Outcomes in patients with glenoid labral lesions: a cohort study

Preoperative factors associated with 180°, 270°, and 360° labral tears

BACKGROUND

Large, circumferential glenoid labral tears are an uncommon injury affecting young, athletic patients. There are limited data describing the clinical presentation of patients with larger tears, especially 270° and 360° labral tears. Additionally, examination and imaging findings have poor reliability in diagnosing these tears. The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical presentation among patients presenting with small (less than 180°), medium (180°-270°), and large (270°-360°) labral tears.

METHODS

This is a retrospective comparative study of consecutive patients surgically managed by a single shoulder surgeon for all glenoid labral tears from 2018-2022. The primary outcome was demographic and preoperative clinical risk factors. Demographic data including age, sex, hand dominance, body mass index, as well as clinical presentation (subluxation vs. dislocation, instability history, and participation in contact sports) were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 188 patients met the inclusion criteria: 101 of 188 (53.70%) patients with small tears, 43 of 188 (22.90%) patients with medium tears, and 44 of 188 (23.40%) patients with large tears. Individuals with large and medium-sized labral tears were more likely to have participated in contact sports compared to those with smaller labral tears (P = .003). Medium and smaller tears were more likely to present as dominant-side injury (P = .02). Furthermore, medium and large tears were more likely to present with anterior instability symptoms compared with smaller tears, which more frequently presented with posterior instability and pain (P = .003).

CONCLUSION

Males participating in contact sports were the most common demographic population presenting with large, 270°-360° labral tears. Instability was the primary complaint rather than pain, and compared with small tears, medium and large tears were more likely to present with primary anterior instability. Although arthroscopic repair of 270°-360° labral tears can yield excellent clinical outcomes similar to smaller tears, identifying factors associated with larger glenoid labral tears may help in surgical planning and patient counseling.

Anatomic risk factors for arthroscopic Bankart repair failure: A case-control study comparing failure and non-failure groups in an Asian population

Introduction

Post-arthroscopic Bankart repair failure/re-dislocation rates are influenced by several risk factors, including anatomic defects. There is limited evidence on the role of anatomic defects, especially for Hill-Sachs size in on-track lesions. This study aimed to assess glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs lesion and labral tear size and evaluate their contribution to post-operative instability after a primary repair.

Material and methods

Across 169 patients with on-track Bankart lesions who underwent primary arthroscopic Bankart repair from 2010 to 2015, this study matched 14 failure with 14 non-failure cases based on age/gender. Patient demographics, pre-operative radiological parameters (including size of glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs lesion) and labral tear size were compared between the failure and non-failure groups.

Result

All patients were male with a mean age of 21.01 ± 4.97. Significantly greater glenoid bone loss (p = 0.024) and labral tear size (p = 0.039) were found in the failure group. However, there was no significant difference in mean volume of Hill-Sachs lesion between the two groups (p = 0.739).

Conclusion

Extensive glenoid bone loss and labral tears are risk factors for post-arthroscopic Bankart failure. However, the size of Hill-Sachs lesion is not a risk factor for failure, in a specific group of on-track Hill-Sachs lesions.

Level of evidence

Retrospective Study, Level IV.