head reconstruction for Hill-Sachs defects: a biomechanical comparison of 2 fixation techniques for bone grafting

PURPOSE

The purpose of this biomechanical study was to compare anterograde with retrograde screw fixation for allograft reconstruction of Hill-Sachs defects.

METHODS

In 8 pairs of fresh-frozen humeral heads, a 40% Hill-Sachs defect was created. The resultant wedge-shaped osteochondral fragment was used as allograft. For each technique, two 3.75-mm screws were used for fixation. To test the strength of fixation, a custom tool was used that would apply load to the graft. By use of a materials testing machine, a staircase cyclic loading protocol was performed (500 cycles at 10, 20, 30, and 40 N) and then load to failure. Graft displacement was measured by an optical tracking system.

RESULTS

For the 2 techniques, graft displacement increased with increasing load and increasing number of cycles up to a mean of 0.9 ± 0.42 mm for anterograde fixation and 1.1 ± 0.79 mm for retrograde fixation. This increase was significant within each technique across all 4 loading levels (P < .05). However, there were no significant differences in graft displacement between the 2 techniques at any loading level or number of cycles (P = .16 to P = .96). In addition, the load to failure between the anterograde and retrograde techniques (98.5 N and 95.6 N, respectively) was not significantly different (P = .706).

CONCLUSIONS

The initial fixation and failure strength of anterograde and retrograde graft fixation techniques for substantial Hill-Sachs defects do not significantly differ in a biomechanical cadaveric model.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This biomechanical study supports that in an engaging Hill-Sachs defect, both anterograde and retrograde screw fixation techniques can be used for fixation of humeral head allografts.

Sonography as a tool for identifying engaging Hill-Sachs lesions: preliminary experience

Engaging Hill-Sachs lesions can be a factor predictive of recurrent anterior shoulder instability, yet no method has been recognized as an effective means to predict engagement. We evaluated the ability of sonography to identify engaging Hill-Sachs lesions by using a transaxillary approach and dynamic scanning. In patients with engaging lesions, there was an abrupt change in the contour of the humeral head when the shoulder was in 90° of abduction and 90° of external rotation. Sonography therefore has the potential to be a useful preoperative tool in determining which patients may benefit from a surgical repair that also addresses Hill-Sachs lesions.

Revision arthroscopic Bankart repair

PURPOSE

Failed anterior shoulder stabilization procedures have traditionally been treated with open procedures. Recent advances in arthroscopic techniques have allowed for certain failed stabilization procedures to be treated by arthroscopic surgery. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the outcomes of revision arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, and CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature) for articles on revision arthroscopic Bankart repairs. Key words included shoulder dislocation, anterior shoulder instability, revision surgery, and arthroscopic Bankart repair. Two reviewers selected studies for inclusion, assessed methodologic quality, and extracted data.

RESULTS

We included 16 studies comprising 349 patients. All studies were retrospective (1 Level II study and 15 Level IV studies). The mean incidence of recurrent instability after revision arthroscopic Bankart repair was 12.7%, and the mean follow-up period was 35.4 months. The most common cause for failure of the primary surgeries was a traumatic injury (62.1%), and 85.1% of patients returned to playing sports. The reasons for failure of revision cases included glenohumeral bone loss, hyperlaxity, and return to contact sports.

CONCLUSIONS

With proper patient selection, the outcomes of revision arthroscopic Bankart repair appear similar to those of revision open Bankart repair. Prospective, randomized clinical trials are required to confirm these findings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Management of the athlete with a failed shoulder instability procedure

The athlete with a failed instability procedure requires a thoughtful and systematic approach to achieve a good outcome. Goals of treatment should be defined and realistic expectations should be set. Revision stabilization has a high rate of recurrent instability, low rates of return to play, and low clinical outcome scores. Fundamental to successful revision surgery is choosing the correct procedure. The decision is straightforward in athletes with clear factors that predict recurrence (significant glenoid bone loss, engaging Hill-Sachs lesions) because only a bony procedure can restore the articular arc of the glenoid. Arthroscopic revision Bankart repair may be appropriate in those athletes who have an obvious Bankart tear and no bone loss after a traumatic reinjury. The challenge for the shoulder surgeon is identifying the best surgery for the athlete who does not have such clear-cut indications. Each factor that has the potential to lead to a poor outcome needs to be collected and calculated. Patient factors (age, laxity, type and level of sport), injury factors (mechanism of injury, capsulolabral injury, glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs lesion), and technical factors (previous surgery performed, integrity of repair, scarring) must be integrated into the treatment algorithm. Based on this collection of factors, the shoulder surgeon should be prepared to provide the athlete with the surgery that provides the best chance to return to playing sports and the lowest risk of recurrent instability.

Arthroscopic glenoid labral repair with an oblique mattress configuration

There have been several arthroscopic techniques described in the literature regarding the passage of sutures for an arthroscopic glenoid labral repair. With simple suture passage when tying knots, there is a concern of internal knot impingement, especially in the posterosuperior labrum. On the other hand, with simple suture passage with knotless technology, there is a concern of leaving the anchor hole exposed in the glenohumeral joint space, especially with anchors that are degradable over time. Whereas a horizontal mattress configuration may address these 2 issues in most cases, there is the issue of tissue cut-through with the labral tissue fibers being in the same plane as the horizontal mattress sutures. The purpose of this report is to describe the oblique mattress configuration, which allows the passage of suture through multiple labral tissue planes, covers up the anchor holes with labral tissue, and maintains the knots away from the articular surface if knots are tied.

Comparison of arthroscopic osteochondral substitute grafting and remplissage for engaging Hill-Sachs lesions

The optimum management for recurrent glenohumeral instability with significant humeral head defects remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes and recurrence rates between patients who underwent osteochondral substitute grafting and patients who underwent remplissage to treat recurrent shoulder instability from an engaging Hill-Sachs defect with a Bankart lesion. Twenty consecutive patients who underwent remplissage and 19 consecutive patients who underwent osteochondral substitute grafting with Bankart repair were studied. Mean follow-up was 29.6 months for the remplissage group and 32.1 months for the osteochondral substitute grafting group. All patients had an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion, and indications for surgery were identical between groups. Three postoperative recurrences occurred in the remplissage group and 6 occurred in the osteochondral substitute grafting group (P=.18). Nineteen patients in the remplissage group and 7 patients in the osteochondral substitute grafting group had a large humeral head defect. Patients in the remplissage group had better Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index [WOSI] scores than those in the osteochondral substitute grafting group for large lesions (74.7 vs 50.4, respectively), although they were not statistically significant (P=.077). After controlling for age, sex, lesion size, and follow-up differences, the remplissage group reported significantly better WOSI scores (P=.016). This study demonstrated a potential advantage of remplissage compared with osteochondral synthetic grafting in patients who experienced recurrent anterior shoulder instability, particularly in shoulders with a large humeral head defect.

RESULTS FROM FILLING "REMPLISSAGE" ARTHROSCOPIC TECHNIQUE FOR RECURRENT ANTERIOR SHOULDER DISLOCATION

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the clinical result from the filling ("remplissage") technique in association with Bankart lesion repair for treating recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation.

METHODS

Nine patients (10 shoulders), with a mean follow-up of 13.7 months, presented traumatic recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation. All of them had a Bankart lesion, associated with a Hill-Sachs lesion showing the "engaging" sign. The Hill-Sachs lesion defect was measured and showed an average bone loss of 17.3% (7.7% to 26.7%) in relation to the diameter of the humeral head. All the cases underwent arthroscopic repair of the Bankart lesion, together with filling of the Hill-Sachs lesion by means of tenodesis of the infraspinatus.

RESULTS

The Rowe score ranged from 22.5 (10 to 45) before the operation to 80.5 (5 to 100) after the operation (p > 0.001). The UCLA score ranged from 18.0 (8 to 29) to 31.1 (21 to 31) (p > 0.001). The measurements of external and internal rotation at abduction of 90° after the operation were 63.5° (45° to 90°) and 73° (50° to 92°) respectively. Two patients presented recurrence (one with dislocation and the other with subluxation). None of the patients presented pain in the region of the infraspinatus tendon after the operation.

CONCLUSION

Over the short term, the filling ("remplissage") arthroscopic technique produced improvements in functional scores and a low complication rate when used for treating glenohumeral instability associated with Hill-Sachs lesions.

Arthroscopic remplissage with Bankart repair for the treatment of glenohumeral instability with Hill-Sachs defects

PURPOSE

To determine whether arthroscopic remplissage with Bankart repair is an effective treatment strategy for patients with Bankart lesions and large Hill-Sachs defects.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2008, 20 patients underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage for the treatment of recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability and large Hill-Sachs defects. Preoperative imaging in all patients identified avulsion of the anterior inferior glenohumeral ligament with an associated Hill-Sachs defect that involved greater than 25% of the humeral head. Patients were followed up postoperatively with the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and the Penn Shoulder Score. Recurrent subluxation or dislocation was documented.

RESULTS

There were 15 male patients and 5 female patients. The mean age of the patients was 27.3 years. The mean length of follow-up in this series was 29.2 months (range, 24.3 to 37.7 months). At final follow-up, 3 patients reported recurrence of instability, which spontaneously reduced in all cases. The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 92.5 (pain, 47.3; function, 45.3). The mean Penn score was 90 of 100 (pain, 27.3 of 30; satisfaction, 8.5 of 10; function, 54.3 of 60). The mean total Western Ontario Shoulder Instability score was 72.74% (mean physical symptom score, 77.10%; mean sports and recreation score, 70.25%; mean lifestyle score, 75%; mean emotions score, 58.50%).

CONCLUSIONS

Using an all-arthroscopic remplissage technique with Bankart repair, we were able to restore function, diminish pain, and yield satisfaction in 85% of the patients in this study. Our results compare favorably with historic controls with similar pathology at early- to intermediate-term follow-up in terms of recurrence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Thermal shrinkage for shoulder instability

Thermal capsular shrinkage was popular for the treatment of shoulder instability, despite a paucity of outcomes data in the literature defining the indications for this procedure or supporting its long-term efficacy. The purpose of this study was to perform a clinical evaluation of radiofrequency thermal capsular shrinkage for the treatment of shoulder instability, with a minimum 2-year follow-up. From 1999 to 2001, 101 consecutive patients with mild to moderate shoulder instability underwent shoulder stabilization surgery with thermal capsular shrinkage using a monopolar radiofrequency device. Follow-up included a subjective outcome questionnaire, discussion of pain, instability, and activity level. Mean follow-up was 3.3 years (range 2.0-4.7 years). The thermal capsular shrinkage procedure failed due to instability and/or pain in 31% of shoulders at a mean time of 39 months. In patients with unidirectional anterior instability and those with concomitant labral repair, the procedure proved effective. Patients with multidirectional instability had moderate success. In contrast, four of five patients with isolated posterior instability failed. Thermal capsular shrinkage has been advocated for the treatment of shoulder instability, particularly mild to moderate capsular laxity. The ease of the procedure makes it attractive. However, our retrospective review revealed an overall failure rate of 31% in 80 patients with 2-year minimum follow-up. This mid- to long-term cohort study adds to the literature lacking support for thermal capsulorrhaphy in general, particularly posterior instability.

ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s11420-010-9187-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Failure of operative treatment for glenohumeral instability: etiology and management

Failure of primary shoulder stabilization procedures is often related to uncorrected anatomic pathology. Orthopaedic surgeons must recognize excessive capsular laxity or large glenohumeral bone defects preoperatively to avoid recurrence of instability. When history, physical examination, and radiographic evaluation are used in conjunction, patients at risk for failure can be identified. The instability severity index score permits precise identification of patients at risk. When treating patients in whom prior surgical intervention has failed, the success of revision procedures correlates to the surgeon's ability to identify the essential pathology and use lesion-specific treatment strategies. Revision procedures remain technically demanding. Keen preoperative and intraoperative judgment is required to avoid additional recurrence of instability after revision procedures, particularly because results deteriorate with each successive operation. Glenoid or humeral defects with greater than 25% bone loss compromise stability provided through the mechanism of concavity compression. These defects must be specifically addressed to avoid recurrence of instability. We prefer anatomic reconstruction techniques combined with capsulolabral repair and, if bone defects are present, anatomic reconstruction with osteochondral allograft.

Subjective and objective outcome after revision arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent anterior instability versus initial shoulder stabilization

BACKGROUND

The value of arthroscopic revision shoulder stabilization after failed instability repair is still a matter of debate.

HYPOTHESIS

Arthroscopic revision shoulder stabilization using suture anchors provides equivalent subjective and objective results compared with initial arthroscopic instability repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

Twenty consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic revision shoulder stabilization using suture anchors (group 2) were matched for age, gender, and handedness (dominant or nondominant) with 20 patients who had initial arthroscopic instability repair using the same technique (group 1). At the time of follow-up, a complete physical examination of both shoulders and evaluation with the Rowe score, Walch-Duplay score, Melbourne Instability Shoulder Score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, and the Subjective Shoulder Value were performed. In addition, standard radiographs (true AP and axillary views) were taken to evaluate signs of osteoarthritis.

RESULTS

After a minimum follow-up of 24 months, no recurrent dislocations were observed in either group. The apprehension sign was positive in 2 cases of revision surgery (0 vs 2; P > .05). No significant differences in the Rowe score (89 vs 81.8 points) were found between groups 1 and 2 (P > .05). However, group 2 revealed significantly lower scores in the Walch-Duplay score (85.3 vs 75.5 points), Melbourne Instability Shoulder Score (90.2 vs 73.7 points), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (89.8% vs 68.9%), and Subjective Shoulder Value (91.8% vs 69.2%) (P < .05). Signs of instability arthropathy were found more often in patients with arthroscopic revision surgery (2 vs 5; P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic revision shoulder stabilization is associated with a lower subjective outcome compared with initial arthroscopic stabilization. The objective results found in this study may overestimate the clinical outcome in this patient population.

A biomechanical analysis of anterior Bankart repair using suture anchors

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic repair of anterior Bankart lesions is typically done with single-loaded suture anchors tied with simple stitch configuration.

HYPOTHESIS

The knotless suture anchor will have similar biomechanical properties compared with two types of conventional suture anchors.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Fresh-frozen shoulders were dissected and an anteroinferior Bankart lesion was created. For phase 1, specimens were randomized into either simple stitch (SSA) or knotless suture anchors (KSA) and loaded to failure. For phase 2, specimens were randomized into 1 of 4 repair techniques and cyclically loaded then loaded to failure: (1) SSA, (2) suture anchor with horizontal mattress configuration, (3) double-loaded suture anchor with simple stitch configuration, or (4) KSA. Data recorded included mode of failure, ultimate load to failure, load at 2 mm of displacement, as well as displacement during cyclical loading.

RESULTS

For phase 1, the load required to 2 mm displacement of the repair construct was significantly greater in SSA (66.5 +/- 21.7 N) than KSA (35.0 +/- 12.5 N, P = .02). For phase 2, there was a statistically significant difference in ultimate load to failure among the 4groups, with both the single-loaded suture anchor with simple stitch (184.0 +/- 64.5 N), horizontal mattress stitch (189.0 +/- 65.3N), and double-loaded suture anchor with simple stitch (216.7 +/- 61.7 N) groups having significantly (P < .05) higher loads than the knotless group (103.9 +/- 52.8 N). There was no statistically significant difference (P > .05) among the 4 groups in displacement after cyclical loading or load at 2 mm of displacement.

CONCLUSION

Both knotless and simple anchor configurations demonstrated similar single loads to failure (without cycling); however, the knotless device required less single load to displace 2 mm. All repair stitches, including simple, horizontal, and double-loaded performed similarly.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The findings may suggest that with cyclical loading up to 25 N there is no difference in gapping greater than 2mm, but a macrotraumatic event may demonstrate a difference in fixation during the initial postoperative period. Additional in vivo studies are needed to determine whether these differences affect the integrity of the repair construct and, ultimately, the clinical outcome.

A biomechanical analysis of shoulder stabilization: posteroinferior glenohumeral capsular plication

BACKGROUND

The use of posterior capsular plication to decrease capsular volume and address capsular laxity for treatment of posterior instability, multidirectional instability, or as an additional technique in the treatment of anterior instability is common. Multiple different suturing techniques have been described.

HYPOTHESIS

The simple stitch will have inferior biomechanical properties compared with either the horizontal mattress or figure-of-8 stitches for suture plication of the posteroinferior quadrant of the glenoid.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

Twenty-one fresh-frozen shoulders with a mean age of 57.7 +/- 12.3 years were randomized into capsulolabral plication of the posteroinferior quadrant using either simple stitch configuration, horizontal mattress configuration, or figure-of-8 configuration. Each shoulder was mounted onto a materials testing machine, preloaded to 5 N for 2 minutes, cycled from 5 to 25 N for 100 cycles (1 Hz), and then loaded to failure at 15 mm/min. Capsular displacement from the glenoid was determined using digital video analysis. Data recorded included mode of failure, ultimate load to failure, load at 2 mm of displacement, as well as displacement during cyclical loading (during the entire 100 cycles and during the final cycle only).

RESULTS

There was a statistically significant difference (P < .0001) in mechanism of failure among the 3 groups with the simple stitch group failing more often in the capsular tissue than in the mattress and figure-of-8 sutures, which more commonly failed at the capsulolabral junction. There was no statistically significant difference (P > .05) among the 3 groups in gapping (displacement) after cyclical loading, load at 2 mm of displacement, or in ultimate load to failure. Conclusion/

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Based on these results, all 3 stitches can be used effectively for capsular plication, although the simple stitch may be preferred for the capsular plication because of technical ease and decreased trauma to the capsulolabral tissue.

Effect of humeral head defect size on glenohumeral stability: a cadaveric study of simulated Hill-Sachs defects

BACKGROUND

Hill-Sachs lesions are often present with recurrent shoulder instability and may be a cause of failed Bankart repair.

HYPOTHESIS

Glenohumeral joint stability decreases with increasingly larger humeral head defects.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive laboratory study.

METHODS

Humeral head defects, 1/8, 3/8, 5/8, and 7/8 of the humeral head radius, were created in 8 human cadaveric shoulders, simulating Hill-Sachs defects. Testing positions included 45 degrees and 90 degrees of abduction and 40 degrees of internal rotation, neutral, and 40 degrees of external rotation. Testing occurred at each defect size sequentially from smallest to largest for all abduction and rotation combinations. The humeral head was translated at 0.5 mm/s 45 degrees anteroinferiorly to the horizontal glenoid axis until dislocation. Distance to dislocation, defined as humeral head translation until it began to subluxate, was the primary outcome measure.

RESULTS

Significant factors by ANOVA were rotation (P < .001) and defect size (P < .001). There was no difference for the 2 abduction angles. External rotation of 40 degrees significantly reduced distance to dislocation compared with neutral and 40 degrees internal rotation (P < .001). Osteotomies of 5/8 and 7/8 radius significantly decreased distance to dislocation over the intact state (P = .009 and P <.001, respectively). Post hoc analysis determined significant differences for the rotational positions. Decreased distance to dislocation occurred at 5/8 radius osteotomy at 40 degrees external rotation with 90 degrees of abduction (P = .008). For the 7/8 radius osteotomy at 90 degrees abduction, there was a decreased distance to dislocation for neutral and 40 degrees external rotation (P < .001); at 45 degrees abduction, there was a decreased distance to dislocation at 40 degrees external rotation (P <.001). With the humerus internally rotated, there was no significant change in distance to dislocation.

CONCLUSION

Glenohumeral stability decreases at a 5/8 radius defect in external rotation and abduction. At 7/8 radius, there was a further decrease in stability at neutral and external rotation.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Defects of 5/8 the humeral head radius may require treatment to decrease the failure rate of shoulder instability repair.

Arthroscopic repair of L-shaped tear of the anterior band of the inferior glenohumeral ligament complex in a pediatric patient: a technical note

The present study reports on a case of a 10-year-old patient with recurrent right shoulder instability after a traumatic event leading to a mid-substance tear of the anterior band of the inferior glenohumeral ligament complex in an L-shaped pattern. Arthroscopic repair consisting of a 2.4 mm bioabsorbable suture anchor at the apex and a four PDS sutures placed through the capsulolabral junction leads to an anatomic repair with excellent short-term results similar to those found in other studies. The injury pattern is thought to be about 1% of shoulder dislocations, but tear pattern recognition is critical for a successful repair and clinical result.

[Unstable shoulder dislocation]

Shoulder dislocations are a frequent event and the severity is often underestimated. A thorough clinical investigation and adapted imaging diagnostics are able to detect age-dependent injury patterns. A biphasic conservative treatment keeping the arm in a neutral to mild external rotation for 3 weeks has proven to be most effective and should be followed by an intensive physiotherapy. Nevertheless, conservative treatment protocols show unacceptable recurrence rates particularly in young men active in sport, therefore, surgical stabilisation is recommended. In the past open procedures were accepted as the gold standard, but today arthroscopic Bankart repair using suture anchors shows comparable recurrence rates. However, the clinical outcome with respect to the shoulder function is much better without compromising the subscapularis muscle.

Bony instability of the shoulder

Instability of the shoulder is a common problem treated by many orthopaedists. Instability can result from baseline intrinsic ligamentous laxity or a traumatic event-often a dislocation that injures the stabilizing structures of the glenohumeral joint. Many cases involve soft-tissue injury only and can be treated successfully with repair of the labrum and ligamentous tissues. Both open and arthroscopic approaches have been well described, with recent studies of arthroscopic soft-tissue techniques reporting results equal to those of the more traditional open techniques. Over the last decade, attention has focused on the concept of instability of the shoulder mediated by bony pathology such as a large bony Bankart lesion or an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion. Recent literature has identified unrecognized large bony lesions as a primary cause of failure of arthroscopic reconstruction for instability, a major cause of recurrent instability, and a difficult diagnosis to make. Thus, although such bony lesions may be relatively rare compared with soft-tissue pathology, they constitute a critically important entity in the management of shoulder instability. Smaller bony lesions may be amenable to arthroscopic treatment, but larger lesions often require open surgery to prevent recurrent instability. This article reviews recent developments in the diagnosis and treatment of bony instability.

Hill-sachs "remplissage": an arthroscopic solution for the engaging hill-sachs lesion

We present an arthroscopic technique used to treat traumatic shoulder instability in patients with glenoid bone loss and a large Hill-Sachs lesion. The procedure consists of an arthroscopic capsulotenodesis of the posterior capsule and infraspinatus tendon to fill the Hill-Sachs lesion. With the patient in the lateral decubitus position, a posterior portal is established at the lateral aspect of the convexity of the humeral head that is centered over the lesion. After anterior-inferior and anterior-superior portals have been established, the camera is placed in the anterior-superior portal. The Hill-Sachs lesion is freshened with a bur through the posterior portal. A cannula is inserted in the posterior portal through the deltoid but not through the infraspinatus or capsule, and an anchor is placed in the inferior aspect of the humeral lesion. A penetrating grasper is passed through the tendon and posterior capsule, 1 cm inferior to the initial portal entry site to pull 1 suture limb. A second anchor is placed superiorly, and 1 suture limb is similarly passed. The inferior suture is tied first with the knots remaining extra-articular, pulling the infraspinatus and capsule into the lesion. After completion, the Bankart lesion can then be repaired.