Arthroscopic stabilisation for shoulder instability

Humeral Head Articular Cartilage Damage by a Retained Arthroscopic Suture Anchor Inserter in a College Athlete

Arthroscopic repair of the glenoid labrum has been shown to be a safe and effective method to address recurrent shoulder instability. However, suture anchor devices must be used appropriately and with caution to avoid postoperative complications such as prominence, migration, and loosening, which can result in intraarticular pathology postoperatively. We report a case of significant glenohumeral articular cartilage damage that occurred as a result of a retained broken suture anchor inserter after arthroscopic Bankart repair. This case demonstrates an uncommon but serious complication that can occur during the surgical insertion of suture anchors when performing arthroscopic labral repairs. Although rare, retained foreign bodies must also be considered in the differential of a symptomatic postoperative patient. Thus, postoperative radiographs are also of extreme importance in evaluating a patient with persistent pain and crepitus after surgical glenoid labral repair.

Patients Report A Positive Experience on Social Media After Bankart Repair

Purpose

The purpose of this cross-sectional study was to analyze publicly available posts on Instagram and Twitter to gain an understanding of patients’ perspectives regarding Bankart injuries and repair.

Methods

Public posts on Instagram and Twitter were queried from June 1, 2019, to June 1, 2020, with the following hashtags: #Bankart #Bankartrepair #Bankartlesion #labrumrepair #labralrepair #shoulderdislocation. Posts that did not contain those hashtags were excluded. In addition, posts that included that hashtag but displayed content unrelated to Bankart repair were excluded. A binary categorical system was used for media format (picture or video), perspective (patient, family or friend, physician, hospital or physical therapy group, professional organization, news media, or industry), timing (preoperative, postoperative, nonoperative), tone (positive, negative, or neutral), content (surgical site, hospital or surgeon, imaging, rehabilitation, activities of daily living [ADLs], return to work, surgical instruments, or education), post popularity (number of likes), and geographic location.

Results

1,154 Instagram posts were identified. 722/1,154 posts (62.6%) were made by patients. 600 (52.0%) of the post tones were positive, 407 (35.3%) were neutral, and 667 (57.8%) were postoperative. The most common content included in Instagram posts were ADLs (577; 50.0%), education (233; 20.2%), and rehabilitation (226; 19.6%). Overall, posts had an average of 117 likes and had geotags from 49 different countries. 155 tweets were identified, 92 of which (59.4%) were made by physicians, 113 (72.9%) were neutral, 127 (81.9%) were nonoperative, and the most common type of content posted was education (130; 83.9%). Overall, posts on Twitter had an average of 3.2 likes and had geotags from 4 different countries.

Conclusions

Instagram posts were made mostly by patients postoperatively and focused on ADLs. The tone of the Instagram posts indicates that a majority of patients have a positive experience with Bankart repair. The majority of tweets were made by physicians and provided educational information with a neutral tone.

Clinical Relevance

Exploring patient's experiences with Bankart repair on social media provides insight into their overall experience with the surgery. The majority of patients reported a positive experience.

Comparison of Perioperative Complications Following Surgical Treatment of Shoulder Instability

Background

Surgical repair for shoulder instability includes arthroscopic Bankart, open Bankart, and Latarjet-Bristow.

Methods

This is a cohort study of patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart, open Bankart, or Latarjet-Bristow procedures that were identified within the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2007-2019). Unadjusted and adjusted analyses were performed (α = 0.05). Outcomes included 30-day adverse events, readmission, and operative time.

Results

This study included 10,955 patients (9128 arthroscopic Bankart, 1148 open Bankart, and 679 Latarjet-Bristow). Compared with arthroscopic Bankart, Latarjet-Bristow had longer operative times (129.96 [95% CI: 126.49-133.43] vs. 86.35 [85.51-87.19] minutes), along with a higher percentage of serious adverse events (2.5% vs. 0.4%), reoperation (1.9% vs. 0.1%), readmission (1.8% vs. 0.3%), thromboembolic complications (0.4% vs. 0.1%), and sepsis (0.4% vs. 0.0%) (P < .05 for all). Open Bankart had longer operative times (98.17 [95.52-100.82] vs. 86.35 [85.51-87.19] minutes) and a higher percentage of sepsis (0.2% vs. 0.0%) (P < .05 both). Latarjet-Bristow had increased odds of a serious adverse event (odds ratio [OR]: 7.68 [4.19-14.07]), reoperation (OR: 17.32 [7.58-39.56]), readmission (OR: 5.73 [2.84-11.54]), and deep wound complications (OR: 14.98 [3.92-57.23]) (P < .05 for all). In comparing the relative utilization of arthroscopic versus open Bankart, arthroscopic Bankart increased (83.4% to 91.2%) while open Bankart decreased (16.6% to 8.8%) from the 2011-2013 time period to 2017-2019 (P_trend < .001).

Conclusion

In addition to a low complication rate, the relative utilization of arthroscopic Bankart increased compared with open Bankart over the past decade. Furthermore, Latarjet-Bristow was associated with a higher incidence of serious adverse events than arthroscopic Bankart.