Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Conservative Management for First-Time Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Outcomes of arthroscopic stabilization for posterior shoulder instability: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Posterior shoulder instability makes up approximately 10% of all shoulder instability cases and its diagnosis and treatment is less well understood. Recently, however, there has been increased recognition of posterior instability and posterior stabilization. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature to ascertain the outcomes on arthroscopic stabilization of posterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers conducted a systematic literature search based on PRISMA guidelines, utilizing the MEDLINE database. Studies were eligible for inclusion if they reported postoperative outcomes for posterior shoulder instability following arthroscopic stabilization.

RESULTS

A total of 48 studies met inclusion criteria for review including 2307 shoulders. Majority of patients were male (83.3%), with an average age of 26.1 years and a mean follow-up of 46.8 months. The functional outcome score primarily utilized for postoperative assessment was the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons with an average of 84.77. Overall, 90.9% of patients reported being satisfied with their arthroscopic stabilization. Recurrent instability occurred in 7.4% of patients. The total revision rate was 5.2%. 16.6% of patients reported residual pain postoperatively. The rate of return to play was 86.4% with 68.0% of patients returning to play at the same or higher level of play.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic stabilization of posterior shoulder instability resulted in good outcomes with high patient satisfaction and low rates of recurrent instability, revisions, and residual pain.

Risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Recurrent instability remains a major source of morbidity following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Many risk factors and predictive tools have been described, but there remains a lack of consensus surrounding individual risk factors and their contribution to outcomes. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature to identify and quantify risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using the PubMed/MEDLINE databases based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were included if they evaluated risk factors for recurrent instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair.

RESULTS

Overall, 111 studies were included in the analysis, including a total of 19,307 patients and 2750 episodes of recurrent instability with 45 risk factors described. Age at operation was reported by 60 studies, with 35 finding increased risk at younger ages. Meta-analysis showed a 2-fold recurrence rate of 27.0% (171 of 634) for patients <20 years old compared with 13.3% (197 of 1485) for older patients (P < .001). Seventeen studies completed multivariable analysis, 13 of which were significant (odds ratio 1.3-14.0). Glenoid bone loss was evaluated by 39 studies, with 20 finding an increased risk. Multivariable analysis in 9 studies found odds ratios ranging from 0.7 to 35.1; 6 were significant. Off-track Hill-Sachs lesions were evaluated in 21 studies (13 significant), with 3 of 4 studies that conducted multivariable analysis finding a significant association with odds ratio of 2.9-8.9 of recurrence. The number of anchors used in repair was reported by 25 studies, with 4 finding increased risk with fewer anchors. Pooled analysis demonstrated a 25.0% (29 of 156) risk of recurrence with 2 anchors, compared with 18.1% (89 of 491) with 3 or more anchors (P = .06). Other frequently described risk factors included glenohumeral joint hyperlaxity (46% of studies reporting a significant association), number of preoperative dislocations (31%), contact sport participation (20%), competitive sport participation (46%), patient sex (7%), and concomitant superior labral anterior-posterior tear (0%).

CONCLUSION

Younger age, glenoid bone loss, and off-track Hill-Sachs lesions are established risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Other commonly reported risk factors included contact and competitive sports participation, number of fixation devices, and patient sex.

Over 89% of Patients Return to Work After Undergoing Arthroscopic or Open Latarjet Procedure for Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To better define the rate of return to work in patients undergoing Latarjet surgery for anterior shoulder instability METHODS: A systematic review was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane Center Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Scopus were queried in October 2023 with the following keywords: ((latarjet) OR (anterior shoulder instability)) AND ((work) or (compensation)). Articles were included if they reported return to work in patients (including military members) undergoing Latarjet surgery for traumatic anterior shoulder instability with bone loss and were written in English. This study was registered in Prospero (ID blinded).

RESULTS

Six studies reporting on 419 shoulders were included in the review. Five studies reported on patients in the general population, and one reported on military members. Mean age ± standard deviation (SD) of patients ranged from 23.1 ± 5.8 - 32.0 ± 12.3 years old. Moreover, there were 286 primary Latarjet procedures, 131 revision Latarjet procedures, and 2 unspecified as primary or revision surgery. Mean glenoid bone loss ranged from 14.5% to 22.9%. Return to work rates ranged from 89.1% to 100%, with two studies reporting all patients were able to return to work. Among military members, 89.1% were able to return to duty. Mean time to return to work ranged from 8.69 - 34.8 weeks after surgery. Four studies also reported return to sport, which ranged from 60.9% to 100%. Mean time for returning to sport varied between 10.0 - 35.2 weeks after Latarjet procedure.

CONCLUSION

Patients with anterior shoulder instability who undergo arthroscopic or open Latarjet procedure can expect high rates of return to work and sport. All studies reported return to work rates over 89% with 89.1% of military members were able to return to duty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Management of Shoulder Instability in the Overhead Athletes

Overhead athletes with anterior, posterior, and multidirectional shoulder instability present with a wide range of symptoms, especially considering the injury mechanism and affected supportive structures. As such, the management of shoulder instability is widely variable and relies on rehabilitation, operative management, and sport-specific considerations, such as positional and seasonal demands on the athlete. Biomechanical analysis may further aid in the recovery process or serve as a predictive tool to identify an increased risk for injury.

Outcomes of arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent instability are equal to stabilization after a primary event

Aims

Extensive literature exists relating to the management of shoulder instability, with a more recent focus on glenoid and humeral bone loss. However, the optimal timing for surgery following a dislocation remains unclear. There is concern that recurrent dislocations may worsen subsequent surgical outcomes, with some advocating stabilization after the first dislocation. The aim of this study was to determine if the recurrence of instability following arthroscopic stabilization in patients without significant glenoid bone loss was influenced by the number of dislocations prior to surgery.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using the PubMed, EMBASE, Orthosearch, and Cochrane databases with the following search terms: ((shoulder or glenohumeral) and (dislocation or subluxation) and arthroscopic and (Bankart or stabilisation or stabilization) and (redislocation or re-dislocation or recurrence or instability)). Methodology followed the PRISMA guidelines. Data and outcomes were synthesized by two independent reviewers, and papers were assessed for bias and quality.

Results

Overall, 35 studies including 7,995 shoulders were eligible for analysis, with a mean follow-up of 32.7 months (12 to 159.5). The rate of post-stabilization instability was 9.8% in first-time dislocators, 9.1% in recurrent dislocators, and 8.5% in a mixed cohort. A descriptive analysis investigated the influence of recurrent instability or age in the risk of instability post-stabilization, with an association seen with increasing age and a reduced risk of recurrence post-stabilization.

Conclusion

Using modern arthroscopic techniques, patients sustaining an anterior shoulder dislocation without glenoid bone loss can expect a low risk of recurrence postoperatively, and no significant difference was found between first-time and recurrent dislocators. Furthermore, high-risk cohorts can expect a low, albeit slightly higher, rate of redislocation. With the findings of this study, patients and clinicians can be more informed as to the likely outcomes of arthroscopic stabilization within this patient subset.

Decision Making of the In-season Athlete with Anterior Shoulder Instability

In-season management of anterior shoulder instability in athletes is a complex problem. Athletes often wish to play through their current season, though recurrent instability rates are high, particularly in contact sports. Athletes are generally considered safe to return to play when they are relatively pain-free, and their strength and range of motion match the uninjured extremity. If an athlete is unable to progress toward recovering strength and range of motion, surgical management is an option, though this is often a season-ending decision.

Preoperative patient-reported outcome measures predict minimal clinically important difference and patient-acceptable symptomatic state following arthroscopic Bankart repair

Aims

The aims of this study were to validate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), Rowe score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores following arthroscopic Bankart repair, and to identify preoperative threshold values of these scores that could predict the achievement of MCID and PASS.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted on 131 consecutive patients with anterior shoulder instability who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair between January 2020 and January 2023. Inclusion criteria required at least one episode of shoulder instability and a minimum follow-up period of 12 months. Preoperative and one-year postoperative scores were assessed. MCID and PASS were estimated using distribution-based and anchor-based methods, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis determined preoperative patient-reported outcome measure thresholds predictive of achieving MCID and PASS.

Results

MCID thresholds were determined as 169.6, 6.8, 7.2, and 1.1 for WOSI, Rowe, ASES, and VAS, respectively. PASS thresholds were calculated as ≤ 480, ≥ 80, ≥ 87, and ≤ 1 for WOSI, Rowe, ASES, and VAS, respectively. Preoperative thresholds of ≥ 760 (WOSI) and ≤ 50 (Rowe) predicted achieving MCID for WOSI score (p < 0.001). Preoperative thresholds of ≤ 60 (ASES) and ≥ 2 (VAS) predicted achieving MCID for VAS score (p < 0.001). A preoperative threshold of ≥ 40 (Rowe) predicted achieving PASS for Rowe score (p = 0.005). Preoperative thresholds of ≥ 50 (ASES; p = 0.002) and ≤ 2 (VAS; p < 0.001) predicted achieving PASS for the ASES score. Preoperative thresholds of ≥ 43 (ASES; p = 0.046) and ≤ 4 (VAS; p = 0.024) predicted achieving PASS for the VAS.

Conclusion

This study defined MCID and PASS values for WOSI, Rowe, ASES, and VAS scores in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. Higher preoperative functional scores may reduce the likelihood of achieving MCID but increase the likelihood of achieving the PASS. These findings provide valuable guidance for surgeons to counsel patients realistically regarding their expectations.

Rehabilitation Protocol Variability Following Arthroscopic Bankart Repair and Remplissage for Management of Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review

Background

Augmentation of an arthroscopic Bankart repair with the remplissage (ABR) procedure has shown to confer a decrease in recurrence rates, yet, at the expense of potentially compromising shoulder motion.

Purpose/Hypothesis

The purpose was to examine clinical studies that described a post-operative rehabilitation protocol after an arthroscopic Bankart repair and remplissage procedure. It was hypothesized that a review of the literature would find variability among the studies and that, among comparative studies, there would be a limited distinction from protocols for isolated Bankart repairs.

Study design

Systematic Review.

Materials and Methods

A search was conducted using three databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL) according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The following terms were combined while utilizing Boolean operators: (Bankart lesion OR labral tear) AND (remplissage). Studies evaluating patients after arthroscopic stabilization for unidirectional anterior glenohumeral instability with the addition of the remplissage procedure and at least 1 year follow-up were included for analysis.

Results

A total of 41 studies (14 Level IV, 24 Level III, 2 Level II, and 1 Level I) were included with a total of 1,307 patients who underwent ABR. All patients had <30% glenoid bone loss and a range of 10-50% humeral head size Hill-Sachs lesion. Type and position of immobilization were the most reported outcomes (41/41) followed by time of immobilization (40/41). Moreover, 23/41 studies described their initial post-operative shoulder range of motion restrictions, while 17/41 specified any shoulder motion allowed during this restrictive phase. Time to return to sport was also described in 37/41 of the retrieved studies. Finally, only two of the 27 comparative studies tailored their rehabilitation protocol according to the specific procedure performed, underscoring the lack of an individualized approach (i.e. same rehabilitation protocol for different procedures).

Conclusion

The results of the present systematic review expose the variability among rehabilitation protocols following ABR. This variability prompts consideration of the underlying factors influencing these disparities and underscores the need for future research to elucidate optimal rehabilitation. Based on the results of this systematic review and the senior authors´ clinical experience, a rehabilitation approach similar to an isolated Bankart repair appears warranted, with additional precautions being utilized regarding internal rotation range of motion and external rotation strengthening.

Level of Evidence

Level 3.

Clinical outcomes in prospective versus retrospective studies on arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The majority of the current literature on arthroscopic Bankart repair is retrospective, and discrepancies exist regarding clinical outcomes including recurrent instability and return to play among studies of different levels of evidence.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to perform a systematic review of the literature to compare the outcomes of prospective and retrospective studies on arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

A search was performed using the PubMed/Medline database for all studies that reported clinical outcomes on Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability. The search term "Bankart repair" was used, with all results being analyzed via strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Three independent investigators extracted data and scored each included study based on the 10 criteria of the Modified Coleman Methodology Score out of 100. A χ2 test was performed to assess if recurrent instability, revision, return to play, and complications are independent of prospective and retrospective studies.

RESULTS

A total of 193 studies were included in the analysis, with 53 prospective studies and 140 retrospective in design. These studies encompassed a total of 13,979 patients and 14,019 surgical procedures for Bankart repair for shoulder instability. The rate of redislocation in the prospective studies was 8.0% vs. 5.9% in retrospective studies (P < .001). The rate of recurrent subluxation in the prospective studies was 3.4% vs. 2.4% in retrospective studies (P = .004). The rate of revision was higher in retrospective studies at 4.9% vs. 3.9% in prospective studies (P = .013). There was no significant difference in terms of overall rate to return to play between prospective and retrospective studies (90% and 91%, respectively; P = .548). The overall rate of non-instability complications in the prospective cohort was 0.27% vs. 0.78% in the retrospective studies (P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

The overall rates of recurrent dislocations-subluxations are higher in prospective studies than retrospective studies. However, rates of revision were reportedly higher in retrospective studies. Complications after arthroscopic Bankart repair are rare in both prospective and retrospective studies, and there was no difference in rates of return to play.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair using a single anterior working portal technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair using a single anterior working portal and determine whether they are comparable to the standard two-portal technique.

METHODS

A search following PRISMA guidelines was performed in July 2024 in the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. Studies evaluating outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair using a single anterior portal technique were included. A meta-analysis comparing outcomes was performed using a random-effects model. A P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Seven studies in patients undergoing Bankart repair with a single anterior portal were included (311 patients, 84.6% male, mean age 27.8 years, mean follow-up 37.4 months). Five of seven studies compared outcomes of a single anterior portal versus the standard two-portal technique. The duration of surgery was significantly shorter in the single anterior portal group (P < 0.00001). The postoperative Oxford Instability Score (P = 0.84), Rowe score (P = 0.26), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (P = 0.73), Constant-Murley score (P = 0.92), and Visual Analog Scale Pain score (P = 0.07) were similar between both groups. The postoperative degree of shoulder abduction (P = 0.84) and external rotation (P = 0.64) were similar between both groups. The risk of redislocation (P = 0.98) was similar between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair with a single anterior portal had significantly lower operative times and comparable PROs, ROM, and risk of redislocation relative to patients undergoing repair with a standard two-portal technique.

Association of socioeconomic status and physical therapy compliance after arthroscopic shoulder labrum repair

BACKGROUND

Socioeconomic status has been shown to impact a patient's access to orthopedic care, but outcomes such as compliance with physical therapy and time to return to full activities has not been established. The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of socioeconomic status on physical therapy compliance and return to play time specifically in patients with shoulder instability. The area deprivation index (ADI) is a validated tool using factors from the US Census that measures socioeconomic deprivation in neighborhoods. Our hypothesis is that patients with higher socioeconomic deprivation are more likely to have more missed scheduled physical therapy appointments and a longer return to play after arthroscopic shoulder labrum repair for instability.

METHODS

This study included patients who underwent arthroscopic shoulder labrum repair between 2019 and 2023 at a single orthopedic hospital by a single surgeon. Demographic information (race, age, and sex), insurance type, ADI, physical therapy no-show visit rates, and return to play times were recorded.

RESULTS

The cohort included 73 patients, 14 of whom did not have return to play times. A total of 82.2% of the patients were male, 63.0% were White, and the mean age was 24 years. Patients with increasing ADI were significantly more likely not to attend a scheduled physical therapy session (P = .035). No association between ADI and return to play time was found (P = .165). No significant association between insurance type (private vs. Medicaid) and missed scheduled physical therapy appointments (P = .139) and return to play times was found (P = .741).

CONCLUSION

Increasing socioeconomic deprivation is associated with increased likelihood to miss scheduled physical therapy visits after shoulder instability surgery. These findings elucidate gaps in orthopedic care as postoperative physical therapy is a crucial part in the comprehensive care of shoulder instability.

Single anterior shoulder dislocation patients demonstrate higher rates of posterior labral repair and biceps procedures than multiple dislocators at the time of arthroscopic stabilization surgery

Hypothesis

The purpose of this study is to identify and compare demographic, clinical, historical, and intraoperative variables in patients who have received arthroscopic treatment for single vs. multiple anterior shoulder dislocations.

Methods

This is a retrospective chart review of patients who underwent arthroscopic labral repair of the shoulder by six surgeons at a single institution between 2012 and 2020. Patients with a documented anterior shoulder dislocation were included. Patients with pain-only, subluxation-only, multidirectional or posterior instability, and prior shoulder surgeries of any kind were excluded. Studied variables included age, sex, laterality, body mass index, contact/collision sports, Charlson comorbidity index, tobacco use, number of dislocations (1, >1), labral tear size, time from first dislocation to surgery, anchor number, and concomitant procedures. Study groups were compared using student's t-tests and Mann-Whitney U test for continuous variables and chi-square or Fisher's exact tests for discrete variables with a significance of 0.05.

Results

Six hundred thirty-three patients were identified, and 351 (85 single dislocators [SDs], 266 multiple dislocators [MDs]) met inclusion criteria (mean age: 27 years; range: 14-71 years). There were no demographic differences between the study groups. SD received surgery significantly sooner at 17 ± 44 months after injury, while MD received surgery 53 ± 74 months postinitial dislocation. SDs (30/85, 35%) were significantly more likely than MDs (56/266, 21%) to receive concomitant posterior labrum repair. MDs (46/266, 17%) were significantly more likely than SDs (5/85, 6%) to receive a remplissage. SDs (11/85, 13%) were significantly more likely than MDs (11/266, 4%) to receive a concomitant biceps tenotomy/tenodesis. There were no other significant differences in injury or surgery characteristics.

Conclusion

MDs will have more time between their initial dislocation and arthroscopic labral repair and are more likely to receive a remplissage procedure, yet they are less likely than SDs to receive a concomitant posterior labral repair or biceps tenodesis/tenotomy despite no differences in age, sex, and activity level. Whether the greater extent of labrum injury in SD is due to a more severe initial injury vs. earlier recognition and intervention requires further study.

Treatment of Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Comprehensive Review

Anterior shoulder instability is a complex spectrum of pathology characterized by excessive translation of the humeral head across the glenoid, leading to apprehension, subluxation, and dislocation. Diagnosis and classification require a thorough clinical history, physical examination, and imaging to appropriately determine the severity of instability. Depending on the individual patient anatomy and severity of instability, there exist many management options that are well-positioned to successfully treat this pathology and allow patients to return to prior functional levels. Treatment options available are conservative management, arthroscopic or open Bankart repair, remplissage, open or arthroscopic Latarjet, and glenoid bone grafting. Each of these options provides unique advantages for the surgeon in treating a subset of patients along the spectrum of disease. Selection of treatment modality depends upon the number of instability events, appropriate quantification, classification bone loss, presence of associated soft tissue injuries, and patient-specific goals regarding return of function. The purpose of this review was to present an evidence-based approach to the investigation, treatment selection, and follow-up of anterior shoulder instability. Individualized patient care is required to optimally address intra-articular pathology, restore stability and function, and preserve joint health for all.

Arthroscopic stabilization surgery for first-time anterior shoulder dislocations: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of first-time anterior shoulder dislocations (FTASDs) remains controversial. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to assess the efficacy of arthroscopic stabilization surgery for FTASDs through a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing literature.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science were searched from inception to December 18, 2022, for single-arm or comparative studies assessing FTASDs managed with arthroscopic stabilization surgery following first-time dislocation. Eligible comparative studies included studies assessing outcomes following immobilization for an FTASD, or arthroscopic stabilization following recurrent dislocations. Eligible levels of evidence were I to IV. Primary outcomes included rates of shoulder redislocations, cumulative shoulder instability, and subsequent shoulder stabilization surgery.

RESULTS

Thirty-four studies with 2222 shoulder dislocations were included. Of these, 5 studies (n = 408 shoulders) were randomized trials comparing immobilization to arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) after a first dislocation. Another 16 studies were nonrandomized comparative studies assessing arthroscopic Bankart repair following first-time dislocation (ABR-F) to either immobilization (studies = 8, n = 399 shoulders) or arthroscopic Bankart repair following recurrent dislocations (ABR-R) (studies = 8, n = 943 shoulder). Mean follow-up was 59.4 ± 39.2 months across all studies. Cumulative loss to follow-up was 4.7% (range, 0%-32.7%). A composite rate of pooled redislocation, cumulative instability, and reoperations across ABR-F studies was 6.8%, 11.2%, and 6.1%, respectively. Meta-analysis found statistically significant reductions in rates of redislocation (odds ratio [OR] 0.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.04-0.3, P < .001), cumulative instability (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.03-0.08, P < .001), and subsequent surgery (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.04-0.15, P < .001) when comparing ABR-F to immobilization. Rates of cumulative instability (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.22-0.47, P < .001) and subsequent surgery rates (OR 0.27, 95% CI 0.09-0.76, P = .01) were significantly reduced with ABR-F relative to ABR-R, with point estimate of effect favoring ABR-F for shoulder redislocation rates (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.19-1.83, P = .36). Return to sport rates to preoperative levels or higher were 3.87 times higher following ABR-F compared to immobilization (95% CI 1.57-9.52, P < .001), with limited ABR-R studies reporting this outcome. The median fragility index of the 5 included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was 2, meaning reversing only 2 outcome events rendered the trials' findings no longer statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic stabilization surgery for FTASDs leads to lower rates of redislocations, cumulative instability, and subsequent stabilization surgery relative to immobilization or arthroscopic stabilization surgery following recurrence. Although a limited number of RCTs have been published on the subject matter to date, the strength of their conclusions is limited by a small sample size and statistically fragile results.

Instability Severity Index Score predicts recurrent shoulder instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair

PURPOSE

The Instability Severity Index (ISI) Score was developed to preoperatively assess the risk of recurrent shoulder instability after an arthroscopic Bankart repair. This study aims to validate the use of ISI Score for predicting the risk of recurrence after an arthroscopic Bankart repair in a heterogeneous population and proposes an appropriate cut-off point for treating patients with an arthroscopic Bankart repair or otherwise.

METHODS

This study analysed 99 shoulders after a traumatic dislocation that underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair with at least 3 years follow-up. Patients were divided into subcategories based on their respective ISI Score. Recurrence includes either a postoperative dislocation or perceived instability.

RESULTS

The overall recurrence rate was found to be 26.3%. A significant correlation was identified between ISI Score and the recurrence rate (odds ratio [OR]: 1.545, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.231-1.939, p < 0.001). Furthermore, ISI Score 4-6 (OR: 4.498, 95% CI: 1.866-10.842, p < 0.001) and ISI Score > 6 (OR: 7.076, 95% CI: 2.393-20.924, p < 0.001) both had a significantly higher risk of recurrence compared to ISI Score 0-3. In ISI Score subcategories 0-3, 4-6 and >6, the recurrence rate was, respectively, 15.4%, 40.7% and 71.4%.

CONCLUSION

ISI Score has predictive value in determining the recurrence risk of shoulder instability following an arthroscopic Bankart repair in a heterogeneous population. Based on the findings of this study, we recommend using arthroscopic Bankart repair in patients with ISI Score 0-3. Clinical and shared decision-making are essential in the group with ISI Score 4-6, since the recurrence rate is significantly higher than in patients with ISI Score 0-3. Arthroscopic Bankart repair is not suitable for patients with ISI Score > 6.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Management of the in-season athlete with an anterior shoulder dislocation

BACKGROUND

Management of the in-season athlete presenting with an anterior shoulder dislocation is a nuanced process that continues to be refined. Options and pathways between nonoperative and operative treatment have undergone many iterations over a century of orthopedic research and advancement. It requires an understanding of sport-specific demands and the individual athlete's goals. The orthopedic surgeon must have mastery of the natural history, treatment options, and outcomes of anterior shoulder dislocations. Balance of these factors is delicate and highly individualized for each athlete, and is why management of the in-season athlete with an anterior shoulder dislocation remains an art for the orthopedic surgeon.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A narrative review of the literature regarding the in-season athlete with anterior shoulder dislocation was conducted of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The findings are summarized in this article.

RESULTS

Multiple studies have investigated management of the in-season athlete with anterior shoulder dislocation. Treatment is highly individualized for each athlete and their respective circumstances. Nonoperative treatment remains the only option for athletes that seek to return to play in the same season, however with a high risk of recurrence. Operative treatment has a track record of success in terms of returning to high level of play and lower recurrence, but would preclude a return to competition in the same season.

CONCLUSIONS

Management of the in-season athlete with anterior shoulder dislocation remains a challenging issue without consensus recommendation among shoulder surgeons. Much has been done to understand the pathology and delineate indications for nonoperative treatment and surgical management. Although recurrence and return to play rates have improved with each iteration, recurrent instability and revision surgery continue to occur at high rates. Therefore, additional work remains to optimize return to play as well as long-term outcomes for athletes.

Prognostic factors for recurrent instability in recreational athletes following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a retrospective study with an average 4.1-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Extensive research has been conducted to investigate the short-term and long-term outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair, yielding varying results across different populations. However, there remains a dearth of studies specifically focused on evaluating outcomes in recreational athletes.

METHODS

A retrospective case series study was conducted on recreational athletes who underwent isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair between 2013 and 2021. The primary outcome assessed was recurrent instability, defined as dislocation or subluxation. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction, rates of returning to the same sports (RTS) and RTS at preinjury level, and patient-reported outcomes. Evaluation of the Rowe score, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and VAS pain score were performed. Prognostic factors for recurrent instability, including demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) appearance of the labrum were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 191 patients met the selection criteria, with 150 (78.5%) available for the final follow-up. Recurrent instability occurred in 10.7% of patients, with a mean follow-up duration of 4.1 years. Younger age at surgery and more critical glenoid bone loss were significantly associated with recurrent instability (p = .038 and p = .011, respectively). The satisfaction rate regarding surgery was 90.0%. Rates of return to the same sports (RTS) and RTS at preinjury level were 82.0% and 49.3%, respectively. Clinical outcomes measured at the final follow-up were as follows: Rowe score - 92.8; Constant score - 98.0; ASES score - 98.3; VAS pain score - 0.2. Patients with recurrent instability had significantly inferior outcomes in terms of satisfaction rate, RTS at preinjury level rate, Rowe score, and Constant score (p = .000, p = .039, p = .000, and p = .015, respectively). A total of thirty-seven patients underwent MRI examination six months after surgery in our institution. The T2-weighted anterior labrum morphology was found to be poorer in patients with recurrent instability. No significant difference was observed between patients with or without recurrent instability in terms of anterior Slope, anterior labral glenoid height index (LGHI), inferior Slope, inferior LGHI, and T2-weighted inferior labrum morphology.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic Bankart repair can yield satisfactory medium-term outcomes for recreational athletes. Younger age at surgery, more critical glenoid bone loss, and poorer T2-weighted anterior labrum morphology assessed six months postoperatively were significantly associated with recurrent instability.

Glenohumeral morphological predictors of recurrent shoulder instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate glenohumeral morphological features on a magnetic resonance arthrogram (MRA) to determine risk factors for recurrence of anterior shoulder instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR).

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who underwent ABR between 2012 and 2017 was performed to identify patients who had recurrence of instability following stabilisation (Group 1). These were pair-matched in a 2:1 ratio for age, gender and sport with a control (Group 2) who underwent ABR without recurrence. Preoperative MRAs were evaluated for risk factors for recurrence, with glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs lesions also measured. Multilinear and multilogistic regression models were used to evaluate factors affecting recurrence.

RESULTS

Overall, 72 patients were included in this study, including 48 patients without recurrence and 24 patients with recurrent instability. There was a significant difference between the two groups in mean glenoid bone loss (Group 1: 7.3% vs. Group 2: 5.7%, p < 0.0001) and the rate of off-track Hill-Sachs lesions (Group 1: 20.8% vs. Group 2: 0%, p = 0.0003). Of the variables analysed in logistic regression, increased glenoid anteversion (p = 0.02), acromioclavicular (AC) degeneration (p = 0.03) and increased Hill-Sachs width were associated with increased risk of failure. Increased chondral version (p = 0.01) and humeral head diameter in the anteriorposterior view were found to be protective and associated with a greater likelihood of success.

CONCLUSION

Glenoid anteversion was a risk factor for recurrent instability, whereas increased chondral version and humeral head diameter were associated with higher rates of success following ABR. Glenoid bone loss, presence of an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, increased Hill-Sachs width and AC degeneration were also associated with failure. These findings should be used by surgeons to stratify risk for recurrence following ABR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Overhead athletes have comparable intraoperative injury patterns and clinical outcomes to non-overhead athletes following surgical stabilization for first-time anterior shoulder instability at average 6-year follow-up

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

Anterior shoulder instability is a common problem affecting young, athletic populations that results in potential career-altering functional limitations. However, little is known regarding the differences in clinical outcomes after operative management of overhead vs. non-overhead athletes presenting with first-time anterior shoulder instability. We hypothesized that overhead athletes would have milder clinical presentations, similar surgical characteristics, and diminished postoperative outcomes when compared with non-overhead athletes after surgical stabilization following first-time anterior shoulder instability episodes.

METHODS

Patients with first-time anterior shoulder instability events (subluxations and dislocations) undergoing operative management between 2013 and 2020 were included. The exclusion criteria included multiple dislocations and multidirectional shoulder instability. Baseline demographic characteristics, imaging data, examination findings, and intraoperative findings were retrospectively collected. Patients were contacted to collect postoperative patient-reported outcomes including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score, Brophy activity index score, and Subjective Shoulder Value, in addition to return-to-work and -sport, recurrent dislocation, and revision rates.

RESULTS

A total of 256 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 178 (70%) were non-overhead athletes. The mean age of the entire population was 23.1 years. There was no significant difference in concomitant shoulder pathology, preoperative range of motion, or preoperative strength between cohorts. A greater proportion of overhead athletes presented with instability events not requiring manual reduction (defined as subluxations; 64.1% vs. 50.6%; P < .001) and underwent arthroscopic surgery (97% vs. 76%, P < .001) compared with non-overhead athletes. A smaller proportion of overhead athletes underwent open soft-tissue stabilization compared with non-overhead athletes (1% vs. 19%, P < .001). Outcome data were available for 60 patients with an average follow-up period of 6.7 years. No significant differences were found between groups with respect to recurrent postoperative instability event rate (13.0% for overhead athletes vs. 16.8% for non-overhead athletes), revision rate (13.0% for overhead athletes vs. 11.1% for non-overhead athletes), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score, Brophy score, Subjective Shoulder Value, or rates of return to work or sport.

CONCLUSION

Overhead athletes who underwent surgery after an initial instability event were more likely to present with subluxations compared with non-overhead athletes. With limited follow-up subject to biases, this study found no differences in recurrence or revision rates, postoperative patient-reported outcomes, or return-to-work or -sport rates between overhead and non-overhead athletes undergoing shoulder stabilization surgery following first-time instability events. Although larger prospective studies are necessary to draw firmer conclusions, the findings of this study suggest that overhead athletes can be considered in the same treatment pathway for first-time dislocation as non-overhead athletes.

A Comprehensive Approach to PROMs in Elective Orthopedic Surgery: Comparing Effect Sizes across Patient Subgroups

Background: There is limited knowledge regarding the comparative patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) and effect sizes (ESs) across orthopedic elective surgery. Methods: All patient data between January 2020 and December 2022 were collected, and treatment outcomes assessed as a PROM difference between baseline and one-year follow-up. The cohort was divided into subgroups (hand, elbow, shoulder, spine, hip, knee, and foot/ankle). The PROM ESs were calculated for each patient separately, and patients with ES > 0.5 were considered responders. Results: In total, 7695 patients were operated on. The mean ES across all patient groups was 1.81 (SD 1.41), and the largest ES was observed in shoulder patients and the smallest in hand patients. Overall, shoulder, hip, and knee patients had a larger ES compared to hand, spine, and foot/ankle patients (p < 0.0001). The proportion of positive responders ranged between 91-94% in the knee, shoulder, and hip, and 69-70% in the hand, spine, and foot/ankle subgroups. Conclusions: The ESs are generally high throughout elective orthopedic surgery. However, based on our institutional observations, shoulder, hip, and knee patients experience larger treatment effects compared to hand, spine, and foot/ankle patients, among whom there are also more non-responders. The expected treatment outcomes should be clearly communicated to patients when considering elective surgery. Because of the study limitations, the results should be approached with some caution.

Young Collision Athletes Have High Rate of Return to Play and Good Clinical Outcomes Following Open Latarjet Procedure

PURPOSE

To evaluate return to play (RTP), clinical outcomes, and recurrence rates in collision athletes 20 years of age and younger who underwent open Latarjet for anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

A retrospective review of collision athletes 20 years of age and younger, who underwent an open Latarjet procedure by a single surgeon between the years of 2010-2020 was carried out. Inclusion criteria were 1) collision athlete, 2) underwent open Latarjet procedure, 3) 16-20 years old, and 4) minimum 24-month follow-up. Exclusion criteria were 1) other pathology of the ipsilateral shoulder and 2) noncollision athlete. Rate of RTP, time to RTP, rate of return to preinjury level, the Shoulder Instability Return to Sport after Injury score (SIRSI) score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, and recurrence events were recorded. Quantitative statistical analysis was carried out.

RESULTS

The study included 105 male collision athletes with a mean age of 18.6 ± 1.0 years (range: 17-20). The mean follow-up for patients was 36 ± 26.2 months. A total of 93 (88.6%) RTP at a mean time of 6.3 ± 2.2 months, with 73 (69.5%) returning to their preinjury level of participation. The mean SIRSI score was 69.2 ± 21.8, the mean VAS score was 2.3 ± 2.1, and the mean SSV score was 84.1 ± 16.8. Five patients (4.8%) redislocated their shoulder, with 4 of these requiring a further surgery (3.8%). Two patients (1.9%) reported incidents of subluxation.

CONCLUSIONS

The open Latarjet procedure in young collision athletes results in high rates of RTP, excellent functional outcomes and low recurrence rates at mid-term follow-up. Additionally, complication rates are low in this cohort.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

Cross-education effects on shoulder rotator muscle strength and function after shoulder stabilization surgery: a randomized controlled trial

HYPOTHESIS

This study aimed to investigate the effects of cross education (CE) on rotator cuff (RC) muscle strength recovery and shoulder function in patients who underwent arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization surgery.

METHODS

Twenty-eight patients who underwent shoulder stabilization surgery were included in the study (age, 25 ± 6 years; body mass index, 24.8 ± 3.6 kg/m2). The patients were randomly divided into either the CE group (n = 14) or the control group (n = 14). All patients received a standardized rehabilitation program until the end of the 12th postoperative week. The CE group also received isokinetic training of the nonoperative shoulder focusing on the RC muscles (twice a week, 3 sets of 10 repetitions). RC muscle strength was measured preoperatively and at 3 and 6 months postoperatively using an isokinetic dynamometer at 60°/s and 180°/s angular velocities. Shoulder function was assessed with the Closed Kinetic Chain Upper Extremity Stability Test and Y-Balance Test-Upper Quarter. Analyses of covariance were used for the statistical analyses.

RESULTS

At 6 months postoperatively, at 60°/s angular velocity, there was higher internal rotator strength in the CE group (P = .02) and similar external rotator strength (P = .62) between the groups. At 180°/s angular velocity, both internal rotator strength (P = .04) and external rotator strength (P = .02) were higher in the CE group. The Closed Kinetic Chain Upper Extremity Stability Test (P = .47), Y-Balance Test-Upper Quarter (P = .95), and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (P = .12) scores were similar between the groups at 6 months after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

CE in the early period of postoperative rehabilitation following stabilization surgery improves RC strength recovery. However, it has no effect on functional outcomes. Integrating a CE program into the postoperative rehabilitation protocol may help to improve dynamic shoulder stability but not functional capacity.

Evaluation High-Quality of Information from ChatGPT (Artificial Intelligence-Large Language Model) Artificial Intelligence on Shoulder Stabilization Surgery

PURPOSE

To analyze the quality and readability of information regarding shoulder stabilization surgery available using an online AI software (ChatGPT), using standardized scoring systems, as well as to report on the given answers by the AI.

METHODS

An open AI model (ChatGPT) was used to answer 23 commonly asked questions from patients on shoulder stabilization surgery. These answers were evaluated for medical accuracy, quality, and readability using The JAMA Benchmark criteria, DISCERN score, Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease Score (FRES) & Grade Level (FKGL).

RESULTS

The JAMA Benchmark criteria score was 0, which is the lowest score, indicating no reliable resources cited. The DISCERN score was 60, which is considered a good score. The areas that open AI model did not achieve full marks were also related to the lack of available source material used to compile the answers, and finally some shortcomings with information not fully supported by the literature. The FRES was 26.2, and the FKGL was considered to be that of a college graduate.

CONCLUSIONS

There was generally high quality in the answers given on questions relating to shoulder stabilization surgery, but there was a high reading level required to comprehend the information presented. However, it is unclear where the answers came from with no source material cited. It is important to note that the ChatGPT software repeatedly references the need to discuss these questions with an orthopaedic surgeon and the importance of shared discussion making, as well as compliance with surgeon treatment recommendations.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

As shoulder instability is an injury that predominantly affects younger individuals who may use the Internet for information, this study shows what information patients may be getting online.

Assessing the use of the frequency, etiology, direction, and severity classification system for shoulder instability in physical therapy research - A scoping review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to review the implementation of the Frequency, Etiology, Direction, and Severity (FEDS) classification for shoulder instability by the physical therapy scientific community since its publication in 2011.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted on January 10, 2024 in the MEDLINE, EMBASE, SPORTDiscus, Scopus, Web of Science, Cochrane, and SciELO databases, as well as Google Scholar. Studies investigating physical therapy interventions in people with shoulder instability, and reporting selection criteria for shoulder instability were considered eligible. A narrative synthesis was conducted.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies were included. None reported using the FEDS classification as eligibility criteria for shoulder instability. Only 42% of the studies provided data of all four criteria of the FEDS classification. The most reported criterion was direction (92%), followed by etiology (85%), severity (65%), and frequency (58%). The most common reported descriptor for profiling shoulder instability was "dislocation" (83.3%), followed by "first-time" (66.7%), "anterior" (62.5%), and "traumatic" (59.1%). Regarding other instability classifications, only one study (4%) used the Thomas & Matsen classification, and two (8%) the Stanmore classification.

CONCLUSIONS

The FEDS classification system has not been embraced enough by the physical therapy scientific community since its publication in 2011.

Studies on Bankart Repair for Anterior Shoulder Instability Show Poor Reporting of Data and Reflect Low Level of Evidence: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To assess the quality and level of evidence of studies reporting on Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

A search was performed using the PubMed/Medline database for all studies that reported clinical outcomes on Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability. The search term "Bankart repair" with all results were analyzed via strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two independent investigators scored each included study based on the 10 criteria of the Modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) out of 100 and gave each study a score out of 25 based on the Anterior Shoulder Instability (ASI) Methodology criteria.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-six studies were included in the analysis and encompassed a total of 19,156 patients and 19,317 surgical procedures for Bankart repair for shoulder instability. Overall, 81.6% of studies were Level III or IV evidence. The mean CMS score for the studies was 55.3 out of 100, and the mean ASI Methodology score for the studies was 12.1 out of 25. Weaknesses in the studies were identified in sample size, description of preoperative investigations and diagnoses, reporting of mean glenoid bone loss, nonsubjective clinical outcome reporting, and description of associated pathologies.

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of studies reporting the clinical outcomes of Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability are of low methodological quality and have a low level of evidence.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study emphasizes need for greater reporting of many variables such as body mass index, mean glenoid bone loss, and patient-reported outcomes and provides a framework for future studies reporting.

Outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with prior anterior shoulder instability: minimum 5-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Patients with a history of anterior shoulder instability (ASI) commonly progress to glenohumeral arthritis or even dislocation arthropathy and often require total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The purposes of this study were to (1) report patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after TSA in patients with a history of ASI, (2) compare TSA outcomes of patients whose ASI was managed operatively vs. nonoperatively, and (3) report PROs of TSA in patients who previously underwent arthroscopic vs. open ASI management.

METHODS

Patients were included if they had a history of ASI and had undergone TSA ≥5 years earlier, performed by a single surgeon, between October 2005 and January 2017. The exclusion criteria included prior rotator cuff repair, hemiarthroplasty, or glenohumeral joint infection before the index TSA procedure. Patients were separated into 2 groups: those whose ASI was previously operatively managed and those whose ASI was treated nonoperatively. This was a retrospective review of prospective collected data. Data collected was demographic, surgical and subjective. The PROs used were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation score, QuickDASH (Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) score, and 12-item Short Form physical component score. Failure was defined as revision TSA surgery, conversion to reverse TSA, or prosthetic joint infection. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed.

RESULTS

This study included 36 patients (27 men and 9 women) with a mean age of 56.4 years (range, 18.8-72.2 years). Patients in the operative ASI group were younger than those in the nonoperative ASI group (50.6 years vs. 64.0 years, P < .001). Operative ASI patients underwent 10 open and 11 arthroscopic anterior stabilization surgical procedures prior to TSA (mean, 2 procedures; range, 1-4 procedures). TSA failure occurred in 6 of 21 patients with operative ASI (28.6%), whereas no failures occurred in the nonoperative ASI group (P = .03). Follow-up was obtained in 28 of 30 eligible patients (93%) at an average of 7.45 years (range, 5.0-13.6 years). In the collective cohort, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation score, QuickDASH (Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) score, and 12-item Short Form physical component score significantly improved, with no differences in the postoperative PROs between the 2 groups. We found no significant differences when comparing PROs between prior open and prior arthroscopic ASI procedures or when comparing the number of prior ASI procedures. Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated a 79% 5-year survivorship rate in patients with prior ASI surgery and a 100% survivorship rate in nonoperatively managed ASI patients (P = .030).

CONCLUSION

At mid-term follow-up, patients with a history of ASI undergoing TSA can expect continued improvement in function compared with preoperative values. However, TSA survivorship is decreased in patients with a history of ASI surgery compared with those without prior surgery.

Immobilization in External Rotation Versus Arthroscopic Stabilization After Primary Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Systematic Review of Level 1 and 2 Studies

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic stabilization has been established as a superior treatment option for primary glenohumeral instability when compared with immobilization in internal rotation. However, immobilization in external rotation (ER) has recently gained interest as a viable nonoperative treatment option for patients with shoulder instability.

PURPOSE

To compare the rates of recurrent instability and subsequent surgery in patients undergoing treatment for primary anterior shoulder dislocation with arthroscopic stabilization versus immobilization in ER.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify studies that'evaluated patients being treated for primary anterior glenohumeral dislocation with either arthroscopic stabilization or immobilization in ER. The search phrase used various combinations of the keywords/phrases "primary closed reduction,""anterior shoulder dislocation,""traumatic,""primary,""treatment,""management,""immobilization,""external rotation,""surgical,""operative,""nonoperative," and "conservative." Inclusion criteria included patients undergoing treatment for primary anterior glenohumeral joint dislocation with either immobilization in ER or arthroscopic stabilization. Rates of recurrent instability, subsequent stabilization surgery, return to sports, positive postintervention apprehension tests, and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

The 30 studies that met inclusion criteria included 760 patients undergoing arthroscopic stabilization (mean age, 23.1 years; mean follow-up time, 55.1 months) and 409 patients undergoing immobilization in ER (mean age, 29.8 years; mean follow-up time, 28.8 months). Overall, 8.8% of operative patients experienced recurrent instability at latest follow-up compared with 21.3% of patients who had undergone ER immobilization (P < .0001). Similarly, 5.7% of operative patients had undergone a subsequent stabilization procedure at latest follow-up compared with 11.3% of patients who had undergone ER immobilization (P = .0015). A higher rate of return to sports was found in the operative group (P < .05), but no other differences were found between groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing arthroscopic treatment for primary anterior glenohumeral dislocation with arthroscopic stabilization can be expected to experience significantly lower rates of recurrent instability and subsequent stabilization procedures compared with patients undergoing ER immobilization.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair versus nonoperative management for first-time anterior shoulder instability: A cost-effectiveness analysis

Purpose

Arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) may be more effective than nonoperative management for patients with anterior shoulder instability following first-time dislocation. The purpose of the study was to determine the most cost-effective treatment strategy by evaluating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for ABR versus nonoperative treatment.

Methods

This cost-effectiveness study utilized a Markov decision chain and Monte Carlo simulation. Probabilities, health utility values, and outcome data regarding ABR and nonoperative management of first-time shoulder instability derived from level I/II evidence. Costs were tabulated from Centers for Medicaid & Medicare Services. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed using >100,000 repetitions of the Monte Carlo simulation. A willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was set at $50,000.

Results

The expected cost for operative management higher than nonoperative management ($32,765 vs $29,343). However, ABR (5.48 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)) was the more effective treatment strategy compared to nonoperative management (4.61 QALYs). The ICER for ABR was $3943. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that ABR was the most cost-effective strategy in 100% of simulations.

Discussion

ABR is more cost-effective than nonoperative management for first-time anterior shoulder dislocation. The threshold analysis demonstrated that when accounting for WTP, ABR was found to be the more cost-effective strategy.

Return to play following operative management of anterior shoulder instability in overhead athletes-A systematic review

Background

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the rate and timing of return to play in overhead athletes following operative management of anterior shoulder instability.

Methods

A systematic literature search based on PRISMA guidelines, utilizing the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library Databases. Eligible for inclusion were clinical studies reporting on return to play among overhead athletes following arthroscopic Bankart repair, open Latarjet procedure or Remplissage procedure.

Results

There are 23 studies included with 961 patients. Among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair, the rate of return to play was 86.2%, with 70.6% returning to the same level of play and the mean time to return to play was 7.1 months. Among those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure, the rate of return to play was 80.9%, with 77.7% returning to the same level of play and the mean time to return to play was 5.1 months. Among those undergoing a Remplissage procedure, the rate of return to play was 70.6%, with 70.0% returning to the same level of play or mean time to return to play.

Discussion

Overall, there were high rates of return to play following operative management of anterior shoulder instability in overhead athletes.

Long-term outcomes of anterior shoulder instability treated with open latarjet procedure - a systematic review of outcomes at a minimum 15-year follow-up

Background

To systematically review the literature to evaluate the outcomes following an open Latarjet (OL) procedure at a minimum 15-year follow-up.

Methods

Two independent reviewers performed a literature search using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines using 3 databases. Only studies reporting outcomes of OL procedure with a minimum of 15 years of follow-up were included.

Results

Nine studies composed of 326 shoulders (78.2% males) in 313 patients were included (average age 26.9 ± 3.2 years (15-58)), with a mean follow-up of 271.9 ± 69.2 months (180-420) At a minimum 15-year follow-up, 93.5% (286 of 306) patients reported being satisfied with their OL procedure, whilst 86.8% (177 of 204) reported good/excellent outcomes at final follow-up. All nine of the included studies reported an overall rate of recurrent instability was 7.7%, with re-dislocations and subluxation at 3.4% and 5.8%, respectively. The rate of surgical revision was 5.15%; 3.5% of cases were revised for recurrent instability. Instability arthropathy was reported across all included studies as 41.0%.

Conclusion

The OL procedure results in satisfactory clinical outcomes, low rates of recurrent instability and surgical revision at a minimum 15-year follow-up. Although high levels of radiological instability arthropathy and residual pain are found over the same period, these appear stable from a minimum of 10-year follow-up data.

Level of Evidence

IV; a systematic review of all levels of evidence.

Arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage results in lower rates of recurrent instability with similar range of motion compared to isolated arthroscopic Bankart for anterior glenohumeral instability: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The addition of the remplissage procedure to an arthroscopic Bankart procedure has been shown to improve clinical outcomes, yet at the expense of potentially decreasing shoulder range of motion. The purpose of this study was to assess recurrent instability, range of motion, functional outcomes and rates of return to sport outcomes in patients undergoing an isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair compared to those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair in addition to the remplissage procedure.

METHODS

According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a search was conducted using three databases (MEDLINE/OVID, EMBASE and PubMed). Retrieved studies were screened based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria for comparative studies. Data were extracted and meta-analysis performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies (13 level III studies, 2 level II studies and 1 level I) were included with a total of 507 and 704 patients in the Bankart plus remplissage and isolated Bankart repair groups, respectively. No studies reported glenoid bone loss of >20% with the least percentage of glenoid bone loss reported among studies being <1%. There was a significantly increased rate of recurrent dislocations (odds ratio [OR] = 4.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.380-7.48, p < 0.00001) and revision procedures (OR = 3.36, 95% CI: 1.52-7.41, p = 0.003) in the isolated Bankart repair group compared to the Bankart plus remplissage group. Additionally, there were no significant differences between groups in terms of external rotation at side (n.s.), in abduction (n.s.) or at forward flexion (n.s.) at final follow-up. Furthermore, return to preinjury level of sport favoured the Bankart plus remplissage group (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.35-0.85, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart plus remplissage for anterior shoulder instability have lower rates of recurrent instability, higher rates of return to sport, and no significant difference in range of motion at final follow-up when compared to an isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair. Further large, prospective studies are needed to further determine which patients and degree of bone loss would benefit most from augmentation with the remplissage procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Complications following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Complications are rare after arthroscopic Bankart repair, and as a result, there is a lack of guidance over rates of complications that can be used to consent patients. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature to assess the complications after arthroscopic Bankart repair, other than recurrent instability.

METHODS

A literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library was performed based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Clinical studies reporting on the complications after arthroscopic Bankart repair were included.

RESULTS

A total of 194 studies were included in the analysis, with 13,979 patients and 14,019 shoulders undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. The overall complication rate was 0.67%, with frozen shoulder being the most common complication occurring in 0.32%. Persistent pain occurred in 0.17%. The rates of nerve, hardware, and wound complications were 0.07%, 0.05%, and 0.03%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

The arthroscopic Bankart repair has a very low rate of complications. Frozen shoulder and persistent pain are the most frequently encountered complications.

Primary Latarjet procedure versus Latarjet in the setting of previously failed Bankart repair: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study is to systematically review the comparative studies in the literature to compare the outcomes of the Latarjet procedure in the setting of a previously failed Bankart repair versus those undergoing the Latarjet procedure as a primary surgery for anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

A systematic search in Pubmed, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library databases was carried out according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Cohort studies comparing outcomes in the Latarjet procedure as a primary surgery versus the Latarjet procedure in the setting of a previously failed Bankart repair were included.

RESULTS

Ten studies with 1913 patients were included. There was a significantly lower rate of recurrent instability in those with a Latarjet procedure as a primary surgery (4.8% vs 12.1%, p ​= ​0.007). There was also a significantly lower rate of complications with the Latarjet procedure as a primary surgery (6.2% vs 10.2%, p ​= ​0.03). Furthermore, there was a significant difference in the rate of revision surgery in favour of the Latarjet procedure as a primary surgery (4.8% vs 10.9%, p ​= ​0.02). However, there were similar rates of redislocations (2.8% vs 3.4%, p ​= ​0.82) and return to play (67.7% vs 78.5%, p ​= ​0.30) between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSION

This study found that the Latarjet procedure as a revision procedure for a previously failed Bankart repair resulted in higher rates of complications, recurrent instability, and revisions than the Latarjet procedure performed as a primary procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Systematic Review & Meta-Analysis of Level III studies.

No difference in biomechanical properties of simple, horizontal mattress, and double row repair in Bankart repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of biomechanical studies

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic Bankart repair is the most common procedure in patients with anterior shoulder instability. Various repair techniques using suture anchors have been used to improve the strength of fixation and surgical outcomes in arthroscopic Bankart surgery. However, evidence regarding which method is superior is lacking. This systematic review and meta-analysis study was designed to compare the biomechanical results of simple versus horizontal mattress versus double-row mattress for Bankart repair.

METHODS

A systematic search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was performed to identify comparative biomechanical studies comparing the simple, horizontal mattress, and double-row techniques commonly used in Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability. Biomechanical results included the ultimate load to failure, stiffness, cyclic displacement, and mode of failure after the ultimate load. The methodological quality was assessed based on the Quality Appraisal for Cadaveric Studies (QUACS) scale for biomechanical studies.

RESULTS

Six biomechanical studies comprising 125 human cadavers were included in this systematic review. In biomechanical studies comparing simple and horizontal mattress repair and biomechanical studies comparing simple and double-row repair, there were no significant differences in the ultimate load to failure, stiffness, or cyclic displacement between the repair methods. The median QUACS scale was 11.5 with a range from 10 to 12, indicating a low risk of bias.

CONCLUSION

There was no biomechanically significant difference between the simple, horizontal mattress, and double-row methods in Bankart repair. Clinical evidence such as prospective randomized controlled trials should be conducted to evaluate clinical outcomes according to the various repair methods.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Systematic review, Therapeutic level IV.

Transglenoid Fixation Technique for Arthroscopic Subscapularis Augmentation Using an Adjustable-Length Loop Cortical Suspensory Fixation Device

The optimal surgical management of anterior shoulder instability remains controversial. Although it has low recurrence rates and good clinical results, the Latarjet procedure has some disadvantages and is considered "overtreatment" in inactive patients with moderate glenoid bone loss. Several studies have described an arthroscopic technique called arthroscopic subscapularis augmentation. We developed a technical variation of the arthroscopic subscapularis augmentation technique involving tenodesis of the upper third of the subscapularis tendon using a graft. This technique uses a transglenoid fixation-immobilization with 2 knotless TightRope devices instead of anchors.

Artificial Intelligence Can Define and Predict the "Optimal Observed Outcome" After Anterior Shoulder Instability Surgery: An Analysis of 200 Patients With 11-Year Mean Follow-Up

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to use unsupervised machine learning clustering to define the "optimal observed outcome" after surgery for anterior shoulder instability (ASI) and to identify predictors for achieving it.

Methods

Medical records, images, and operative reports were reviewed for patients <40 years old undergoing surgery for ASI. Four unsupervised machine learning clustering algorithms partitioned subjects into "optimal observed outcome" or "suboptimal outcome" based on combinations of actually observed outcomes. Demographic, clinical, and treatment variables were compared between groups using descriptive statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival curves. Variables were assessed for prognostic value through multivariate stepwise logistic regression.

Results

Two hundred patients with a mean follow-up of 11 years were included. Of these, 146 (64%) obtained the "optimal observed outcome," characterized by decreased: postoperative pain (23% vs 52%; P < 0.001), recurrent instability (12% vs 41%; P < 0.001), revision surgery (10% vs 24%; P = 0.015), osteoarthritis (OA) (5% vs 19%; P = 0.005), and restricted motion (161° vs 168°; P = 0.001). Forty-one percent of patients had a "perfect outcome," defined as ideal performance across all outcomes. Time from initial instability to presentation (odds ratio [OR] = 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92-0.98; P = 0.006) and habitual/voluntary instability (OR = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.04-0.77; P = 0.020) were negative predictors of achieving the "optimal observed outcome." A predilection toward subluxations rather than dislocations before surgery (OR = 1.30; 95% CI, 1.02-1.65; P = 0.030) was a positive predictor. Type of surgery performed was not a significant predictor.

Conclusion

After surgery for ASI, 64% of patients achieved the "optimal observed outcome" defined as minimal postoperative pain, no recurrent instability or OA, low revision surgery rates, and increased range of motion, of whom only 41% achieved a "perfect outcome." Positive predictors were shorter time to presentation and predilection toward preoperative subluxations over dislocations.

Level of Evidence

Retrospective cohort, level IV.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair versus conservative treatment for first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Shoulder is vulnerable to dislocation owing to its anatomical structure and the increasing popularity of contact sports in young population. The management of first-time anterior shoulder dislocation in this group is still controversial and the prognosis are varied. This review aimed to compare the results of arthroscopic Bankart repair and conservative management for first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in young active patients.

METHODS

Databases were searched till November 2021, and comparative studies between arthroscopic Bankart repair and conservative management for first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in young population were selected. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Back Review Group 12-item scale. Outcome measures included recurrence of instability, return to play, subsequent instability surgery, and shoulder functional scores.

RESULTS

The search returned 12 eligible trials with 786 participants. All the trials were of prospective design. After arthroscopic Bankart repair, patients experienced significantly less re-dislocation (7.5% vs. 53.0%, p < 0.00001, I² = 0%), subluxation (3.1% vs. 24.2%, p < 0.0001, I² = 0%), positive apprehension test (7.3% vs. 25.8%, p = 0.002, I² = 11%), and subsequent surgical treatment for instability (5.6% vs. 37.8%, p < 0.00001, I² = 0%) when compared with those underwent conservative management. And more patients returned to play (83.5% vs. 66.0%, p = 0.03, I² = 81%) after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Outcomes regarding the functional scores did not reach a significant difference between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic Bankart repair showed superiority over conservative management in terms of recurrence, return to play, and subsequent instability surgery during the follow-up in young active patients that encountered first episode of dislocation. As long-term prognosis is comparable, an immediate surgical stabilization might not be suitable for everyone.

Glenoid index: a new risk factor for recurrence of glenohumeral instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair

Background

The glenoid index (GI) (glenoid height to width ratio) has been shown to be a risk factor for instability in young healthy athletes. Nevertheless, whether the altered GI is a risk factor for recurrence after a Bankart repair remains unknown.

Methods

Between 2014 and 2018, 148 patients ≥ 18 years old with anterior glenohumeral instability underwent a primary arthroscopic Bankart repair in our institution. We assessed return to sports, functional outcomes, and complications. We evaluate the association between the altered GI and the probabilities of recurrence in the postoperative period. Intraclass correlation coefficient was used to determine interobserver reliability.

Results

The mean age at the time of surgery was 25.6 years old (19 to 29), and the mean follow-up was 53.3 months (29 to 89). The 95 shoulders who met the inclusion criteria were divided into 2 cohorts, 47 shoulders had a GI ≤ 1.58 (group A) and 48 had a GI > 1.58 (group B). At the final follow-up, 5 shoulders in group A (10.6%) and 17 shoulders in group B (35.4%) suffered a recurrence of instability. Those patients with a GI > 1.58 had a hazard ratio of 3.86 (95% confidence interval: 1.42-10.48) (P = .004) compared with those with a GI ≤ 1.58 of suffering a recurrence. When correlating GI measurements between raters, we observed an intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.76 (95% confidence interval: 0.63-0.84), these results fall under the qualitative definition of good interobserver agreement.

Conclusion

In young active patients with an arthroscopic Bankart repair, an increased GI was associated with a significantly higher rate of postoperative recurrences. Specifically, those subjects with a GI > 1.58 had 3.86 times the risk of recurrence than those subjects with a GI ≤ 1.58.

[Treatment strategies for traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation]

Anterior glenohumeral instability is the most frequent type of shoulder instability. This is often associated with labral and osseous lesions leading to recurrent instability. A detailed medical history, a physical examination and targeted diagnostic imaging are necessary to assess possible pathological soft tissue alterations as well as bony lesions of the humeral head and the glenoid bone. Early surgical treatment has been shown to reduce the risk of recurrence, especially in young active athletes, and can avoid secondary damage. Shoulder dislocations in older patients also require a detailed assessment and selection of treatment as persisting pain and limitation of movement can occur due to rotator cuff lesions and nerve injuries. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the currently available evidence and results regarding diagnostic considerations and conservative vs. surgical treatment and time to return to sport after treatment of a primary anterior shoulder dislocation.

Arthroscopic Posterior Capsulolabral Repair With Suture-First Versus Anchor-First Technique in Patients With Posterior Shoulder Instability (Type B2): Clinical Midterm Follow-up

Background

Isolated soft tissue injuries of the posterior capsulolabral complex can be addressed arthroscopically, with various anchor systems available for repair.

Purpose

To evaluate clinical and patient-reported outcomes after arthroscopic capsulolabral repair in patients with posterior shoulder instability (PSI) and to compare differences in outcomes between patients treated with a suture-first technique (PushLock anchor) and an anchor-first technique (FiberTak all-suture anchor).

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Included were 32 patients with dynamic structural PSI (type B2 according to the ABC classification) treated with an arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair. After a mean follow-up time of 4.8 ± 3.4 years (range, 2-11) patients were evaluated clinically, and standardized outcome scores were obtained for the Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), Rowe, Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic (KJOC), patient satisfaction (0-5 [best]), and pain on a visual analog scale (VAS; 0-10 [worst]).

Results

The overall satisfaction level with the outcome of the surgery was 4.6 ± 0.5 (range, 4-5). No patient suffered from instability events. The mean VAS level for pain was 0.4 ± 0.9 (range, 0-4) at rest and 1.9 ± 2.0 (range, 0-6) during motion. The mean SSV was 80 ± 17 (range, 30-100), the mean postoperative WOSI score 75% ± 19% (range, 18-98), the mean Rowe score 78 ± 20 (range, 10-100), and the mean KJOC score was 81 ± 18 (range, 40-100) for the entire cohort. There was no significant difference between the techniques with regard to range of motion, strength, or clinical outcome scores.

Conclusion

Arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair was a satisfactory method to treat structural PSI type B2 with regard to stability, pain relief, and functional restoration. The majority of patients had good outcomes. No differences in outcomes were observed between the anchor-first and suture-first techniques.

The Longitude-Latitude-Loop Used for Complex Bankart Lesion Repair: An All-Arthroscopic Technique

The most frequent operation for anterior shoulder instability is the arthroscopic Bankart repair, which has a positive outcome and a low rate of complications. A variety of restoration procedures have been reported to reconstruct labral height and reproduce a dynamic concavity-compression reaction. The longitude-latitude loop is a knotless high-strength suture method that simultaneously tightens the joint capsule in the warp and weft direction and resists tearing. The suture method is safe and reproducible. This study aimed to present a longitude-latitude loop suture for joint capsule labral complex repair during Bankart arthroscopy surgery.

Arthroscopic Repair Versus Conservative Treatment for First-time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation

To systematically compare the clinical efficacy of conservative treatment and arthroscopic one-stage repair for patients with first-time anterior dislocation of the shoulder. A retrieval and systematic review of randomized controlled studies of primary anterior shoulder dislocation with conservative versus arthroscopic repair was conducted and further pooled analysis was performed to compare the overall difference in clinical outcomes, including redislocation and revision surgery rates, shoulder function scores and related complications. Preliminary meta-analysis showed that the risk of anterior shoulder redislocation was 4.73-fold higher in patients treated conservatively than those undergoing arthroscopic repair (RR:4.73 [2.95-7.58], p<0.000; I²=0%, p=0.920),and that the revision surgery rate was 5.91 times higher in the conservative group than in the arthroscopic repair group (RR:5.91 [2.82-12.39], p<0.000; I²⁼0%, p=0.560).Early arthroscopic repair can significantly reduce the redislocation and revision surgery rates and also improve the shoulder joint function score, without serious complications. However, it is necessary to recognize the subset of patients with a higher risk of redislocation in young patients through a high quality, blinded, prospective cohort study when early arthroscopic repair intervention in this subset of high-risk patients will be of significant clinical value.

Increased Failure Rates After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair After Second Dislocation Compared to Primary Dislocation With Comparable Clinical Outcomes

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare rates of recurrent dislocation and postsurgical outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability immediately after a first-time traumatic anterior dislocation versus patients who sustained a second dislocation event after initial nonoperative management.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed of patients undergoing primary arthroscopic stabilization for anterior shoulder instability without concomitant procedures and minimum 2-year clinical follow-up. Primary outcome was documentation of a recurrent shoulder dislocation. Secondary clinical outcomes included range of motion, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (ASES), and Shoulder Activity Scale (SAS).

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients (mean age 21.3 years ± 7.3 years) met inclusion criteria. Sixty-three shoulders underwent surgical stabilization after a single shoulder dislocation, and 14 underwent surgery after 2 dislocations. Average follow-up was 35.9 months. The rate of recurrent dislocation was significantly higher in the 2-dislocation group compared to single dislocations (42.8% vs 14.2%, P = .03). No significant difference was present in range of motion, VAS, ASES, and SAS scores. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was 1.4 for VAS and 1.8 for SAS scores. The MCID was met or exceeded in the primary dislocation group in 31/38 (81.6%) patients for VAS, 23/31 (74.1%) for ASES, and 24/31 for SES (77.4%) scores. For the second dislocation cohort, MCID was met or exceeded in 7/9 (77.8%) for VAS, 4/7 (57.1%) for ASES, and 5/7 for SES (71.4%) scores.

CONCLUSION

Immediate arthroscopic surgical stabilization after a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation significantly decreases the risk of recurrent dislocation in comparison to those who undergo surgery after 2 dislocation events, with comparable clinical outcome scores. These findings suggest that patients who return to activities after a primary anterior shoulder dislocation and sustain just 1 additional dislocation event are at increased risk of a failing arthroscopic repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective comparative study; Level of evidence, 3.

Physical Therapy for the Treatment of Shoulder Instability

Shoulder instability is the separation of the humeral head from the glenoid. Injury to the static and dynamic stabilizers can result in instability. Anterior shoulder instability is the predominant form of instability. It is usually a result of trauma. Posterior shoulder instability often presents with an insidious onset of pain. Multidirectional instability of the shoulder is symptomatic laxity in more than one plane of motion. The primary goal of rehabilitation is to restore pain-free mobility, strength, and functioning. Rehabilitation implements range of motion and strengthening exercises to restore proprioceptive control and scapular kinematics.

Pediatric Shoulder Arthroscopy is Effective and Most Commonly Indicated for Instability, Obstetric Brachial Plexus Palsy, and Partial Rotator Cuff Tears

Purpose

The purpose of this review was to systematically evaluate the literature on pediatric shoulder arthroscopy and outline its indications, outcomes, and complications.

Methods

This systematic review was carried out in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect, and OVID Medline were searched for studies reporting the indications, outcomes, or complications in patients undergoing shoulder arthroscopy under the age of 18 years. Reviews, case reports, and letters to the editor were excluded. Data extracted included surgical techniques, indications, preoperative and postoperative functional and radiographic outcomes, and complications. The methodological quality of included studies was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool.

Results

Eighteen studies, with a mean MINORS score of 11.4/16, were identified, including a total of 761 shoulders (754 patients). Weighted average age was 13.6 years (range, 0.83-18.8 years) with a mean follow-up time of 34.6 months (range, 6-115). As part of their inclusion criteria, 6 studies (230 patients) recruited patients with anterior shoulder instability and 3 studies recruited patients with posterior shoulder instability (80 patients). Other indications for shoulder arthroscopy included obstetric brachial plexus palsy (157 patients) and rotator cuff tears (30 patients). Studies reported a significant improvement in functional outcomes for arthroscopy indicated for shoulder instability and obstetric brachial plexus palsy. A significant improvement was also noted in radiographic outcomes and range of motion for obstetric brachial plexus palsy patients. The overall rate of complication ranged from 0% to 25%, with 2 studies reporting no complications. The most common complication was recurrent instability (38 patients of 228 [16.7%]). Fourteen of the 38 patients (36.8%) underwent reoperation.

Conclusion

Among pediatric patients, shoulder arthroscopy was indicated most commonly for instability, followed by brachial plexus birth palsy, and partial rotator cuff tears. Its use resulted in good clinical and radiographic outcomes with limited complications.

Level of Evidence

Systematic review of Level II to IV studies.

Open Glenoid Augmentation With Scapular Spine Autograft for Recurrent Shoulder Instability: A Report of Two Cases

Optimal treatment for patients with significant glenoid bone loss after severe shoulder dislocation remains a topic of discussion, as there are many autograft and allograft techniques for glenoid augmentation. Several studies have identified scapular spine autograft to be a potential option for restoring glenohumeral stability, however, there is limited clinical data for this procedure. We present two cases in which patients suffered from anterior glenoid bone loss and recurrent shoulder instability who underwent open glenoid augmentation with scapular spine autograft. Both patients report a full return to activity with no functional limitations. Open glenoid augmentation with a scapular spine autograft is a viable option for patients with anterior glenoid bone loss and recurrent shoulder instability.

Inconsistencies in Controlling for Risk Factors for Recurrent Shoulder Instability After Primary Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Failure rates after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization are highly variable in the current orthopaedic literature. Predictive factors for risk of failure have been studied to improve patient selection, refine surgical techniques, and define the role of bony procedures. However, significant heterogeneity in the analysis and controlling of risk factors makes evidence-based management decisions challenging.

PURPOSE

The goals of this systematic review were (1) to critically assess the consistency of reported risk factors for recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair, (2) to identify the existing studies with the most comprehensive inclusion of confounding factors in their analyses, and (3) to give recommendations for which factors should be reported consistently in future clinical studies.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. An initial search yielded 1754 titles, from which 56 full-text articles were screened for inclusion. A total of 29 full-text articles met the following inclusion criteria: (1) clinical studies regarding recurrent anterior shoulder instability; (2) surgical procedures performed including arthroscopic anterior labral repair; (3) reported clinical outcome data including failure rate; and (4) assessment of risk factors for surgical failure. Further subanalyses were performed for 15 studies that included a multivariate analysis, 17 studies that included glenoid bone loss, and 8 studies that analyzed the Instability Severity Index Score.

RESULTS

After full-text review, 12 of the most commonly studied risk factors were identified and included in this review. The risk factors that were most consistently significant in multivariate analyses were off-track lesions (100%), glenoid bone loss (78%), Instability Severity Index Score (75%), level of sports participation (67%), number of anchors (67%), and younger age (63%). In studies of bone loss, statistical significance was more likely to be found using advanced imaging, with critical bone loss thresholds of 10% to 15%. Several studies found predictive thresholds of 2 to 4 for Instability Severity Index Score by receiver operating characteristic or multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Studies reporting risk factors for failure of arthroscopic Bankart repair often fail to control for known confounding variables. The factors with the most common statistical significance among 15 multivariate analyses are off-track lesions, glenoid bone loss, Instability Severity Index Score, level of sports participation, number of anchors, and younger age. Studies found significance more commonly with advanced imaging measurements or arthroscopic assessment of glenoid bone loss and with lower thresholds for the Instability Severity Index Score (2-4). Future studies should attempt to control for all relevant factors, use advanced imaging for glenoid bone loss measurements, and consider a lower predictive threshold for the Instability Severity Index Score.

Knotless Arthroscopic Glenoid Labral Stabilization for a 270° Tear With Concurrent Remplissage in the Lateral Decubitus Position

Labral tears resulting in 270° near-circumferential pathology predispose patients to recurrent instability and are technically challenging to repair. Furthermore, when such lesions are associated with Hill-Sachs lesions, recurrent instability risk is significantly increased and can result in substantially lower clinical outcomes. When determining a surgical treatment algorithm for shoulder stabilization, it is important to consider both humeral- and glenoid-sided pathology because subtle defects can have significant influence on recurrence and patient reported outcomes. In this Technical Note and accompanying video, we discuss our surgical technique for knotless arthroscopic stabilization for a 270° labral tear with concurrent remplissage in the setting of recurrent shoulder instability.

Assessment of Acute Lesions of the Biceps Pulley in Patients with Traumatic Shoulder Dislocation Using MR Imaging

Background: Shoulder dislocations represent common injuries and are often combined with rotator cuff tears and potentially damage to the biceps pulley. Purpose: To assess the occurrence and type of biceps pulley lesions in patients after traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation using 3T MRI. Methods: Thirty-three consecutive patients were enrolled between June 2021 and March 2022 (14 women, mean age 48.0 ± 19 years). All patients underwent MR imaging at 3 T within one week. Images were analyzed for the presence and type of pulley tears, subluxation/dislocation of the LHBT, rotator cuff lesions, joint effusion, labral lesions, and osseous defects. Results: Seventeen patients (52%) with traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation demonstrated biceps pulley lesions. Of those, eleven patients (33%) showed a combined tear of the sGHL and CHL. All seventeen patients with lesions of the biceps pulley showed associated partial tearing of the rotator cuff, whereas three patients showed an additional subluxation of the LHBT. Patients with pulley lesions after dislocations were significantly older than those without (mean age 52 ± 12 years vs. 44 ± 14 years, p = 0.023). Conclusion: Our results suggest an increased awareness for lesions of the biceps pulley in acute traumatic shoulder dislocation, particularly in patients over 45 years.

Impact of Prior Anterior Instability on Shoulder Arthroplasty Outcomes: A Systematic Review

Background

Anterior shoulder instability (ASI) is a frequently encountered pathology. Patients with a history of ASI have an increased rate of developing glenohumeral osteoarthritis and becoming candidates for shoulder arthroplasty. This systematic review aims to synthesize outcomes for patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty with a history of ASI.

Methods

A comprehensive literature review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) using PubMed, Embase, OVID Medline, Scopus, CINAHL, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases for studies evaluating the impact of prior ASI on total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), reverse TSA, and/or hemiarthroplasty outcomes, with a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Studies were graded by level of evidence and data concerning patient demographics and outcomes were extracted.

Results

Sixteen articles met the inclusion criteria, including 596 patients (413 male, 181 female). The average age of the control and prior ASI groups were 57.5 and 57.0 years, respectively. Overall, 251 patients were treated operatively, 132 nonoperatively, and 213 were controls without a history of prior ASI. Shoulder arthroplasty techniques included TSA (436 shoulders), reverse TSA (130 shoulders), and hemiarthroplasty (14 shoulders). Prior anterior stabilization management included soft tissue repair, bony augmentation, and nonoperative treatment. Almost all studies reported no significant difference in subjective and functional arthroplasty outcomes between control and prior ASI groups, or between patients with prior ASI treated nonoperatively vs. surgically.

Conclusion

Shoulder arthroplasty in the setting of prior ASI results in improved subjective and functional outcome scores that are comparable to patients without a history of instability.