Arthroscopic transglenoid suture repair for initial anterior shoulder dislocation

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.

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.

Open shoulder stabilization: current trends and 1-year postoperative complications

Background

Shoulder instability is commonly treated by arthroscopic stabilization. However, open stabilization procedures remain important in management of complex instability. Despite continued use of these procedures, the relative frequency of related complications remains poorly described. This study investigates current trends in open shoulder stabilization and characterizes major postoperative complications.

Methods

PearlDiver, a national insurance database of orthopedic patients, was used to identify open shoulder stabilization procedures from 2007 to 2010. Current Procedural Terminology codes for 4 procedures—Bankart repair, coracoid transfer, and anterior and posterior glenoid bone grafting—were used to track procedural trends. The 1-year postoperative complications were identified and categorized into 5 groups: dislocation treated with closed reduction, closed manipulation under anesthesia, reoperation with arthroscopy, reoperation with open surgery, and others. χ² analysis determined statistical significance.

Results

There were 2678 open shoulder stabilization procedures performed, with a 1-year complication rate of 12.3%. Relative proportion of open Bankart repairs decreased (82.5% to 69.8%), whereas proportion of coracoid transfers increased (7.7% to 19%). Posterior glenoid bone grafting had the highest complication rate (20.7%). Rate of total complications was 9.8% in patients 10-24 years, 13.6% in patients 25-54 years, and 25.9% in patients >55 years.

Conclusions

Based on our patient database sample, a significant decline in the relative use of open Bankart repair was observed. Our analysis indicates that the use of bone transfer procedures was correlated with significantly higher reoperation rates than open Bankart repair, particularly in the older patient cohort. Further studies comparing open stabilization procedures with contemporary arthroscopic techniques are indicated.

Management of primary acute anterior shoulder dislocation: systematic review and quantitative synthesis of the literature

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcome of surgical versus conservative treatment of primary acute anterior dislocation of the shoulder.

METHODS

A systematic review of published studies on the treatment of primary acute anterior dislocation of the shoulder was performed. Three investigators independently conducted the research. A comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases using various combinations of the keywords "shoulder," "dislocation," "treatment," "acute," and "primary" over the years 1994 to 2013 was performed. The following data were extracted: demographics, soft tissue lesions and bone defects, outcome measurements, type of management, recurrence of instability, and complications. A quantitative synthesis of the literature was performed to compare surgery and conservative management and immobilization by internal and external in patients undergoing conservative treatment.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies were included in which 2,813 shoulders were evaluated. All patients sustained primary acute anterior shoulder dislocation. The mean Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) was 67 points (range, 19 to 84). Pooled results from comparative studies showed that the rate of recurrence was statistically significantly lower in the surgical group than in the conservative group (odds ratio, 12.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.88 to 33.10; P < .00001). External rotation immobilization provided better results than internal rotation, being associated with a lower rate of recurrence (odds ratio, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.34 to 3.87; P = .002).

CONCLUSIONS

Although limited, the available evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTS) supports primary surgery in young adults engaged in highly demanding sports or job activities. There is lack of evidence to determine whether surgical or nonsurgical treatment is better for other categories of injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level I to IV studies.

An overview of shoulder instability and its management

The assessment and management of patients with instability of the shoulder joint can be challenging, due to the varying ways patients present, the array of different classification systems, the confusing terminology used and the differing potential management strategies. This review article aims to provide a clear explanation of the common concepts in shoulder instability and how they relate to the assessment and management of patients.

There are sections covering the mechanisms of shoulder stability, the clinical assessment of patients and imaging techniques. Beyond that there is a discussion on the common classifications systems used and the typical management options.

Some patients fall into reasonably well defined categories of classification and in these cases, the management plan is relatively easy to define. Unfortunately, other patients can elude simple classification and in these instances their management requires very careful consideration. Further research may help to facilitate a better understanding of management of the patients in this latter group.

Long-term outcomes after Bankart shoulder stabilization

PURPOSE

The purposes of this study were (1) to analyze long-term outcomes in patients who have undergone open or arthroscopic Bankart repair and (2) to evaluate study methodologic quality through validated tools.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of Level I to IV Evidence using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Clinical outcome studies after open or arthroscopic Bankart repair with a minimum of 5 years' follow-up were analyzed. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were extracted and reported. Study methodologic quality was evaluated with Modified Coleman Methodology Scores and Quality Appraisal Tool scores.

RESULTS

We analyzed 26 studies (1,781 patients). All but 2 studies were Level III or IV Evidence with low Modified Coleman Methodology Scores and Quality Appraisal Tool scores. Patients analyzed were young (mean age, 28 years) male patients (81%) with unilateral dominant shoulder (61%), post-traumatic recurrent (mean of 11 dislocations before surgery) anterior shoulder instability without significant glenoid bone loss. The mean length of clinical follow-up was 11 years. There was no significant difference in recurrence of instability with arthroscopic (11%) versus open (8%) techniques (P = .06). There was no significant difference in instability recurrence with arthroscopic suture anchor versus open Bankart repair (8.5% v 8%, P = .82). There was a significant difference in rate of return to sport between open (89%) and arthroscopic (74%) techniques (P < .01), whereas no significant difference was observed between arthroscopic suture anchor (87%) and open repair (89%) (P = .43). There was no significant difference in the rate of postoperative osteoarthritis between arthroscopic suture anchor and open Bankart repair (26% and 33%, respectively; P = .059). There was no significant difference in Rowe or Constant scores between groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability using arthroscopic suture anchor and open Bankart techniques yields similar long-term clinical outcomes, with no significant difference in the rate of recurrent instability, clinical outcome scores, or rate of return to sport. No significant difference was shown in the incidence of postoperative osteoarthritis with open versus arthroscopic suture anchor repair. Study methodologic quality was poor, with most studies having Level III or IV Evidence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of studies with Level I through IV Evidence.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of primary arthroscopic stabilization versus nonoperative treatment for first-time anterior glenohumeral dislocations

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of initial observation versus surgery for first-time anterior shoulder dislocation.

METHODS

The clinical scenario of first-time anterior glenohumeral dislocation was simulated using a Markov model (where variables change over time depending on previous states). Nonoperative outcomes include success (no recurrence) and recurrence; surgical outcomes include success, recurrence, and complications of infection or stiffness. Probabilities for outcomes were determined from published literature. Costs were tabulated from Medicare Current Procedural Terminology data, as well as hospital and office billing records. We performed microsimulation and probabilistic sensitivity analysis running 6 models for 1,000 patients over a period of 15 years. The 6 models tested were male versus female patients aged 15 years versus 25 years versus 35 years.

RESULTS

Primary surgery was less costly and more effective for 15-year-old boys, 15-year-old girls, and 25-year-old men. For the remaining scenarios (25-year-old women and 35-year-old men and women), primary surgery was also more effective but was more costly. However, for these scenarios, primary surgery was still very cost-effective (cost per quality-adjusted life-year, <$25,000). After 1 recurrence, surgery was less costly and more effective for all scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

Primary arthroscopic stabilization is a clinically effective and cost-effective treatment for first-time anterior shoulder dislocations in the cohorts studied. By use of a willingness-to-pay threshold of $25,000 per quality-adjusted life-year, surgery was more cost-effective than nonoperative treatment for the majority of patients studied in the model.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, economic and decision analysis.

Operative versus nonoperative treatment after primary traumatic anterior glenohumeral dislocation: expected-value decision analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal management strategy for primary traumatic anterior glenohumeral dislocation remains controversial. Patients have traditionally been managed nonoperatively, but high recurrence rates in certain populations have led to increased interest in early operative stabilization. The purpose of this study was to use expected-value decision analysis to determine the optimal management strategy--nonoperative treatment or arthroscopic stabilization--for a first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Probabilities for the occurrences of the potential outcomes after nonoperative and arthroscopic treatment of a first-time traumatic anterior glenohumeral dislocation were determined from a systematic review of the literature. Utilities for these outcomes were obtained from a questionnaire on patient preferences completed by 42 subjects without a history of shoulder injury. A decision tree was constructed, fold-back analysis was performed to determine optimal management, and sensitivity analyses were used to determine the effect on decision making of varying outcome probabilities and utilities.

RESULTS

Nonoperative treatment was associated with a utility value of 5.9 and early arthroscopic surgery with a value of 7.6. On sensitivity analysis, it was found that when the rate of recurrence after nonoperative treatment falls below 32% or when the utility value for successful arthroscopic stabilization falls below 6.6, nonoperative treatment is the preferred management strategy.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic stabilization was the preferred strategy after a primary anterior glenohumeral dislocation. In clinical settings where the likelihood of recurrent instability is low after nonoperative care or when an informed patient has an aversion to surgery, nonoperative treatment may be the preferred treatment strategy.

Long-term follow-up of acute arthroscopic Bankart repair for initial anterior shoulder dislocations in young athletes

BACKGROUND

Little is known of the long-term results of acute arthroscopic Bankart repair for first-time traumatic anterior glenohumeral dislocations.

HYPOTHESIS

Acute arthroscopic Bankart repair for first-time traumatic anterior glenohumeral dislocations will provide good results at long-term follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

The authors evaluated a cohort of young patients who sustained first-time anterior glenohumeral dislocations and were acutely treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair using bioabsorbable tacks. Subjective outcome measures were obtained at a mean follow-up of 11.7 years (range, 9.1-13.9 years).

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients (40 shoulders) were available of the original cohort of 49 shoulders (82%). Two of the 9 who were lost to follow-up had revision surgery before being lost and are carried forward in the calculations of recurrent instability and revision surgery but are not included in the calculation of the functional scores. The mean Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation was 91.7, the mean Western Ontario Shoulder Instability score was 371.7, the mean subjective Rowe score was 25.3, the mean Simple Shoulder Test was 11.1, the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Society score was 90.9, the mean Short Form-36 Physical Component score was 94.4, and the mean Tegner score was 6.5. Six patients sustained recurrent dislocations for a redislocation rate of 14.3%. Nine patients (21.4%) reported experiencing subluxation events. Six patients (14.3%) underwent revision stabilization surgery.

CONCLUSION

At long-term follow-up, acute arthroscopic Bankart repair for first-time traumatic anterior glenohumeral dislocations resulted in excellent subjective function and return to athletics in young, active patients with an acceptable rate of recurrence and reoperation.

Suture anchors are superior to transglenoid sutures in arthroscopic shoulder stabilization

PURPOSE

We retrospectively compared 2 groups of high-demand patients with post-traumatic anterior shoulder instability to determine whether arthroscopic stabilization was superior with transglenoid suture or suture anchors.

METHODS

In a retrospective comparative study we investigated the results of 246 high-demand patients, with post-traumatic anterior shoulder instability, who underwent arthroscopic capsulolabral reconstruction: 165 (mean age, 27.5 years; mean follow-up, 80 months) were evaluated after treatment with transglenoid sutures, and 81 (mean age, 26.6 years; mean follow-up, 27 months) were treated with suture anchors in a consecutive period. We compared both techniques with regard to recurrence rate, postoperative complications, range of motion, sport activity, work, and patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

In the anchor group recurrent dislocation after surgery occurred in 7 patients (8.7%), all within 18 months postoperatively. This finding was significantly (P = .009) better than that in the transglenoid group, in which recurrent postoperative dislocation occurred in 57 patients (34%), in a period of 0 to 115 months after surgery. Postoperative complications were seen in 4 of 81 patients in the suture anchor group, whereas a significantly (P = .01) higher rate was found in the transglenoid suture group, with 36 complications in 35 of 165 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The data presented in this study suggest that the modern suture anchor technique results in a better outcome after shoulder stabilization, with fewer complications and lower recurrence rates, than the transglenoid repair. We conclude that the suture anchor technique should be a preferred method for arthroscopic shoulder stabilization surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective, comparative therapeutic study.

Open Bankart repair versus arthroscopic repair with transglenoid sutures or bioabsorbable tacks for Recurrent Anterior instability of the shoulder: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In published comparative studies, it remains unknown if arthroscopic techniques for performing Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability equal the success of open repair.

HYPOTHESIS

The current literature supports a lower rate of recurrent instability after open Bankart repair compared to arthroscopic repair with bioabsorbable tacks or transglenoid sutures.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

METHODS

A Medline search identified all randomized controlled trials or cohort studies that directly compared open repair to arthroscopic techniques of Bankart repair for traumatic, unilateral, recurrent anterior instability. Data collected from each study included patient demographics, surgical technique, rehabilitation, outcome, and complications.

RESULTS

Six studies met all inclusion criteria. There were 172 patients in the arthroscopic group (90 patients with transglenoid sutures, 77 patients with arthroscopic tacks, and 5 patients with suture anchors) and 156 patients in the open group. The groups were similar in demographic characteristics. When comparing the arthroscopic to the open group, there was a significantly higher rate of recurrent dislocation (12.6% vs 3.4%; P = .01) and total recurrence (recurrent dislocation or subluxation) (20.3% vs 10.3%; P = .01). In addition, there was a higher proportion of patients with an excellent or good postoperative Rowe score in the open group (88%) than in the arthroscopic group (71%) (P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic Bankart repair using transglenoid sutures or bioabsorbable tacks results in a higher rate of recurrence of instability compared to open techniques. Studies comparing open repair to newer arthroscopic techniques using suture anchor fixation and capsular plication are necessary.

Arthroscopic stabilization of anterior shoulder instability: a review of the literature

The treatment of anterior glenohumeral instability has been a topic of debate in the recent literature. Current surgical management of shoulder instability has included a variety of open and arthroscopic procedures. Open techniques for anterior reconstruction have been quite successful in preventing recurrent dislocations and continue to be the gold standard of care. In an attempt to address some of the disadvantages associated with open procedures, arthroscopic stabilization procedures have been developed. Arthroscopic capsuloligamentous repair presumably has clear advantages including better cosmesis, decreased perioperative morbidity, and a possible decrease in the loss of external rotation. Advances in arthroscopic instrumentation and improved arthroscopic techniques have increased the popularity of arthroscopic stabilization. The art of diagnosing the anatomic pathology associated with instability and proper patient selection continues to evolve. Most previous reports of arthroscopic stabilization have included small numbers of patients, variable patient pathology, and a variety of surgical techniques, making comparisons between stabilization procedures difficult. Arthroscopy can be valuable in both the confirmation of the degree and severity of the instability and to correct the pathoanatomy responsible for the instability.

Shoulder instability: management and rehabilitation

Shoulder dislocation and subluxation occurs frequently in athletes with peaks in the second and sixth decades. The majority (98%) of traumatic dislocations are in the anterior direction. The most frequent complication of shoulder dislocation is recurrence, a complication that occurs much more frequently in the adolescent population. The static (predominantly capsuloligamentous and labral) and dynamic (neuromuscular) restraints to shoulder instability are now well defined. Rehabilitation aims to enhance the dynamic muscular and proprioceptive restraints to shoulder instability. This paper reviews the nonoperative treatment and the postoperative management of patients with various classifications of shoulder instability.