Identification and treatment of existing copathology in anterior shoulder instability repair

What keeps a shoulder stable - Is there an ideal method for anterior stabilisation?

The gleno-humeral joint is by far the most mobile in the human body but also afflicted by dislocations, predominantly anterior. Surgical stabilisation is often successful but failures not uncommon. The following review describes potential causes of failure and highlights the need of adapting surgical methods to pathomorphology.

Posterior Compression Test: a Provocative Test for Detecting Posterior Labral Tears

Purpose

The purpose is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of a provocative test coined as the 'posterior compression test' (PCT) in those with the suspected posterior labral tear or lesion.

Methods

A total of 515 'arthroscopic labral repairs' were identified between April 2013 and September 2020. Excluding those with concomitant shoulder pathologies, and only including those with pre-operative documentation of the PCT and/or the Jerk test, 191 patients were included. For the purposes of the analyses, the patients were divided into 'non-posterior' labral tear group which included the anterior labral tears and/or the superior labral anterior-to-posterior (SLAP) tears, versus 'any posterior' labral tear group which included the isolated posterior labral tears, the SLAP tears with posterior extension and the pan-labral tears.

Results

When the PCT was performed for the isolated posterior labral tears, the sensitivity was 92.6% with the specificity of 86.5%. The positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 71.4-97%, respectively. The Jerk test's sensitivity was 77.8% but when the two tests were combined, the sensitivity increased up to 96.3%. The combined sensitivity with the Jerk test was still up to 94.6% with the AUC (area under curve) /ROC (receiver operator characteristic) at 0.855. Low 'false-positive' rate with the PCT was observed when the test was performed for the 'non-posterior' labral group, with the sensitivity of 13.5%.

Conclusions

The posterior compression test correlated well with the arthroscopic diagnoses in a subset of patients with suspected posterior labral pathology, possibly by means of direct stimulation.

Level of Evidence

III; Diagnostic Study.

Surgical Outcomes and Associated Injuries of Anterior Labroligamentous Periosteal Sleeve Avulsion (ALPSA) Lesions: A Systematic Review

Introduction

Anterior Labroligamentous Periosteal Sleeve Avulsion (ALPSA) lesions can lead to chronic shoulder instability and repetitive dislocations in active populations.

Objective

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate associated injuries and postoperative outcomes following ALPSA lesion repairs.

Methods

Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science were searched through May 2022 for studies that investigated management and surgical outcomes of ALPSA lesion repair. Data was extracted on the following topics: surgical management, surgical complications, associated injuries, follow-up duration, and outcome parameters, including recurrence rates, functional outcome scores, range-of-motion (ROM), and return to activity.

Results

A total of 6 studies covering 202 patients met the inclusion criteria. In the included studies, 79% of patient were male with a mean age of 25.1 years. A total of 192 associated injuries were reported amongst 176 patients with the most common being Hill Sachs lesions (84, 43.8%), synovitis (35, 18.2%), SLAP tears (32, 16.7%) and glenoid erosions or lesions (30, 15.6%). All 202 patients were treated arthroscopically with no reported complications. 26 patients (12.9%) experienced operative failure as evidenced by recurrence of shoulder instability over a mean follow-up of 4.3 years. Various clinical outcome scores showed postoperative functional improvement and one study reported a 100% return to activity rate in 26 patients.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest a high 12.9 % risk of recurrence following ALPSA repair but satisfactory functional outcomes, both of which should be weighed by physicians when considering arthroscopic repair. Physicians should also be cognizant of co-pathologies when examining patients with suspected ALPSA lesions.

Arthroscopic Repair of Humeral Avulsion of Glenohumeral Ligament Lesions: Outcomes at 2-Year Follow-up

Background:

Humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament (HAGL) is an uncommon condition but a major contributor to shoulder instability and functional decline.

Purpose:

To describe the pre- and postoperative HAGL lesion presentations of instability, pain, and functionality and the return-to-sports activities in patients managed arthroscopically for anterior and posterior HAGL lesions.

Study Design:

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

Data on patients with HAGL lesions treated with arthroscopic repair between 2009 and 2018 were retrospectively retrieved from medical charts, and the patients were interviewed to assess their level of postoperative functionality. The Rowe; Constant; University of California, Los Angeles; Oxford; and pain visual analog scale (VAS) scores were obtained for both pre- and postoperative status. Return-to-sports activities and level of activities after surgery were compared with the preinjury state, and complications, reoperations, and recurrent instability were recorded and evaluated.

Results:

There were 23 study patients (12 females and 11 males; mean age, 24 years). The mean follow-up duration was 24.4 months (range, 7-99 months; median, 17 months). In 7 (30.4%) of the patients, HAGL lesions were diagnosed only intraoperatively. A significant improvement was seen in all examined postoperative functional scores and VAS. At the last follow-up visit, 2 patients (8.7%) reported residual instability with no improvement in pain levels and declined any further treatment, and 3 others (13.0%) required revision surgeries for additional shoulder pathologies (reoperations were performed 18-36 months after the index procedure). The remaining 18 patients (78.3%) were free of pain and symptoms. There was a mean of 0.65 coexisting pathologies per patient, mostly superior labral anterior-posterior, Bankart, and rotator cuff lesions.

Conclusion:

HAGL lesions are often missed during routine workup in patients with symptoms of instability, and a high level of suspicion is essential during history acquisition, clinical examination, magnetic resonance imaging arthrogram interpretation, and arthroscopic evaluation. Arthroscopic repair yields good pain and stability results; however, some high-level athletes may not return to their preinjury level of activity.

Estimation of Location and Extent of Labral Tear Based on Preoperative Range of Motion in Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Stabilization for Anterior Shoulder Instability

Purpose

To determine whether range of motion (ROM) varies with the location and extent of labral tear seen in patients undergoing arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization.

Methods

Consecutive patients undergoing arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization who were enrolled in the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network Shoulder Instability database underwent a preoperative physical examination and intraoperative examination under anesthesia in which ROM was recorded. Intraoperatively, the location and extent of the labral tear was recorded using conventional clock-face coordinates. Patients were grouped by combinations of quadrants involved in the labral tear (G1-G7): G1 = anterior only, G2 = anterior + inferior, G3 = anterior + inferior + posterior, G4 = all quadrants, G5 = superior + anterior, G6 = superior + anterior + inferior, and G7 = posterior + superior + anterior. Statistical analyses were performed with the Kruskal–Wallis rank-sum test. When P < .05, a post-hoc Dunn’s test was performed. For categorical variables, the χ² test was performed. We performed a series of bivariate negative binomial regression models testing pairwise combinations of ROM parameters predicting the count of labral tear locations (possible: 0-5) within each quadrant.

Results

A total of 467 patients were included, with 13 (2.8%) in G1, 221 (47.3%) in G2, 40 (8.6%) in G3, 51 (10.9%) in G4, 18 (3.9%) in G5, 121 (25.9%) in G6, and 3 (0.6%) in G7. Multiple statistically significant differences were noted in ROM, specifically active internal rotation at side (IRS) (P = .005), active abduction (P = .02), passive IRS (P = .02), and passive external rotation in abduction (P = .0007). Regression modeling revealed a positive correlation between passive abduction and predicted count of labral tear locations in the superior quadrant and between passive IRS and predicted count of labral tear location in the inferior quadrant.

Conclusions

In patients undergoing arthroscopic shoulder stabilization for anterior instability, ROM varies with location and extent of labral tear. However, the clinical relevance of such small ROM differences remains undetermined.

Level of evidence

II, prospective comparative study.

Latarjet Procedure With Coracoclavicular Ligament Augmentation for Traumatic Coracoid Fracture and Recurrent Anterior Glenohumeral Instability in an Elite Contact Athlete

Coracoid fractures are relatively uncommon injuries and are typically treated conservatively or with open reduction and internal fixation of displaced fractures. In rare cases, coracoid fractures coincide with glenohumeral instability. Although glenohumeral instability is frequently treated with Bankart procedures, the Latarjet procedure (or transfer of the coracoid process) is used in patients with significant glenoid bone loss, recurrent instability, or prior failed Bankart procedures. However, in some cases, surgeons opt for the Latarjet procedure in patients who are at risk for recurrent instability, such as the elite contact athlete presented in this case. This Technical Note describes the transfer of a previously fractured coracoid fragment to the anterior glenoid rather than reduction of the fracture with concurrent coracoclavicular ligament augmentation to restore anterior shoulder stability.

Arthroscopic Repair of 270- and 360-Degree Glenoid Labrum Tears: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To review the current literature available and evaluate the efficacy of arthroscopic repair of 270° and 360° labral tears, as well as the complication rates associated with such. In addition, we intend to investigate whether consistent clinical findings can be observed in these patients.

METHODS

This review is registered in the PROSPERO database. The MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were queried, and additional searches were performed manually. Studies that reported outcomes after arthroscopic repair of a minimum of 270° of glenoid labrum were included. Technique articles, repairs of less than 270°, studies on atraumatic multidirectional instability, and studies that lacked observable outcomes were excluded.

RESULTS

In total, 3031 studies/documents were identified from database and manual searching. Screening, removal of duplicates, and assessment for inclusion/exclusion criteria resulted in 6 level IV studies for review. History and physical examination, as well as advanced imaging findings, were variable across studies. All studies reported satisfactory outcomes at short- to mid-term follow-up, although there was heterogeneity in type of outcomes used. Return to sport ranged from 75% to 100%. Complication rates ranged from 10% to 30%. Notably, recurrence of instability and need for secondary surgery occurred in up to 15% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature suggests that although clinical and radiographic variability exist in the diagnosis of 270° and 360° glenoid labrum tears, successful outcomes and return to work/sport can be achieved with arthroscopic management at an average minimum follow-up of 1 year. These figures, however, are limited by heterogenous studies containing small numbers of patients. Complications occur in up to 30% of cases, including an instability recurrence rate of up to 15%.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review of Level IV evidence.

Understanding the Glenoid Avulsion of the Glenohumeral Ligaments as a Cause of Shoulder Instability: Surgical and Postsurgical Management

In adolescents and young adults, instability is a common shoulder pathology with a myriad of coexisting soft tissue and bony lesions. When evaluating a patient for the cause of instability, care must be given to assess for the infrequent lesions, including glenoid avulsion of the glenohumeral ligaments. This case example illustrates key points in the diagnosis, surgical, and postsurgical management of this less common cause of anterior shoulder instability.

Rotator interval closure: inconsistent techniques and its association with anterior instability. A literature review

The Rotator interval (RI) is an anatomic space in the anterosuperior part of the glenohumeral joint. An incompetent or lax RI has been implicated in various conditions of shoulder instability and therefore RI has been frequently touted as an area that is important in preserving stability of the shoulder. Biomechanical studies have shown that repair of RI ligamentous and capsular structures decreases glenohumeral joint laxity in various directions. Clinical studies have reported successful outcomes after repair or plication of these structures in patients undergoing shoulder stabilization procedures. Although varieties of methods have been described for its closure, the optimal surgical technique is unclear with various inconsistencies in incorporation of the closure tissue. This in particular makes the analysis of the RI closure very difficult. The purposes of this study are to review the structures of the RI and their contribution to shoulder instability, to discuss the biomechanical and clinical effects of plication of RI structures in particular to anterior glenohumeral instability, to delineate the differences between an arthroscopic and open RI closure. Additionally, we have proposed a new classification system describing various techniques used during RI closure.

Coracohumeral Ligament Reconstruction for Patients With Multidirectional Shoulder Instability

Coracohumeral ligament pathology arises from acute trauma, capsular thickening, or congenital connective tissue disorders within the glenohumeral joint. Recent studies have highlighted the significance of this pathology in multidirectional shoulder instability because insufficiency of the rotator interval has become increasingly recognized and attributed to failed shoulder stabilization procedures. The diagnosis and subsequent treatment of coracohumeral ligament pathology can be challenging, however, because patients usually present with a history of failed surgical stabilization and persistent laxity. At the time of presentation, most patients have undergone failed nonoperative treatments and are indicated for surgical intervention. One of the options for the treatment of coracohumeral ligament pathology is reconstruction. The purpose of this Technical Note is to describe our preferred surgical technique for the reconstruction of the coracohumeral ligament. Research was performed at the Steadman Philippon Research Institute.

Conservative management following closed reduction of traumatic anterior dislocation of the shoulder

BACKGROUND

Acute anterior shoulder dislocation, which is the most common type of dislocation, usually results from an injury. Subsequently, the shoulder is less stable and is more susceptible to re-dislocation or recurrent instability (e.g. subluxation), especially in active young adults. After closed reduction, most of these injuries are treated with immobilisation of the injured arm in a sling or brace for a few weeks, followed by exercises. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2006 and last updated in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects (benefits and harms) of conservative interventions after closed reduction of traumatic anterior dislocation of the shoulder. These might include immobilisation, rehabilitative interventions or both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PEDro and trial registries. We also searched conference proceedings and reference lists of included studies. Date of last search: May 2018.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing conservative interventions with no treatment, a different intervention or a variant of the intervention (e.g. a different duration) for treating people after closed reduction of a primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation. Inclusion was regardless of age, sex or mechanism of injury. Primary outcomes were re-dislocation, patient-reported shoulder instability measures and return to pre-injury activities. Secondary outcomes included participant satisfaction, health-related quality of life, any instability and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Both review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We pooled results of comparable groups of studies. We assessed risk of bias with the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and the quality of the evidence with the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included seven trials (six randomised controlled trials and one quasi-randomised controlled trial) with 704 participants; three of these trials (234 participants) are new to this update. The mean age across the trials was 29 years (range 12 to 90 years), and 82% of the participants were male. All trials compared immobilisation in external rotation (with or without an additional abduction component) versus internal rotation (the traditional method) following closed reduction. No trial evaluated any other interventions or comparisons, such as rehabilitation. All trials provided data for a follow-up of one year or longer; the commonest length was two years or longer.All trials were at some risk of bias, commonly performance and detection biases given the lack of blinding. Two trials were at high risk of selection bias and some trials were affected by attrition bias for some outcomes. We rated the certainty of the evidence as very low for all outcomes.We are uncertain whether immobilisation in external rotation makes a difference to the risk of re-dislocation after 12 months' or longer follow-up compared with immobilisation in internal rotation (55/245 versus 73/243; risk ratio (RR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 1.19; 488 participants; 6 studies; I² = 61%; very low certainty evidence). In a moderate-risk population with an illustrative risk of 312 per 1000 people experiencing a dislocation in the internal rotation group, this equates to 103 fewer (95% CI 194 fewer to 60 more) re-dislocations after immobilisation in external rotation. Thus this result covers the possibility of a benefit for each intervention.Individually, the four studies (380 participants) reporting on validated patient-reported outcome measures for shoulder instability at a minimum of 12 months' follow-up found no evidence of a clinically important difference between the two interventions.We are uncertain of the relative effects of the two methods of immobilisation on resumption of pre-injury activities or sports. One study (169 participants) found no evidence of a difference between interventions in the return to pre-injury activity of the affected arm. Two studies (135 participants) found greater return to sports in the external rotation group in a subgroup of participants who had sustained their injury during sports activities.None of the trials reported on participant satisfaction or health-related quality of life.We are uncertain whether there is a difference between the two interventions in the number of participants experiencing instability, defined as either re-dislocation or subluxation (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.14; 395 participants, 3 studies; very low certainty evidence).Data on adverse events were collected only in an ad hoc way in the seven studies. Reported "transient and resolved adverse events" were nine cases of shoulder stiffness or rigidity in the external rotation group and two cases of axillary rash in the internal rotation group. There were three "important" adverse events: hyperaesthesia and moderate hand pain; eighth cervical dermatome paraesthesia; and major movement restriction between 6 and 12 months. It was unclear to what extent these three events could be attributed to the treatment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence from randomised trials is limited to that comparing immobilisation in external versus internal rotation. Overall, the evidence is insufficient to draw firm conclusions about whether immobilisation in external rotation confers any benefit over immobilisation in internal rotation.Considering that there are several unpublished and ongoing trials evaluating immobilisation in external versus internal rotation, the main priority for research on this question consists of the publication of completed trials and the completion and publication of ongoing trials. Meanwhile, evaluation of other interventions, including rehabilitation, is warranted. There is a need for sufficiently large, good-quality, well-reported randomised controlled trials with long-term follow-up. Future research should aim to determine the optimal immobilisation duration, precise indications for immobilisation, optimal rehabilitation interventions, and the acceptability of these different interventions.

Arthroscopic soft tissue reconstruction in anterior shoulder instability

Anterior glenohumeral instability remains a difficult problem in the athletic and working patient populations. Treatment strategies are variable and range from nonoperative approaches incorporating immobilization and rehabilitation to surgical management. Surgical decision-making can be challenging, especially with a high-level patient who wishes to return to high-demand activities. Operative options range from open soft tissue stabilization to arthroscopic soft tissue stabilization, with both open and arthroscopic options for bony reconstruction in the setting of clinically significant anterior glenoid bone loss. In all cases, understanding appropriate indications and utilizing sound surgical techniques are critical for achieving a successful result. For the majority of patients with anterior shoulder instability, arthroscopic soft tissue reconstruction with suture anchors is a successful, minimally invasive approach that results in a stable shoulder with excellent outcomes and low complication rates.

Outcomes of Arthroscopic Posterior Shoulder Stabilization in the Beach-Chair Versus Lateral Decubitus Position: A Systematic Review

Background:

Arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization can be performed with patients in the beach-chair (BC) and the lateral decubitus (LD) positions; however, the impact of patient positioning on clinical outcomes has not been evaluated.

Purpose:

To compare clinical outcomes and recurrence rates after arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization performed in the BC and LD positions.

Study Design:

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods:

A systematic review using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses) guidelines was performed by searching PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library for studies reporting the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization in either the BC or LD position. All English-language studies from 1990 to 2017 reporting clinical outcomes after arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization with a minimum 2-year follow-up were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers. Data on the recurrent instability rate, return to activity or sport, range of motion, and patient-reported outcome scores were collected. Study methodological quality was evaluated using the Modified Coleman Methodology Score (MCMS) and Quality Appraisal Tool (QAT).

Results:

A total of 15 studies (11 LD, 4 BC) with 731 shoulders met the inclusion criteria, including 626 shoulders in the LD position (mean patient age, 23.9 ± 4.1 years; mean follow-up, 37.5 ± 10.0 months) and 105 shoulders in the BC position (mean patient age, 27.8 ± 2.2 years; mean follow-up, 37.9 ± 16.6 months). There was no significant difference in the overall mean recurrent instability rate between the LD and BC groups (4.9% ± 3.6% vs 4.4% ± 5.1%, respectively; P = .83), with similar results in a subanalysis of studies utilizing only suture anchor fixation (4.9% ± 3.6% vs 3.2% ± 5.6%, respectively; P = .54). There was no significant difference in the return-to-sport rate between the BC and LD groups (96.2% ± 5.4% vs 88.6% ± 9.1%, respectively; P = .30). Range of motion and other patient-reported outcome scores were not provided consistently across studies to allow for statistical comparisons.

Conclusion:

Low rates of recurrent shoulder instability and high rates of return to sport can be achieved after arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization in either the LD or the BC position. Additional long-term randomized trials comparing these positions are needed to better understand the potential advantages and disadvantages of surgical positioning for posterior shoulder stabilization.

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.

Eponymous terms in anterior shoulder stabilization surgery

Shoulder dislocation and its treatment are probably as old as time. Surgical treatment has gained acceptance recently, especially in recurrent cases. Within roughly the last 100years, numerous treatment strategies have been developed and questions elucidated regarding the entity of shoulder instability. Shoulder instability holds many eponymous terms. By means of literature and historical research, we present the biographical background of some common eponymous terms and the original publication on which those terms are based. We describe the Perthes lesion, Bankart lesion and repair, Hill-Sachs lesion, Bristow-Latarjet procedure and Eden-Hybbinette procedure. Shoulder instability has been recognized and treated for many centuries. Before the invention of X-rays and the ability to intervene surgically, empirical reduction and time were the only feasible treatment options. Understanding of the pathophysiology of this problem and its corresponding treatment has kept increasing since the 19th century. The originators involved still have their name attached to the different signs and procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Controversies In The Surgical Management Of Shoulder Instability: Associated Soft Tissue Procedures

Background:

The glenohumeral joint is a ball-and-socket joint that is inherently unstable and thus, susceptible to dislocation. The traditional and most common anatomic finding is the Bankart lesion (anterior-inferior capsule labral complex avulsion), but there is a wide variety of anatomic alterations that can cause shoulder instability or may be present as a concomitant injury or in combination, including bone loss (glenoid or humeral head), complex capsule-labral tears, rotator cuff tears, Kim´s lesions (injuries to the posterior-inferior labrum) and rotator interval pathology.

Methods:

A review of articles related to shoulder anatomy and soft tissue procedures that are performed during shoulder instability arthroscopic management was conducted by querying the Pubmed database and conclusions and controversies regarding this injury were exposed.

Results:

Due to the complex anatomy of the shoulder and the large range of movement of this joint, a wide variety of anatomic injuries and conditions can lead to shoulder instability, specially present in young population. Recognizing and treating all of them including Bankart repair, capsule-labral plicatures, SLAP repair, circumferential approach to pan-labral lesions, rotator interval closure, rotator cuff injuries and HAGL lesion repair is crucial to achieve the goal of a stable, full range of movement and not painful joint.

Conclusion:

Physicians must be familiarized with all the lesions involved in shoulder instability, and should be able to recognize and subsequently treat them to achieve the goal of a stable non-painful shoulder. Unrecognized or not treated lesions may result in recurrence of instability episodes and pain while overuse of some of the techniques previously described can lead to stiffness, thus the importance of an accurate diagnosis and treatment when facing a shoulder instability.

Posterior Glenohumeral Instability: Evidence-based Treatment

Posterior glenohumeral instability is an increasingly important clinical finding in athletic patients. Over the last decade, basic and clinical research has improved our understanding of the pathoanatomy and biomechanics of this challenging disorder, as well as our ability to diagnose and appropriately treat it. Although recurrent posterior shoulder instability is not as common as anterior instability, it is prevalent among specific populations, including football and rugby players, and may be overlooked by clinicians who are unaware of the typical physical examination and radiographic findings.

Open Bankart Revisited

The surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability can present a dilemma. Historically, an open Bankart repair was the benchmark solution. Over the last decade as surgeons became more arthroscopically savvy, the pendulum swung and a paradigm shift occurred. However, more recent studies have challenged this trend and, subsequently, revived interest in open repair. Thus, we feel it is critical to provide a more contemporary stepwise description of a procedure that has become essentially abandoned. The goal is to provide tips and pearls to achieve optimal exposure and, ultimately, a robust repair for a notoriously challenging operation.

Arthroscopic treatment of anterior shoulder instability associated with a HAGL lesion-a case series

BACKGROUND

Restoration of shoulder stability after humeral avulsion of glenohumeral ligament (HAGL) lesions can be achieved with arthroscopy, yet limited evidence exists on its benefit. We evaluated objective and subjective outcomes after arthroscopic refixation of a HAGL lesion.

METHODS

Between 2009 and 2012, 8 patients were treated arthroscopically for anterior shoulder instability associated with a HAGL lesion and invited for a follow-up examination. Radiographic assessment of joint centering and osteoarthritis, clinical assessment including Constant and Rowe scores, and complications as well as functional outcomes using the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, Subjective Shoulder Value, and Simple Shoulder Test were documented.

RESULTS

Six patients were postoperatively examined at a median time of 29 months (range, 12-38). Four patients had up to 6 previous luxation events. Two patients had a concomitant labral lesion, and another 2 had an associated rotator cuff tear. Positive preoperative apprehension and relocation test results for 5 patients were negative at follow-up. No neurologic lesion was noted both before and after surgery. Shoulder motion did not improve significantly; lower internal and external rotation relative to the contralateral shoulder was reported. The Rowe score improved significantly from baseline (median score change, 65 points; P = .027), with 2 and 4 patients rating "good" and "excellent" at follow-up, respectively. Final median Constant score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, Subjective Shoulder Value, and Simple Shoulder Test scores were 77.3 points, 91.0 points, 90%, and 87.5 points, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic stabilization of a HAGL lesion is a safe, feasible, and reproducible technique. In our patient cohort, good shoulder stability could be achieved with high patient satisfaction.

Subsequent Shoulder Surgery After Isolated Arthroscopic SLAP Repair

PURPOSE

To quantify the incidence of and identify the risk factors for subsequent shoulder procedures after isolated SLAP repair.

METHODS

New York's Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was searched between 2003 and 2014 to identify individuals with the sole diagnosis of a SLAP lesion who underwent isolated arthroscopic SLAP repair. Patients were longitudinally followed up for a minimum of 3 years to analyze for subsequent ipsilateral shoulder procedures.

RESULTS

Between 2003 and 2014, 2,524 patients met our inclusion criteria. After 3 to 11 years of follow-up, 10.1% of patients (254 of 2,524) underwent repeat surgical intervention on the same shoulder as the initial SLAP repair. The mean time to repeat shoulder surgery was 2.3 ± 2.1 years. Subsequent procedures included subacromial decompression (35%), debridement (26.7%). repeat SLAP repair (19.7%), and biceps tenodesis or tenotomy (13.0%). After isolated SLAP repair, patients aged 20 years or younger were more likely to undergo arthroscopic Bankart repair (odds ratio [OR], 2.91; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.36-6.21; P = .005), whereas age older than 30 years was an independent risk factor for subsequent acromioplasty (OR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.4-3.7; P < .001) and distal clavicle resection (OR, 2.5; 95% CI, 1.1-5.5; P = .030). The need for a subsequent procedure was significantly associated with Workers' Compensation cases (OR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.7-3.2; P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified a 10.1% incidence of subsequent surgery after isolated SLAP repair, often related to an additional diagnosis, suggesting that clinicians should consider other potential causes of shoulder pain when considering surgery for patients with SLAP lesions. In addition, the number of isolated SLAP repairs performed has decreased over time, and management of failed SLAP repair has shifted toward biceps tenodesis or tenotomy over revision SLAP repair in more recent years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, case-control study.

Shoulder Problems Motivate Innovative Solutions

Shoulder arthroscopic and related surgeons may require expertise in use of the 70° arthroscope, biologic patch augmentation, repair of massive rotator cuff tears, the Latarjet procedure and related glenoid bone augmentation, and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Arthroscopic treatment of glenoid bone loss

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

The Rotator Interval of the Shoulder: Implications in the Treatment of Shoulder Instability

Biomechanical studies have shown that repair or plication of rotator interval (RI) ligamentous and capsular structures decreases glenohumeral joint laxity in various directions. Clinical outcomes studies have reported successful outcomes after repair or plication of these structures in patients undergoing shoulder stabilization procedures. Recent studies describing arthroscopic techniques to address these structures have intensified the debate over the potential benefit of these procedures as well as highlighted the differences between open and arthroscopic RI procedures. The purposes of this study were to review the structures of the RI and their contribution to shoulder instability, to discuss the biomechanical and clinical effects of repair or plication of rotator interval structures, and to describe the various surgical techniques used for these procedures and outcomes.

Arthroscopic Repair of a Glenoid Avulsion of the Glenohumeral Ligament

Injury to the glenohumeral capsulolabral complex is the critical lesion in anterior shoulder instability. Various injury patterns have been described including the classic Bankart lesion, the bony Bankart lesion, and humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament. A rare injury variant is a glenoid avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament (GAGL lesion). Careful patient setup and surgical technique are required to identify and arthroscopically repair these lesions. We describe a suture anchor-based arthroscopic GAGL repair performed with the patient in the lateral decubitus position through standard anterior and posterior portals and an accessory posterolateral 7-o'clock portal.

Editorial Commentary: Platelet-Rich Plasma Improves Knee Pain and Function in Patients With Knee Osteoarthritis

Systematic review of overlapping meta-analyses shows that platelet-rich plasma improves knee pain and function in patients with knee osteoarthritis. Ultimately, biologics hold promise for chondroprotection in addition to symptomatic relief.