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

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.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Anterior Glenohumeral Instability in 488 Adolescents Between 2000 and 2020: Risk Factors for Subsequent Recurrent Instability Requiring Revision Stabilization

BACKGROUND

After arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) for anterior glenohumeral instability (GHI), adolescent athletes have higher rates of subsequent recurrent GHI than any other subpopulation. Elucidating which adolescents are at highest risk of postoperative recurrent GHI may optimize surgical decision-making.

PURPOSE

To identify prognostic factors associated with subsequent recurrent GHI requiring revision stabilization surgery (RSS) after ABR.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

The study included patients 12 to 21 years old who had undergone ABR for anterior GHI at a pediatric tertiary care hospital by 1 of 5 sports medicine fellowship-trained surgeons between 2000 and 2020. A multivariate Cox proportional hazards model, with percentage of patients with recurrent GHI undergoing subsequent RSS, was used with a time-to-event outcome analysis. The Cox model effects were expressed as the hazard ratio (HR). All tests were 2-sided, with an alpha of .05.

RESULTS

Records of 488 adolescent patients with ABR (78% male; mean age, 16.9 ± 1.98 years) were analyzed. Of these, 86 patients (17.6%) underwent subsequent RSS for recurrent GHI, yielding a cumulative risk of 8.8% at 2 years, 16.5% at 5 years, and 20% at 15 years. RSS occurred at a mean of 2.6 ± 2.1 years after ABR. Risk factors for RSS included >1 preoperative dislocation (2 dislocations: HR = 7.4, P = .0003; ≥3 dislocations: HR = 10.9, P < .0001), presence of a Hill-Sachs lesion (small: HR = 2.5, P = .0114; medium-large: HR = 4.2, P = .0004), younger age (1-year decrease: HR = 1.2, P = .0015), and participation in contact sports (HR = 1.8, P = .01). Adolescents with only 1 preoperative dislocation had a cumulative incidence of RSS (3.2%), which was significantly lower than those with 2 (24.2%) or ≥3 preoperative dislocations (33.5%).

CONCLUSION

The number of dislocations before index ABR was the strongest risk factor for recurrent GHI requiring RSS in adolescents with anterior GHI, with 2 dislocations conferring >7-fold increased risk compared with a single preoperative dislocation. Other significant risk factors included the presence of a Hill-Sachs lesion, younger age, and participation in contact sports.

Long-term results of arthroscopic capsulolabral revision repair for failed anterior shoulder instability repair using suture anchors at a minimum of 10 years follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Arthroscopic revision anterior shoulder instability repair has been proposed, and early clinical results have been promising. However, long-term results after this procedure and the probable risk factors for failure have not been sufficiently discussed in the literature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-eight patients who were diagnosed with recurrent anteroinferior shoulder instability after failed Bankart repair, treated with ACRR between September 1998 and November 2003 and able to be contacted were included. Of these patients, 2 were excluded from the study due to the use of SureTak anchors for fixation, and 5 other patients refused to participate in the study due to lack of interest (3 patients) or lack of time (2 patients). The remaining shoulders were clinically examined at a minimum of ten years after surgery via the ASES, Constant, AAOS, Rowe, Dawson and VAS scores for pain and stability. Degenerative arthropathy was assessed with the modified Samilson-Prieto score.

RESULTS

All 31 remaining shoulders were evaluated at a mean time of 11.86 years (142.4 months) after surgery. Six patients (19.35%) reported redisolcation after the revision procedure, 4 of whom were affected by a new significant shoulder trauma. The ROWE and Constant scores improved significantly. Moderate to severe dislocation arthropathy was observed in 19.4% of patients. Five patients (16.2%) were not satisfied with the procedure.

CONCLUSION

Long-term follow-up after ACRR shows predictable results, with a high degree of patient satisfaction, good to excellent patient-reported outcome scores and minimal radiological degenerative changes. However, with an average recurrence rate of 19.3% after 11.86 years, the redislocation rate appears high. With careful patient selection, recurrence rates can be significantly reduced.

Clinical outcomes, return to sport, and complications after isolated primary Latarjet versus Latarjet as a revision procedure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this review was to compare clinical outcomes, return to sport (RTS), and complications in comparative studies examining patients undergoing primary Latarjet procedure versus Latarjet in the revision setting following soft tissue stabilization.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using PubMed and Scopus databases using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Meta-Analyses guidelines. Inclusion criteria consisted of level I to III human clinical studies reporting clinical outcomes (Visual Analogue Pain Scale [VAS]), RTS metrics, and complications in patients following primary versus revision Latarjet procedures. Study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria.

RESULTS

A total of seven studies, consisting of 1170 patients (n=1179 shoulders) with a mean age of 26.4 years, consisting of 91.9% males (n=1083/1179 shoulders), were identified. Mean final follow-up was 46.4 (mean range, 7.3-72.2) months. A total of 748 primary and 431 revision Latarjet procedures were analyzed. Complications were reported in 9.6% (range, 0%-24.2%) of patients undergoing primary and 20.2% (range, 0%-40.7%) in patients undergoing revision procedures (p=0.22). There was no significant difference in the RTS rate between patients undergoing primary (87.3%; range, 83.8%-92.1%) versus Latarjet as a revision procedure (78.9%; range, 60%-100%) (p=0.08). Moreover, no significant difference in postoperative VAS was observed in patients undergoing primary versus Latarjet as a revision procedure (p=0.21). Recurrent shoulder subluxation was significantly greater in patients undergoing revision (12.0%; n=31/259 shoulders; range, 0%-20.7%) compared to primary procedures (3.3%; n=27/511 shoulders; range, 0%-9%) (p<0.001).

DISCUSSION

Patients undergoing primary and revision Latarjet demonstrated overall similar rates of complications and return to sport. Of clinical importance, Latarjet as a revision procedure possessed a risk of recurrent subluxation 3.6 times higher than primary Latarjet. While effective, patients should be counseled regarding the differing prognosis between Latarjet as a primary or revision procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; Systematic review and meta-analysis.

Arthroscopic Labral Reconstruction With a Modified Inferior Capsular Shift Allows Return to Sport and Excellent Outcomes in Contact and Noncontact Athletes With Anterior Shoulder Instability at Minimum 5-Year Follow-Up

PURPOSE

To compare return to sport, functional outcomes, recurrence of instability, and osteoarthritis (OA) between collision/contact and limited/noncontact athletes following arthroscopic labral reconstruction with a modified inferior capsular shift for anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

Athletes underwent an arthroscopic labral reconstruction with a modified inferior capsular shift by the senior author between 1999 and 2018. Inclusion criteria were labral stripping from 12 (just beyond the biceps anchor) to 6 o'clock, less than 20% glenoid bone loss, active sports participation, and no previous surgery. Athletes were divided into collision/contact and limited/noncontact groups. Outcome measures, physical examination, and radiographic evaluation were collected at a minimum 5-year follow-up. Reoperations or any subjective laxity were considered failures. Radiographs were analyzed for OA using the Samilson-Prieto Radiological Classification.

RESULTS

Ninety-two patients underwent arthroscopic labral reconstruction with a modified inferior capsular shift. Sixty-four met the inclusion criteria. Thirty-eight (age = 26.0 ± 8.0 years) participated in at least 1 collision/contact sport, and 26 (age = 38.0 ± 9.0 years) participated in limited/noncontact sports. Two (5%) collision/contact and 3 (12%) limited/noncontact athletes had traumatic reinjury requiring revision surgery. Of the remaining athletes (59/64), minimum 5-year follow-up was obtained on 54 (92%), with a mean follow-up of 12 ± 4 years (range 5-23 years). All athletes returned to their original sport at the same level. There was no significant difference between collision/contact and limited/noncontact athletes in timing of return to sports (5.2 ± 1.9 and 6.0 ± 3.1 months, respectively; P = .389). There were no significant differences between groups on any outcomes scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic labral reconstruction with a modified inferior capsular shift addressed anterior instability with return to sport for both collision/contact and limited/noncontact athletes with excellent functional and clinical outcomes, full shoulder range of motion, and a low prevalence of advanced OA at minimum 5-year follow-up. This modified technique resulted in a low failure rate in both limited/noncontact and collision/contact athletes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, retrospective case control study.

Magnetic Resonance Imaging Analysis Demonstrates Improved Reliability in Measuring Shoulder Glenoid Bone Loss Using a Two-Thirds Glenoid Height Technique Compared to the "Best-fit Circle"

PURPOSE

To evaluate the superior to inferior glenoid height as a reliable reference in best-fit circle creation for glenoid anatomy.

METHODS

The morphology of the native glenoid was evaluated using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients without shoulder instability. Using T1 sagittal MRI images, 2 reviewers independently estimated glenoid size using the two-thirds technique and the "best-fit circle" technique at 2 different times. A Student t-test was used to determine significant difference between the two methodologies. Inter- and intra-rater reliability were calculated using interclass and intraclass coefficients.

RESULTS

This study included 112 patients. Using the results of glenoid height and "best-fit circle" diameter, the diameter of the "best-fit circle" was found to intersect the glenoid line at 67.8% of the glenoid height on average. We found no significant difference between the 2 measures of glenoid diameter (27.6 vs 27.9, P = .456). The interclass and intraclass coefficients for the two-third method were 0.85 and 0.88, respectively. The interclass and intraclass coefficients for the perfect circle methods were 0.84 and 0.73, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

We determined that the diameter of a circle placed on the inferior glenoid using the "best-fit circle" technique corresponds to 67.8% of the glenoid height. Additionally, we found that constructing a perfect circle using a diameter equal to two-thirds the height of the glenoid may improve intraclass reliability.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, retrospective cohort study.

Patients Have a 15% Redislocation Rate After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair With a Knotless Technique

Purpose

To evaluate the redislocation rate after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) with a standardized knotless anchor technique in a consecutive series of patients with anterior glenohumeral instability.

Methods

Inclusion criteria were patients who underwent ABR by a single surgeon between January 2008 and December 2018 with a minimum follow up of 2 years. We collected data through phone interviews, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, and review of patient records. The primary outcome was redislocation and secondary outcomes were recurrent subluxations, reoperation, postoperative complications, patient satisfaction, and functional outcomes. We also performed survival analysis and risk factor analysis.

Results

Of 88 patients (91 shoulders) who underwent ABR during the inclusion period, 70 patients (73 shoulders) were included (follow-up rate 80%). The mean follow-up was 7.5 years (range 2-12 years). Redislocation occurred in 15% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.8%-25.4%) of patients at a mean of 41 months after surgery (range 6-115 months). The reoperation rate for recurrent redislocation was 4.1%. Overall, 90.4% reported being currently satisfied with their shoulder and the mean Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score at follow-up was 73.8% (range 8.3%-99.9%). Patients with redislocation were younger at primary operation than patients with no redislocation (mean 21 years vs 28 years; P = .023) and adjusted hazard ratio for age was 0.86 (95% CI 0.74-0.99; P = .033). It was more common to have less than 3 anchors in patients with redislocation (P = .024), but adjusted hazard ratio was 4.42 (95% CI 0.93-21.02; P = .061).

Conclusions

The redislocation rate after ABR with a standardized knotless anchor technique in a consecutive series of patients with anterior glenohumeral instability was found to be 15% after a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean 7.5).

Level of Evidence

Level IV, therapeutic case-series.

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.

Beach-Chair Versus Lateral Decubitus Positioning for Primary Arthroscopic Anterior Shoulder Stabilization: A Consecutive Series of 641 Shoulders

BACKGROUND

There are limited data comparing the beach-chair (BC) versus lateral decubitus (LD) position for arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization.

PURPOSE

To identify predictors of instability recurrence and revision after anterior shoulder stabilization and evaluate surgical position and glenoid bone loss as independent predictors of recurrence and revision at short- and midterm follow-ups.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A consecutive series of 641 arthroscopic anterior stabilization procedures were performed from 2005 to 2019. All shoulders were evaluated for glenohumeral bone loss on magnetic resonance imaging. The primary outcomes of interest were recurrence and revision. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the relationships of outcomes with age, position, glenoid bone loss group, and track.

RESULTS

A total of 641 shoulders with a mean age of 22.3 years (SD, 4.45 years) underwent stabilization and were followed for a mean of 6 years. The overall 1-year recurrent instability rate was 3.3% (21/641) and the revision rate was 2.8% (18/641). At 1 year, recurrence was observed in 2.3% (11/487) and 6.5% (10/154) of BC and LD shoulders, respectively. The 5-year recurrence and revision rates were 15.7% (60/383) and 12.8% (49/383), respectively. At 5 years, recurrence was observed in 16.4% (48/293) and 13.3% (12/90) of BC and LD shoulders, respectively. Multivariable modeling demonstrated that surgical position was not associated with a risk of recurrence after 1 year (odds ratio [OR] for LD vs BC, 1.39; P = .56) and 5 years (OR for LD vs BC, 1.32; P = .43), although younger age at index surgery was associated with a higher risk of instability recurrence (OR, 1.73 per SD [4.1 years] decrease in age; P < .03). After 1 and 5 years, surgical position results were similar in a separate multivariable logistic regression model of revision surgery as the dependent variable, when adjusted for age, surgical position, bone loss group, and track. At 5 years, younger age was an independent risk factor for revision: OR 1.68 per SD (4.1 years) decrease in age (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Among fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons, there was no difference in rates of recurrence and revision surgery after performing arthroscopic anterior stabilization in either the BC or the LD position at 1- and 5-year follow-ups. In multivariable analysis, younger age, but not surgical position, was an independent risk factor for recurrence.

Mid- to Long-Term Outcomes of Arthroscopic Shoulder Stabilization in Athletes: A Systematic Review

There exists a considerable amount of evidence regarding short-term outcomes of shoulder arthroscopy in athletes; however, mid- to long-term data are limited. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to evaluate studies assessing mid- to long-term outcomes and rates of return to sport in athletes undergoing primary shoulder arthroscopy. A search for the systematic review was performed in PubMed, Scopus, and Embase on 14 March 2023. Study parameters, as well as their respective outcomes, were described in detail and compiled into diagrams. Five studies were included, which contained data on a total of 307 shoulders in patients with mean ages ranging from 20.3 to 26.9 years and mean follow-up times ranging from 6.3 to 14 years. The arthroscopic Bankart repair was the primary surgical intervention performed in all five studies. The overall rate of return to sport was 84% (range, 70-100%) across the studies. The rate of return to sport at pre-injury level was 65.2% (range, 40-82.6%) across four studies. The overall rate of recurrent instability was 17.3%, with redislocation specifically occurring in 13.7% of patients across all studies. The overall rate of revision surgery was 11.1%. Athletes who underwent primary shoulder arthroscopy demonstrated favorable outcomes and a high rate of RTS at a minimum follow-up of 5 years. However, rates of recurrent instability, redislocation, and revision surgery occurred at less than favorable numbers, which emphasizes the importance of proper patient selection when considering candidates for arthroscopic versus open repairs.

Return to Preinjury-Level Sports After Arthroscopic Latarjet for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability in Professional Athletes

Background

The Latarjet procedure is recommended to treat recurrent anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss. Longer return-to-sport (RTS) times have been reported after the open Latarjet when compared with the arthroscopic Latarjet.

Purpose

To assess the clinical outcomes and RTS in athletes who underwent an arthroscopic Latarjet.

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

This study included 46 professional athletes with recurrent anterior shoulder instability who underwent an arthroscopic Latarjet between 2010 and 2016. Patients were divided by type of sport: noncollision and nonoverhead (n = 22), collision and martial arts (n = 13), and overhead (n = 11). Sport activity was evaluated with the Kerlan-Jobe Orthopaedic Clinic (KJOC) score, Subjective Patient Outcome for Return to Sports score, and RTS time. Clinical results were evaluated by Constant-Murley score, Walch-Duplay score, and range of external and internal rotation. Complication rates, recurrence of shoulder instability, and number of revision procedures were recorded. Correlation tests were used to assess the relationship between measured parameters.

Results

The mean ± SD patient age was 27.1 ± 7.3 years, and the mean follow-up was 50.7 ± 18 months. Overall, 44 patients (95.7%) returned to their previously practiced sports, and 40 (87%) returned to their preinjury levels. The RTS time was 5 ± 1.4 months, with no significant difference among sport types. KJOC and Subjective Patient Outcome for Return to Sports scores were 95.2 ± 5.6 and 9.5 ± 1, respectively. Significant pre- to postoperative improvement was seen on the Constant-Murley score (from 54.3 ± 9.4 to 87.9 ± 8.2; P = .001) and Walch-Duplay score (from 53.7 ± 7.3 to 88.1 ± 10.7; P = .001). Mean postoperative external and internal rotation was 72.8° ± 18.6° and 81.3° ± 11.3°. Procedure-related complications occurred in 10 patients (21.7%); recurrence of shoulder instability was observed in 4 (8.7%); and 4 (8.7%) underwent revision surgery. A worse Walch-Duplay score was significantly associated with longer RTS time (r = -0.39; P = .019) and lower KJOC score (r = 0.29; P = .03).

Conclusion

There was a 95.7% RTS rate after the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure, although the procedure was not free from complications.

Pediatric and Adolescent Shoulder Instability

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Traumatic and atraumatic shoulder instability is common in pediatric and adolescent patients. It is well-established that young patients with anterior shoulder dislocation are at high risk of recurrent instability. This review assesses the current literature pertaining to management of both anterior instability and MDI in the pediatric and adolescent populations.

RECENT FINDINGS

Current research suggests that pediatric and adolescent patients with shoulder instability have excellent outcomes following arthroscopic Bankart repair; however, higher rates of recurrent instability requiring revision surgical management have been identified in patients with more than one dislocation episode pre-operatively, those with Hill-Sachs lesions and those under age 16. The addition of the remplissage procedure to an arthroscopic Bankart repair may be useful in preventing recurrent instability for patients with large Hill-Sachs lesions. Open procedures with bony glenoid augmentation may be indicated in patients with significant glenoid bone loss, or those who have failed primary surgical management, with promising outcomes reported following the Latarjet coracoid process transfer procedure in the adolescent population. Pediatric and adolescent patients with hyperlaxity, and those participating in swimming or gymnastics are more likely to have multidirectional instability (MDI). Non-surgical management with physical therapy is the mainstay of treatment for MDI with positive outcomes reported overall. In young patients with MDI who continue to have symptoms of instability and pain that effects daily activities or sports despite an adequate and appropriate course of rehabilitation, surgical management with capsulorrhaphy may be considered, with promising outcomes reported for both open and arthroscopic techniques. Attentive selection of timing and surgical procedure for pediatric and adolescent patients with anterior shoulder instability may help to prevent recurrent instability following shoulder stabilization. Although most pediatric and adolescent patients with MDI do well following non-surgical management alone, those that fail conservative management have good outcomes following arthroscopic or open capsulorrhaphy.

Predictors of Bone Loss in Anterior Glenohumeral Instability

BACKGROUND

Anterior shoulder instability can result in bone loss of both the anterior glenoid and the posterior humerus. Bone loss has been shown to lead to increased failure postoperatively and may necessitate more complex surgical procedures, resulting in worse clinical outcomes and posttraumatic arthritis.

HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate predictors of glenoid and humeral head bone loss in patients undergoing surgery for anterior shoulder instability. It was hypothesized that male sex, contact sport participation, traumatic dislocation, and higher number of instability events would be associated with greater bone loss.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A total of 892 patients with anterior shoulder instability were prospectively enrolled in the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability cohort. The presence and amount of anterior glenoid bone loss and accompanying Hill-Sachs lesions were quantified. Descriptive information and injury history were used to construct proportional odds models for the presence of any bone defect, for defects >10% of the anterior glenoid or humeral head, and for combined bony defects.

RESULTS

Anterior glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs lesions were present in 185 (20.7%) and 470 (52.7%) patients, respectively. Having an increased number of dislocations was associated with bone loss in all models. Increasing age, male sex, and non-White race were associated with anterior glenoid bone defects and Hill-Sachs lesions. Contact sport participation was associated with anterior glenoid bone loss, and Shoulder Actitvity Scale with glenoid bone loss >10%. A positive apprehension test was associated with Hill-Sachs lesions. Combined lesions were present in 19.4% of patients, and for every additional shoulder dislocation, the odds of having a combined lesion was 95% higher.

CONCLUSION

An increasing number of preoperative shoulder dislocations is the factor most strongly associated with glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs lesions, and combined lesions. Early surgical stabilization before recurrence of instability may be the most effective method for preventing progression to clinically significant bone loss. Patients should be made aware of the expected course of shoulder instability, especially in athletes at high risk for recurrence and osseous defects, which may complicate care and worsen outcomes.

REGISTRATION

NCT02075775 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Adolescent Anterior Shoulder Instability: Clinical and Imaging Predictors of Revision Surgery and Recurrent Subjective Instability

BACKGROUND

Multiple clinical and radiologic risk factors for recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair have been described. Humeral bone loss has gained more recent attention, particularly with respect to "off-track" lesions and increased rates of recurrent instability and revision surgery.

PURPOSE

To evaluate clinical and radiologic predictors of failure after arthroscopic Bankart repair in adolescents.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective study was performed in patients <19 years of age treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair from 2011 to 2017. Magnetic resonance imaging measurements of glenoid and humeral bone loss, the glenoid track, and the presence of off-track Hill-Sachs (HS) lesions were assessed. All patients had a minimum follow-up of 24 months and completed patient-reported outcome scores. Failure was defined as revision surgery or postoperative subjective instability.

RESULTS

A total of 59 patients (46 male, 13 female) with a median age of 16 years (range, 12-18 years) were included. Ten patients (17%) had revision surgery and 8 patients (14%) had subjective instability without revision surgery. No clinical or radiologic factors were significantly different between the failure cohort and the nonfailure cohort. Four patients (7%) measured off-track, and 2 of these patients experienced failure. A total of 38 patients (64%) were identified to have an HS defect. Subgroup analysis of these patients identified a greater HS interval (HSI) in patients who underwent revision surgery as compared with those patients who did not have revision surgery. Among patients with GT ratio ≥15 mm, there was a 50% rate of revision surgery. The Pediatric/Adolescent Shoulder Survey (PASS) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores at the final follow-up were not significantly different among patients with or without revision surgery. However, those with subjective instability who had not undergone revision surgery had significantly lower PASS and SANE scores as compared with the remainder of the cohort.

CONCLUSION

Of the adolescents in this cohort, 31% either had revision surgery (17%) or reported subjective feelings of instability (14%) after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Off-track instability was identified in 7% of the cohort but was not predictive of failure. Among the subgroup of patients with an HS defect, those who underwent revision surgery had a significantly larger HSI.

At long-term follow-up many first-time male traumatic shoulder dislocators remain symptomatic

OBJECTIVES

To assess the status at 13 to 17 years follow-up of a cohort of young male traumatic shoulder dislocators.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

METHODS

A prospective study of first-time young male traumatic shoulder dislocators, began in 2004. Subjects were evaluated by the apprehension test after completing rehabilitation 6 to 9 weeks post dislocation. Between March 2021 and July 2022, a telephone questionnaire was administered to ascertain their current shoulder status. Subjects were questioned about avoidance of activities of daily living and sport, participation in sports, current instability, and self-assessed shoulder function by the SANE score.

RESULTS

50/53 (94.3%) of the study subjects, mean age 20.4 years, completed a mean follow-up of 181.8 ± 12 months. The non-redislocation survival was 13% for those with a positive apprehension test and 49% for those with a negative test (p = 0.007). SANE scores were 64.3 ± 23.7 for those with a positive apprehension test and 83.7 ± 19.7 for those with a negative test (p = 0.001). In the year before the follow-up, 33.3% of those treated conservatively and 42.9% treated surgically experienced subluxation (p = 0.5). Fifty-seven percent of those who were treated conservatively and 56% of those who underwent surgery avoided some ADL or sports because of their shoulder.

CONCLUSIONS

For young male first time traumatic shoulder dislocators a positive apprehension test after rehabilitation is associated with a high risk for reoccurrence and poorer long-term results. Most subjects were still dealing with shoulder symptoms at long-term follow-up.

Shoulder Anteroinferior Glenoid Labrum Reconstruction With the Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Restores Glenohumeral Stability: A Cadaveric Biomechanical Study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this cadaveric study was to determine feasibility and assess biomechanical stability of glenoid labral reconstruction utilizing the long head of the biceps tendon (LHBT) as a local autograft for labral deficient shoulders.

METHODS

Ten cadaveric shoulders underwent resection of all soft tissue structures except the labrum and LHBT. The scapula and humerus were separately attached to a custom shoulder testing apparatus allowing for 22.5 N of compressive isotonic force across the joint. An Instron (Electroplus 1000) measured the peak force (N) as the humeral head was translated over the anteroinferior glenoid rim through 10 cycles. Shoulders were tested in 3 separate scenarios: intact labrum, resected labrum from 3- to 6-o'clock (for a right shoulder), and labral reconstruction with the LHBT. Reconstruction was performed by performing LHBT tenotomy at the level of the pectoralis major insertion. The proximal LHBT tendon, left attached to the supraglenoid tubercle, was then attached to the anteroinferior glenoid rim with suture anchors.

RESULTS

Mean (SD) length of the LHBT was 76.1 (12.9 mm) and the diameter was 5.9 (1.6) mm. Peak force for intact labrum was significantly greater than the deficient labrum state (14.06 vs 11.78 N; P = .012). Peak force for labral reconstruction (16.67 N) was significantly greater than both intact and deficient labral states (P < .001 and P = .011, respectively). In all specimens, the length for the LHBT to the pectoralis major insertion was sufficient for reconstruction of the labrum to the 6-o'clock position.

CONCLUSIONS

Glenoid labrum reconstruction with the LHBT is a feasible option to restore glenohumeral stability, with peak force to displacement significantly greater than the labral-intact and labral-deficient states.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This reconstruction may be an option for augmentation in the labral-deficient shoulder.

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.

Long-Term Results and Failure Analysis of the Open Latarjet Procedure and Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Adolescents

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to analyze the long-term results of arthroscopic Bankart repair compared with an open Latarjet procedure in adolescents who are at high risk for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. We hypothesized that the long-term stability rate of an open Latarjet procedure would be superior to that of arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

Forty eligible patients (41 shoulders) with a mean age of 16.4 years (range, 13 to 18 years) underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair, and 37 patients (40 shoulders) with a mean age of 16.7 years (range, 14 to 18 years) underwent an open Latarjet procedure. Of these, 34 patients (35 shoulders) in the Bankart group and 30 patients (31 shoulders) in the Latarjet group with long-term follow-up were compared; the overall follow-up rate was 82%. Clinical and radiographic results were obtained after a mean follow-up of 12.2 years (range, 8 to 18 years).

RESULTS

Treatment failure occurred in 20 shoulders (57%) in the Bankart repair group and in 2 shoulders (6%) in the open Latarjet procedure group (p < 0.001), representing a significantly higher revision rate for instability in the Bankart group (13) compared with the Latarjet group (1) (p < 0.001). In patients without recurrent shoulder instability (15 in the Bankart group and 29 in the Latarjet group), there was a significant improvement in the Constant score (p = 0.006 in the Bankart group and p < 0.001 in the Latarjet group) and Subjective Shoulder Value (p = 0.009 in the Bankart group and p < 0.001 in the Latarjet group), without any significant difference between the 2 groups. Younger age was the only variable significantly correlated with failure following a Bankart repair (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Adolescents are at a high risk for treatment failure after Bankart repair, and, therefore, the Latarjet procedure should be strongly considered as a primary procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability in this population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Comparison of suture anchor penetration rate between navigation-assisted and traditional shoulder arthroscopic capsulolabral repair

Proper placement of suture anchors is an important step in Bankart repair as improper placement can lead to failure. Concern surrounding suture anchor placement inspired the use navigation systems in shoulder arthroscopy. We aimed to demonstrate the technological advantage of using the O-arm (Medtronic Navigation, Denver, CO, USA) image guidance system to provide real-time images during portal and anchor placements in shoulder arthroscopy. Consecutive patients (from July to October 2014) who were admitted for arthroscopic capsulolabral repair surgeries were included. Ten patients were randomly enrolled in the navigation group and 10 in the traditional group. The glenoid was divided into four zones, and the penetration rates in each zone were compared between the two groups. In zone III, the most inferior region of the glenoid, the penetration rate was 40.9% in the traditional group and 15.7% in the navigation group (P = 0.077), demonstrating a trend toward improved accuracy of anchor placement with the aid of the navigation system; however, this was not statistically significant. Average surgical time in the navigation and traditional groups was 177.6±40.2 and 117.7±17.6 mins, respectively. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Scores showed no difference before and 6 months after surgery. This pilot study showed a trend toward decreased penetration rate in O-arm-navigated capsulolabral repair surgeries and decreased risks of implant misplacement; however, possibly due to the small sample size, the difference was not statistically significant. Further large-scale studies are needed to confirm the possible benefit of the navigation system. Even with the use of navigation systems, there were still some penetrations in zone III of the glenoid. This penetration may be attributed to the micro-motion of the acromioclavicular joint. Although the navigation group showed a significant increase in surgical time, with improvements in instrument design, O-arm-navigated arthroscopy will gain popularity in clinical practice.

Posterior Labral Tear Extension Concomitant With Shoulder Bankart Injuries Is not Uncommon

Purpose

To identify the rate and risk factors of posterior labral involvement in operatively managed Bankart lesions and assess the effectiveness of MRI arthrogram for preoperative identification of such injury patterns.

Methods

A consecutive cohort of patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair were retrospectively reviewed. All subjects underwent a prearthroscopy MRI arthrogram. Operative findings were used as the gold standard for posterior labral tear extension. Patient demographic and surgical data were then analyzed to identify independent factors associated with the presence of concomitant posterior labral injury.

Results

Of 124 patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart stabilization, 23 (19%) were noted to demonstrate posterior labral injury on arthroscopic evaluation. Factors associated with injury to the posterior labrum included those sustaining two or fewer dislocations events (P =.001), an earlier average presentation (P = .001), and a reported “contact” mechanism of dislocation (P = .02). Posterior labral involvement did not correlate with surgical positioning (beach-chair versus lateral) or the need for revision surgery. On the basis of review of preoperative imaging, MRI arthrogram demonstrated a sensitivity of 83% and a specificity of 95% for detection of posterior labral injury.

Conclusions

Posterior propagation of Bankart lesions is relatively common following shoulder dislocations, with a rate of 18.5%. Risk factors for posterior labral extension include two or fewer dislocations, early presentation from the time of injury, and contact sports. On the basis of these findings, careful assessment of the posterior labrum on MRI arthrogram may reveal the majority, but not all, of these lesions.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective case-controlled study.

Team Approach: Treatment of Shoulder Instability in Athletes

»

Shoulder instability is a complex problem with a high rate of recurrence in athletes. Treatment of a first-time subluxation or dislocation event is controversial and depends on patient-specific factors as well as the identified pathology.

»

Athletic trainers and physical therapists are an integral part of the treatment team of an in-season athlete who has experienced a shoulder instability event. Through comprehensive physiological assessments, these providers can effectively suggest modifications to the patient's training regimen as well as an appropriate rehabilitation program.

»

Surgical intervention for shoulder stabilization should use an individualized approach for technique and timing.

»

A team-based approach is necessary to optimize the care of this high-demand, high-risk population.

Low rate of recurrent instability following the open Latarjet procedure as a revision procedure for failed prior stabilization surgery

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature to ascertain functional outcomes, recurrence rates and subsequent revision rates following the open Latarjet procedure when performed as a revision procedure.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on PRISMA guidelines, utilizing the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library Databases. Studies where the Latarjet procedure was performed as a revision procedure were included. Clinical outcomes analyzed were: (1) functional outcomes, (2) recurrent instability, (3) revisions, and (4) complications.

RESULTS

The review found 16 studies with 713 shoulders that met the inclusion criteria. 605 of the patients were male (84.9%), with an average age of 28.2 years (15-62) and follow-up of 47.7 months. The most commonly reported functional outcome measure was the Rowe score, with a weighted mean of 92.7. 86/95 patients had good-excellent outcomes (90.4%). 136/143 patients reported return to play (95.1%). 141/161 patients returned to the same level of competition (87.6%). 50 patients experienced recurrence (8.4%). Five patients experienced redislocation (0.9%) and 37 patients experienced subluxation (6.7%). There were 29 revisions (5.1%), with 12 revisions due to recurrence (2.1%). There were 68 total complications, not including recurrence (11%). The most common complications were 13 cases of nerve damage and infection respectively (2.1%). There was 17 cases of new instability arthropathy (6.5%), and 31 cases of residual pain (6.7%).

CONCLUSION

This review shows that the revision Latarjet provides excellent functional outcomes, low rates of recurrence and complications, and a high rate of return to sport among athletes. This results from study can be used to explain the expected outcomes associated with the Latarjet procedure performed as a revision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Male Sex, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index Score, and Sport as Predictors of Large Labral Tears of the Shoulder: A Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To identify factors predictive of a large labral tear at the time of shoulder instability surgery.

METHODS

As part of the Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability cohort, patients undergoing open or arthroscopic shoulder instability surgery for a labral tear were evaluated. Patients with >270° tears were defined as having large labral tears. To build a predictive logistic regression model for large tears, the Feasible Solutions Algorithm was used to add significant interaction effects.

RESULTS

After applying exclusion criteria, 1235 patients were available for analysis. There were 222 females (18.0%) and 1013 males (82.0%) in the cohort, with an average age of 24.7 years (range 12 to 66). The prevalence of large tears was 4.6% (n = 57), with the average tear size being 141.9°. Males accounted for significantly more of the large tears seen in the cohort (94.7%, P = .01). Racquet sports (P = .01), swimming (P = .02), softball (P = .05), skiing (P = .04), and golf (P = .04) were all associated with large labral tears, as was a higher Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI; P = .01). Age, race, history of dislocation, and injury during sport were not associated with having a larger tear. Using our predictive logistic regression model for large tears, patients with a larger body mass index (BMI) who played contact sports were also more likely to have large tears (P = .007).

CONCLUSIONS

Multiple factors were identified as being associated with large labral tears at the time of surgery, including male sex, preoperative WOSI score, and participation in certain sports including racquet sports, softball, skiing, swimming, and golf.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I, prognostic study.

Limited Predictive Value of the Instability Severity Index Score: Evaluation of 217 Consecutive Cases of Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability

PURPOSE

To review the existing variables and their ability to predict recurrence of shoulder instability as it relates to the Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS), as well as evaluate any other pertinent imaging and patient history variables that may impact risk of recurrent anterior instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

All consecutive patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability and who had arthroscopic instability repair were identified. Exclusion criteria were prior surgery on the shoulder, posterior or multidirectional instability, instability caused by seizure disorder, or a rotator cuff tear. All ISIS variables were recorded (age <20 years, sport type and level, hyperlaxity, Hill-Sachs on anteroposterior external rotation radiograph, loss of glenoid contour on anteroposterior radiograph), as well as additional variables: (1) number of instability events; (2) total time of instability; (3) glenoid bone loss (GBL) percent; and (4) Hill-Sachs measures (H/L/W/D/Volume). Postoperative outcomes were assessed based on the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores, and recurrent anterior instability. Regression analysis was used to determine preoperative variables that predicted outcomes and failures.

RESULTS

There were 217 consecutive patients (209 male patients [96.5%], 8 female patients [3.5%]) who met the inclusion criteria and were all treated with a primary arthroscopic shoulder stabilization during a 3.5-year period (2007-2011), with a mean follow-up time of 42 months (range, 26-58). The mean age at first instability event was 23.9 years (range, 16-48 years) and the mean cumulative ISIS score for the overall group was 3.6 (range, 1-6). Outcomes were improved from mean preoperative (WOSI = 1,050/2,100; ASES = 61.0; SANE = 52.5) to postoperative (WOSI = 305/2,100; ASES = 93.5; SANE = 95.5). A total of 11.5% (25/217) of patients had evidence of recurrent instability (subluxation or dislocation). Additionally, all 25 patients who failed postoperatively also had consistently inferior ASES, SANE, and WOSI outcome scores when compared with successfully treated patients. Factors associated with failure were GBL greater than 14.5% (P < .001), total time of instability symptoms greater than 3 months (P = .03), Hill-Sachs volume greater than 1.3 cm³ (P = .02), contact sports participation (P = .05), and age 20 years or younger (P < .01). There was no correlation in outcomes with Hill-Sachs on presence of glenoid contour loss on radiograph (P = .07), participation sports, or ISIS (mean = 3.4 success vs 3.9 failure, P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

At a mean follow-up of 42 months was an 11.5% failure rate after arthroscopic Bankart stabilization surgery. This study shows no correlation between treatment outcome and the ISIS measure, given a mean score of 3.4 for the overall cohort with little difference identified in those who failed. However, several important parameters previously unidentified were detected including, GBL greater than 14.5%, Hill-Sachs volume greater than 1.3 cm³, and duration of instability symptoms (>3 months). The ISIS may need to be redesigned to incorporate variables that more accurately portray the actual risk of failure after arthroscopic stabilization, including quantification of both glenoid and humeral head bone loss.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III (Retrospective Case Series).

High Variability of the Definition of Recurrent Glenohumeral Instability: An Analysis of the Current Literature by a Systematic Review

Purpose

To determine the definitions for recurrence used in the literature, assess the consensus in using these definitions, and determine the impact of these definitions on recurrence rates.

Methods

A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE including studies from 2000 to 2020 reporting on recurrence rates after anterior arthroscopic shoulder instability surgery. Dislocation, apprehension, subluxation and recurrence rates were compared.

Results

Ninety-one studies were included. In 68% of the eligible studies, recurrence rates are not well defined. Thirty (33%) studies did not report on dislocations, 45 (49%) did not report on subluxations, and 58 (64%) did not report on apprehension. Seventeen different definitions for recurrence of instability, 4 definitions of dislocations, and 8 definitions of subluxation were used.

Conclusion

Recurrence rates are poorly specified and likely underreported in the literature, hampering comparison with results of other studies. This highlights the need for a consensus on definition of recurrence across shoulder instability studies. We recommend not using the definition recurrence of instability anymore. We endorse defining dislocations as a radiographically confirmed dislocation or a dislocation that is manually reduced, subluxations as the feeling of a dislocation that can be (spontaneously) reduced without the need for a radiographically confirmed dislocation, and a positive apprehension sign as fear of imminent dislocation when placing the arm in abduction and external rotation during physical examination. Reporting on the events resulting in a dislocation or subluxation aids in making an estimation of the severity of instability.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, systematic review.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Immobilization for First Episode of Anterior Shoulder Dislocation Before the Age of 25: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

The risk of recurrence after the first episode of anterior shoulder dislocation is high with nonoperative treatment in younger patients.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The aim of this study was to compare the results of arthroscopic Bankart repair and nonoperative treatment for shoulder dislocation in patients younger than 25 years, with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. The hypothesis was that surgery would decrease the risk of recurrence.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

We included patients aged between 18 and 25 years after a first episode of anterior shoulder dislocation and divided them into 2 groups. The first group was treated surgically with an arthroscopic Bankart repair within 2 weeks after the dislocation; the second group was treated nonoperatively. Both groups were immobilized for 3 weeks in internal rotation and followed the same physical therapy protocol. Standard radiography and computed tomography were performed immediately after reduction of the dislocation, and follow-up was performed at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months. The primary outcome measure was instability recurrence, defined as another anterior shoulder dislocation requiring closed reduction by another person (the patient was unable to reduce the dislocated joint themselves), a subluxation, or a positive apprehension test. Secondary outcome measures included range of motion, return to sport, and functional scores such as the short version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score the Walch-Duplay score, and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI).

RESULTS

A total of 20 patients were included in each group. The mean ± SD age was 21 ± 1.8 years, and there were 33 men (82.5%) and 7 women (17.5%) in the total sample. Recurrence of instability was significantly decreased in the surgical treatment group compared with the nonoperative group (2 [10%] vs 14 [70%], respectively; P = .0001). Fewer patients in the surgical treatment group versus the nonoperative group had another episode of dislocation (0 vs 6 [30%], respectively), subluxation (2 [10%] vs 13 [65%], respectively; P = .003), or a positive apprehension test (1 [5%] vs 11 [58%], respectively; P = .0005). The Walch-Duplay score (88.4 vs 70.3 points; P = .046) and WOSI (11.5 vs 17.7 points; P = .035) were significantly better in the surgical group versus the nonoperative group after a 2-year follow-up. Level of sport was the same or better in 89% of the surgical treatment group vs 53% of the nonoperative treatment group (P = .012). No surgical complication was recorded. We did not find any significant difference in range of motion.

CONCLUSION

In patients with first-time shoulder dislocations, arthroscopic labral repair (Bankart procedure) reduced the risk of secondary shoulder dislocation and improved functional outcome versus nonoperative treatment after a 2-year follow-up. Surgical treatment after a first episode of shoulder dislocation could be offered as a primary treatment option in a younger population if these results are confirmed by larger studies with a longer follow-up.

REGISTRATION

NCT03315819 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Long-term results of arthroscopic Bankart repairs for anterior instability of the shoulder in patients aged thirty years or older

INTRODUCTION

Bankart repair is a popular treatment for anterior shoulder instability. However, long-term failure rates of arthroscopic Bankart repair remain higher than Latarjet procedures. The purpose of this study was to report long-term results of arthroscopic Bankart repair in patients greater than 30 years old and analyze risk factors of failure following arthroscopic Bankart repair that are independent of younger age.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 1999 and December 2003, 41 patients aged 30 years or older treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability were evaluated. Outcome measures included pain (VAS), range of motion, post-operative Walch-Duplay, WOSII scores, complications, failure rate, and risk factors of failure. Failure was defined as recurrent dislocation or subluxation.

RESULTS

At a mean 12-year follow-up (range; 10-15 years), the failure rate of arthroscopic Bankart repair in patients aged 30 years and older was 37%. The mean post-operative Walch-Duplay score was significantly higher in patients who had no recurrence compared to those who had had recurrence of instability (100 versus 90, p=0.02). An ISIS score≥3 (p=0.02), a glenoid bone lesion (p=0.06), and a Hill-Sachs lesion>15% defect (p=0.001) were risk factors for recurrent instability. When considering a modified ISIS score that accounted for bony defects on the glenoid and humeral side, patients with an ISIS score <3 + no glenoid lesion + Hill-Sachs ≤ 15% had a recurrence rate of 0%.

CONCLUSION

The failure rate of arthroscopic Bankart repairs in patients over 30 was higher than previously reported. Specifically, patients with an ISIS >3 and bony glenoid defects and/or Hill-Sachs lesions > 15% may be at higher risk for recurrent instability following an isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair. Alternative stabilization techniques may need to be considered for this subset of patients.

Return to Play After Revision Anterior Shoulder Stabilization: A Systematic Review

Background

Revision shoulder stabilizations are becoming increasingly common. Returning to play after revision shoulder stabilizations is important to patients.

Purpose

To evaluate the return-to-play rate after revision anterior shoulder stabilization using arthroscopic, open, coracoid transfer, or free bone block procedures.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

All English-language studies published between 2000 and 2020 that reported on return to play after revision anterior shoulder stabilization were reviewed. Clinical outcomes that were evaluated included rate of overall return to play, level of return to play, and time to return to play. Study quality was evaluated using the Downs and Black quality assessment score.

Results

Eighteen studies (1 level 2; 17 level 4; mean Downs and Black score, 10.1/31) on revision anterior shoulder stabilization reported on return to play and met inclusion criteria (7 arthroscopic, 5 open, 3 Latarjet, and 3 bony augmentation), with a total of 564 revision cases (mean age, 27.9 years; 84.1% male). The weighted mean length of follow-up was 52.5 months. The overall weighted rate of return to play was 80.1%. The weighted mean rate of return to play was 84.0% (n = 153) after arthroscopic revision, 91.5% (n = 153) after open revision, 88.1% (n = 149) after Latarjet, and 73.8% (n = 65) after bone augmentation. The weighted mean rate of return to same level of play was 69.7% for arthroscopic revision, 70.0% for open revision, 67.1% for Latarjet revision, and 61.8% after bone block revision. There were 5 studies that reported on time to return to play, with a weighted mean of 7.75 months (4 arthroscopic) and 5.2 months (1 Latarjet). The weighted mean rates of complication (for studies that provided it) were 3.3% after arthroscopic revision (n = 174), 3.5% after open revision (n = 110), 9.3% after Latarjet revision (n = 108), and 45.8% after bone block revision (n = 72).

Conclusion

Revision using open stabilization demonstrated the highest return-to-play rate. Revision using Latarjet had the quickest time to return to play but had higher complication rates. When evaluated for return to same level of play, arthroscopic, open, and Latarjet had similar rates, and bone block had lower rates. The choice of an optimal revision shoulder stabilization technique, however, depends on patient goals. Higher-quality studies are needed to compare treatments regarding return to play after revision shoulder stabilization.

Immobilization in External Rotation and Abduction Versus Arthroscopic Stabilization After First-Time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment of first-time shoulder dislocation (FSD) is a topic of debate. After high rates of recurrent instability after nonoperative management were reported in the literature, primary repair of FSD significantly increased. At the same time, new concepts were proposed that had promising results for immobilization in external rotation (ER) and abduction (ABD).

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the recurrence rates (primary outcome) and clinical outcomes (secondary outcome parameters) of immobilization in ER+ABD versus arthroscopic primary stabilization after FSD.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

In a multicenter randomized controlled trial, patients with FSD were randomized to either treatment with immobilization in 60° of ER plus 30° of ABD (group 1) or surgical treatment with arthroscopic Bankart repair (group 2). Clinical evaluation was performed 1, 3, and 6 weeks as well as 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively or after reduction, including range of motion, instability testing, subjective shoulder value, Constant-Murley score, Rowe score, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index. Recurrent instability events were prospectively recorded.

RESULTS

Between 2011 and 2017, a total of 112 patients were included in this study. Of these, 60 patients were allocated to group 1 and 52 to group 2. At the 24-month follow-up, 91 patients (81.3%) were available for clinical examination. The recurrence rate was 19.1% in group 1 and 2.3% in group 2 (P = .016). No significant differences were found between groups regarding clinical shoulder scores (P > .05). Due to noncompliance with the immobilization treatment protocol, 4 patients (6.7%) were excluded.

CONCLUSION

Immobilization in ER+ABD versus primary arthroscopic shoulder stabilization for the treatment of FSD showed no differences in clinical shoulder scores. However, recurrent instability was significantly higher after nonoperative treatment.

Anterior glenohumeral instability: Current review with technical pearls and pitfalls of arthroscopic soft-tissue stabilization

The glenohumeral joint (GHJ) allows for a wide range of motion, but is also particularly vulnerable to episodes of instability. Anterior GHJ instability is especially frequent among young, athletic populations during contact sporting events. Many first time dislocators can be managed non-operatively with a period of immobilization and rehabilitation, however certain patient populations are at higher risk for recurrent instability and may require surgical intervention for adequate stabilization. Determination of the optimal treatment strategy should be made on a case-by-case basis while weighing both patient specific factors and injury patterns (i.e., bone loss). The purpose of this review is to describe the relevant anatomical stabilizers of the GHJ, risk factors for recurrent instability including bony lesions, indications for arthroscopic vs open surgical management, clinical history and physical examination techniques, imaging modalities, and pearls/pitfalls of arthroscopic soft-tissue stabilization for anterior glenohumeral instability.

Postoperative Management Following Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to review systematically the literature concerning postoperative management following arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability in adolescent and young adult (≤ 25 years) athletes.

METHODS

The Pubmed, Medline, EMBASE, EBSCO (CINAHL), and Google Scholar databases were systematically searched according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines to identify all studies reporting postoperative rehabilitation guidelines following arthroscopic Bankart repair in the adolescent and young adult population. The Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies instrument and Modified Coleman Methodology Score were used for quality assessment of the included studies. All aspects of rehabilitation were extracted and analyzed, including type/duration of immobilization, range of motion, strength, and return to sport (RTS) criteria.

RESULTS

Screening yielded 17 eligible studies with a total of 675 patients and an average age of 18.3 years. There was considerable variation with regard to reported postoperative rehabilitation guidelines. Of the 17 studies, 15 reported the duration of immobilization; there was a mean of 4 weeks (range, 2-6 weeks). Range of motion and strength restrictions were reported in 15 (88.2%) and 13 (76.4%) studies, respectively. All of the 17 studies included an expected timeframe for RTS, but only 5 of the studies (29.4%) included either subjective or objective criteria to determine safe RTS. Differences in outcomes were unable to be assessed due to large study heterogeneity.

CONCLUSION

Considerable variation is reported in postoperative rehabilitation guidelines following arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic shoulder instability in the adolescent and young adult population. All studies used time-based criteria for determining RTS, but subjective and/or objective criteria were lacking in the majority of studies. The current literature lacks data to generate evidence-based rehabilitation protocols in this young athletic population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

Decision making in treatment after a first-time anterior glenohumeral dislocation: A Delphi approach by the Neer Circle of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons

BACKGROUND

The treatment of patients who sustain a first-time anterior glenohumeral dislocation (FTAGD) is controversial. The purpose of this study was to find consensus among experts using a validated iterative process in the treatment of patients after an FTAGD.

METHODS

The Neer Circle is an organization of shoulder experts recognized for their service to the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons. Consensus among 72 identified experts from this group was sought with a series of surveys using the Delphi process. The first survey used open-ended questions designed to identify patient-related features that influence treatment decisions after an FTAGD. The second survey used a Likert scale to rank each feature's impact on treatment decisions. The third survey used highly impactful features to construct 162 clinical scenarios. For each scenario, experts recommended surgery or not and reported how strongly they made their recommendation. These data were analyzed to find clinical scenarios that had >90% consensus for recommending treatment. These data were also used in univariate and multivariate mixed-effects models to identify odds ratios (ORs) for different features and to assess how combining these features influenced the probability of surgery for specific populations.

RESULTS

Of the 162 scenarios, 8 (5%) achieved >90% consensus for recommending surgery. All of these scenarios treated athletes with meaningful bone loss at the end of their season. In particular, for contact athletes aged > 14 years who were at the end of the season and had apprehension and meaningful bone loss, there was >90% consensus for recommending surgery after an FTAGD, with surgeons feeling very strongly about this recommendation. Of the scenarios, 22 (14%) reached >90% consensus for recommending nonoperative treatment. All of these scenarios lacked meaningful bone loss. In particular, surgeons felt very strongly about recommending nonoperative treatment after an FTAGD for non-athletes lacking apprehension without meaningful bone loss. The presence of meaningful bone loss (OR, 6.85; 95% confidence interval, 6.24-7.52) and apprehension (OR, 5.60; 95% confidence interval, 5.03-6.25) were the strongest predictors of surgery. When these 2 features were combined, profound effects increasing the probability of surgery for different populations (active-duty military, non-athletes, noncontact athletes, and contact athletes) were noted, particularly non-athletes.

CONCLUSION

Consensus for recommending treatment of the FTAGD patient was not easily achieved. Certain combinations of patient-specific factors, such as the presence of meaningful bone loss and apprehension, increased the probability of surgery after an FTAGD in all populations. Over 90% of shoulder instability experts recommend surgery after an FTAGD for contact athletes aged > 14 years at the end of the season with both apprehension and meaningful bone loss. Over 90% of experts would not perform surgery after a first dislocation in patients who are not athletes and who lack apprehension without meaningful bone loss.

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

Purpose

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

Methods

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

Results

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

Conclusions

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

Level of evidence

II, prospective comparative study.

Traumatic Primary Anterior Glenohumeral Joint Dislocation in Sports: A Systematic Review of Operative versus Nonoperative Management

Anterior shoulder (glenohumeral joint [GHJ]) dislocations are relatively common injuries in sports. Previous studies have evaluated clinical outcomes of operative and nonoperative management for primary traumatic anterior GHJ dislocations. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature in an effort to provide a thorough analysis of patients after undergoing closed reduction of a traumatic anterior GHJ dislocation, particularly among the athletic population. Two independent reviewers performed a comprehensive search of PubMed and the Cochrane Library through February 23, 2020. Unfortunately, the quantity and quality of published articles on this subject is very limited. In many studies, younger age (between 21 and 30 years) was associated with greater risk for recurrence of GHJ dislocations. Twelve studies (total N = 753) directly compared outcomes of operative versus nonoperative management. It seems that operative management significantly reduces recurrence rates with patients treated operatively among the young and active population. Operative management should be considered as a treatment option for young and athletic patients presenting with a first-time anterior GHJ dislocation.

First-time Glenohumeral Dislocations: Current Evidence and Considerations in Clinical Decision Making

The decision to manage first-time shoulder dislocations conservatively or operatively has become increasingly complex because of conflicting literature. Although shoulder dislocations have traditionally been managed with reduction and immobilization, recent evidence has suggested high rates of subsequent recurrence. Surgical intervention is thought to better restore stability and decrease recurrence rates; however, it also has the potential for additional morbidity and financial cost. As such, recent literature has sought to better define patient risk profiles to identify optimal candidates for both conservative and operative management. The purpose of the current review is to provide a comprehensive and evidence-based assessment of the most recent literature to better delineate an appropriate treatment algorithm for this challenging clinical scenario.

Latarjet Procedure for Anterior Glenohumeral Instability: Early Postsurgical Complications for Primary Coracoid Transfer Versus Revision Coracoid Transfer After Failed Prior Stabilization

BACKGROUND

The Latarjet procedure (coracoid transfer) is often used to successfully treat failed instability procedures. However, given the reported increased complication rates in primary Latarjet surgery, there is a heightened concern for complications in performing the Latarjet procedure as revision surgery.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the early outcomes and complications of the Latarjet procedure as primary surgery compared with revision surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A total of 157 patients were included and retrospectively reviewed: 103 patients in the revision group and 54 patients in the primary group. Patients were evaluated by physical examination findings as well as by documentation of complications and reoperations extracted from their electronic medical records.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 7.8 ± 11.0 months for the primary group and 7.0 ± 13.2 months for the revision group. There were no significant differences in overall complication rates between the primary and revision groups (16.7% vs 8.7%, respectively; P = .139). The complication rate was significantly higher in patients in the revision group who had undergone a prior open procedure compared with those who had undergone only arthroscopic procedures (30.0% vs 4.1%, respectively; P < .001). Of those patients who sustained a complication, 7 of the 9 underwent a reoperation in the primary group (13.0%), and 7 of the 9 did so in the revision group (6.8%); the risk of reoperations was not different between groups (P = .198). There were 4 patients in the primary group (7.4%) and 5 patients in the revision group (4.9%) who experienced recurrent dislocations during the follow-up period (P = .513). There was no difference in postoperative range of motion.

CONCLUSION

The Latarjet procedure is a reasonable option for the treatment of failed arthroscopic instability repair with an early complication rate similar to that found in primary Latarjet surgery.

Surgical outcomes in the Frequency, Etiology, Direction, and Severity (FEDS) classification system for shoulder instability

BACKGROUND

The Frequency, Etiology, Direction, and Severity (FEDS) system was developed as a simple but reliable method for classifying shoulder instability based on 4 factors attainable by history and physical examination: frequency (solitary, occasional, or frequent); etiology (traumatic or atraumatic); direction (anterior, posterior, or inferior); and severity (subluxation or dislocation). This study investigated the epidemiology and 2-year surgical outcomes for the FEDS categories in the prospective Multicenter Orthopaedic Outcomes Network (MOON) Shoulder Instability cohort.

METHODS

At the time of surgery, 1204 patients were assigned to the FEDS categories. Follow-up data were available for 636 of 734 patients (86.6%) who had undergone surgery at least 2 years prior to analysis. The most common categories were further analyzed by patient-reported outcomes (PROs) (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores) and rates of recurrent subluxation, recurrent dislocation, and revision surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 36 FEDS categories, 16 represented at least 1% of patients. Occasional traumatic anterior dislocation (OTAD) was the most common category, with 16.4% of patients. Five other anterior categories (solitary traumatic anterior subluxation, occasional traumatic anterior subluxation [OTAS], frequent traumatic anterior subluxation [FTAS], solitary traumatic anterior dislocation, and frequent traumatic anterior dislocation) and one posterior category (solitary traumatic posterior subluxation [STPS]) represented at least 5% of patients. PROs improved significantly for each category. The highest rates of recurrent subluxation occurred in FTAS, OTAS, and OTAD cases; dislocation, OTAS and FTAS cases; and further surgery, OTAD cases. The lowest rates of failure occurred in STPS cases. Downward trends in PROs and higher failure rates were noted with an increasing number of preoperative dislocations.

CONCLUSION

Different FEDS categories showed varying degrees of improvement and failure rates, indicating that the system can be used to provide prognostic insight for presurgical education. Overall, outcomes decreased with a higher number of preoperative dislocations.

Primary Arthroscopic Stabilization for a First-Time Anterior Dislocation of the Shoulder: Long-Term Follow-up of a Randomized, Double-Blinded Trial

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term efficacy of arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR).

METHODS

Eighty-eight patients with an age of ≤35 years who had sustained a primary anterior glenohumeral dislocation were enrolled in a single-center, double-blinded clinical trial. Subjects were randomized to receive either an arthroscopic washout (AWO) or ABR. Participants were reassessed after a minimum of 10 years postoperatively. Data regarding recurrent instability, revision surgery, satisfaction, and function (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH] and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index [WOSI]) scores were collected.

RESULTS

Sixty-five patients (74%; 32 in the AWO group and 33 in the ABR group) were included and had an average follow-up of 14.2 years (range,12 to 16 years). The rate of recurrent dislocation was significantly higher in the AWO group than the ABR group (47% and 12%, respectively; p = 0.002). Kaplan-Meier curves were plotted for event-free survival using recurrent instability and/or revision surgery as clinical end points. This analysis demonstrated a sustained significant difference between the groups at 10 years after surgery (58% for the AWO group versus 79% for the ABR group; log-rank test [Mantel-Cox]; p = 0.018). Long-term WOSI scores were significantly better in the ABR group. The presence of recurrent instability was associated with significantly poorer WOSI and DASH scores.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates a long-term benefit in overall shoulder stability and functional outcome in high-risk patients who have undergone ABR for first-time anterior dislocation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Instability severity index score values below 7 do not predict recurrence after arthroscopic Bankart repair

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy of the Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) in predicting an increased recurrence risk after an arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

Retrospective review of a cohort of patients operated in three different centres. The inclusion criteria (recurrent anterior instability [dislocation or subluxation] with or without hyperlaxity, arthroscopic Bankart repair) and the exclusion criteria (concomitant rotator cuff lesion, acute first-time dislocation, surgery after a previous anterior stabilization, surgery for an unstable shoulder without true dislocation or subluxation; multidirectional instability) were those used in the study that defined the ISIS score. The medical records and a telephone interview were used to identify the six variables that define the ISIS and identify recurrences.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-three shoulders met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 140 subjects (22 females/118 males; mean age 35.5 ± 7.9) with 142 (89.0%) shoulders were available for follow-up after 5.3 (1.1) (range 3.1-7.4) years. There were 20 recurrences (14.1%). The mean (SD) preoperative ISIS was 1.8 (1.6) in the patients without recurrence and 1.8 (1.9) in the patients with recurrence (n.s.). In the 117 subjects with ISIS between 0 and 3 the recurrence rate was 12.8%; in the 25 with ISIS 4 to 6 the rate was 20% (n.s.).

CONCLUSION

For subjects with anterior shoulder instability in which an arthroscopic Bankart repair is being considered, the use of the ISIS, when the values obtained are ≤ 6 was not useful to predict an increased recurrence risk in the midterm in this retrospectively evaluated case series. The efficacy of the ISIS score in defining a group of subjects with a preoperative increased risk of recurrence after an arthroscopic Bankart instability repair is limited in lower risk populations (with ISIS scores ≤ 6).

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Retrospective case series, Level IV.

Novel and effective arthroscopic extracapsular stabilization technique for anterior shoulder instability-BLS

PURPOSE

Arthroscopic Bankart repair for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability is associated with a high rate of recurrent instability. Extracapsular stabilization of the glenohumeral joint with enhancement of anterior wall soft tissues may be an effective alternative treatment technique. The aim of this study is to retrospectively assess clinical outcomes in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability using a novel technique of anterior extracapsular stabilization-"between glenohumeral ligaments and subscapularis tendon" (BLS).

METHODS

Patients with anterior shoulder instability who underwent surgical treatment with a novel arthroscopic BLS technique between 2008 and 2016 were eligible for inclusion. According to the level of glenoid bone loss, patients were separated into four groups. Group 1 comprised patients with GBL equal to or less than 5%, group 2 patients with GBL 6-10%, group 3 patients with GBL 11-15%, and group 4 patients with GBL > 15%. A positive outcome in this study was defined as full restoration of joint stability. To evaluate clinical results, preoperative range of ER and IR measured in 90 degrees of abduction were compared with ER and IR measured at final follow-up. Additional outcome instruments used consisted of the Constant Score and the Walch-Duplay Score.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients underwent arthroscopic BLS surgery. During the study period, 50 patients were lost to follow-up and 100 patients were available for final analysis. Mean patient age was 27.5 (± 10.3) years at the time of surgery. Mean duration of follow-up was 82.9 (± 29.4) months. At final assessment, 86 patients (86%) were categorized as having a positive outcome, with full restoration of joint stability. Recurrence of shoulder instability was observed in 14 (14%) patients, including 6 (6%) cases that were associated with major trauma. At final follow-up, the mean Constant Score was 88.2 ± 10.1, compared to 82.9 ± 9.1 preoperatively (p < 0.05). The mean final and mean preoperative Walch-Duplay Scores were 81.5 ± 18.9 and 52.2 ± 11.9, respectively (p < 0.05). There was no statistically significant limitation of external or internal rotation.

CONCLUSIONS

The BLS technique has been shown to be an effective method to anterior shoulder instability in patients without significant glenoid bone loss. It was shown that this technique provides significant improvement in shoulder function without reducing shoulder range of motion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Long-term outcomes of the arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review of studies at 10-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the evidence in the literature to ascertain the functional outcomes and recurrences rates, as well as subsequent revision rates, following arthroscopic Bankart repair at a minimum of 10 years' follow-up.

METHODS

Two independent reviewers performed a literature search based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, using the Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library databases. Studies were included if they were clinical studies on arthroscopic Bankart repair with a minimum of 10 years' follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS software.

RESULTS

Our review found 9 studies including 822 shoulders meeting our inclusion criteria. The majority of patients were male patients (75.5%), the average age was 28.0 years (range, 15-73 years), and the mean follow-up period was 149.4 months. The most commonly used functional outcome score was the Rowe score, with a weighted mean of 87.0. Overall, 77.6% of athletes were able to return to sports postoperatively. The overall rate of recurrent instability was 31.2%, with 16.0% of patients having recurrent dislocations, and the overall revision rate was 17.0%. Evidence of instability arthropathy was found in 59.4% of patients, with 10.5% of patients having moderate to severe arthropathy.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability has been shown to result in excellent long-term functional outcomes despite a relatively high rate of recurrent instability necessitating revision surgery. In addition, the high rate of instability arthropathy is a concern following arthroscopic Bankart repair in the long term.

Analysis of complication after open coracoid transfer as a revision surgery for failed soft tissue stabilization in recurrent anterior shoulder instability

BACKGROUND

The coracoid transfer represents a treatment option for patients with recurrent shoulder instability. Only a few studies exist about the complication rate of the coracoid transfer as a revision surgery following failed soft tissue stabilization. The purpose of this study was to analyze the results and complication rate after coracoid transfer as a revision surgery.

METHODS

In this study 38 patients (4 females, 34 males, mean age 27 years) were included of whom 29 patients were available for follow-up after a mean of 27 months. Previous shoulder stabilization procedures were predominantly arthroscopic (n = 25). Complications were divided according to their timely appearance into early (< 3 months) and late (> 3 months) postoperatively as well as need for revision. Clinical scores [Constant Score (CS), Rowe Score (RS), Walch-Duplay-Score (WDS), WOSI and Subjective-Shoulder-Value (SSV)] were evaluated preoperatively and at final follow-up.

RESULTS

In this patient cohort, the overall complication rate was 27.6%, all of them occurred > 3 months postoperatively. In seven of eight cases (24.1%) a repeat surgical procedure was conducted. Recurrent instability occurred in three patients (10.3%) of which two received a revision surgery (n = 1 iliac-crest bone graft, n = 1 labral repair). Due to persistent pain five patients underwent an arthroscopic implant removal. The complication rate was with 40% higher in patients with two or more previous surgeries (n = 4 out of 10 patients) compared to patients with one previous surgery (21%, n = 4 out of 19 patients). The scores increased significantly comparing pre- to postoperative [CS 74-90 points, RS 27-91 points, WDS 16-89 points, WOSI 40-76% and SSV 41-82% (p < 0.05)].

CONCLUSION

The open coracoid transfer as a revision surgery after failed soft tissue stabilization leads to satisfying clinical results. However, the complication rate is high though comparable to data in the literature when used as a primary surgery. The indication for a coracoid transfer should be judged carefully and possible alternatives should be considered.

The 6-O'clock Anchor Increases Labral Repair Strength in a Biomechanical Shoulder Instability Model

PURPOSE

To characterize the additive effect of a 6-o'clock anchor in the stabilization of a Bankart lesion.

METHODS

Twelve cadaveric shoulders were tested on a 6-df robotic musculoskeletal simulator to measure the peak resistance force due to anterior displacement of 1 cm. The rotator cuff muscles were loaded dynamically. The test conditions consisted of the intact shoulder, Bankart lesion, Bankart repair (3-, 4-, and 5-o'clock anchors), and Bankart repair with the addition of a 6-o'clock anchor. A 13% anterior bone defect was then created, and all conditions were repeated. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was performed.

RESULTS

In the group with no bone loss, the addition of a 6-o'clock anchor yielded the highest peak resistance force (52.8 N; standard deviation [SD], 4.5 N), and its peak force was significantly greater than that of the standard Bankart repair by 15.8% (7.2 N, P = .003). With subcritical glenoid bone loss, the repair with the addition of a 6-o'clock anchor (peak force, 52.6 N; SD, 6.1 N; P = .006) had a significantly higher peak resistance force than the group with bone loss with a Bankart lesion (35.2 N; SD, 5.8 N). Although the 6-o'clock anchor did increase the strength of the standard repair by 6.7%, this was not statistically significant (P = .9) in the bone loss model.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of a 6-o'clock suture anchor to a 3-anchor Bankart repair increases the peak resistance force to displacement in a biomechanical model, although this effect is lost with subcritical bone loss.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study provides surgeons with essential biomechanical data to aid in the selection of the repair configuration.

Curved-guide system is useful in achieving optimized trajectory for the most inferior suture anchor during arthroscopic Bankart repair

BACKGROUND

A curved-drill guide system was recently introduced to achieve a better trajectory for a low anteroinferior anchor during arthroscopic Bankart repair. However, the clinical performance of such a device remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the trajectory and position of the low anteroinferior suture anchor with use of the curved-guide system in clinical cases.

METHODS

We enrolled 41 cases of arthroscopic Bankart repair in this study. Of these cases, 9 were repaired using the curved drill guide whereas 32 were repaired using a conventional straight guide. Postoperative computed tomography scans were obtained, and 3-dimensional models of the scapula were reconstructed. Notable perforations of the opposite cortex by the most inferior anchors were recorded. The clock-face angle, insertion angle, and insertion distance were measured.

RESULTS

The anchor perforation rate in the curved-guide group (11%) was significantly lower than that in the straight-guide group (56%) (P = .02). The insertion distance in the curved-guide group was significantly shorter than that in the straight-guide group (4.0 ± 1.6 mm vs. 7.0 ± 2.4 mm, P < .01). The clock-face angle and insertion angle were significantly greater in the perforated straight-guide group than in the nonperforated groups. The percentage of anchors in the absolute safe zone (clock-face angle > 135° and < 165° and insertion angle < 100°), where no anchors perforated, was greater in the curved-guide group than the straight-guide group.

CONCLUSION

Compared with the conventional straight guide, the curved-guide system provides better placement of the most inferior suture anchor during arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Management of primary anterior shoulder dislocations: a narrative review

Abstract

The recurrence rate following acute anterior shoulder dislocations is high, particularly in young, active individuals. The purpose of this paper is to provide a narrative overview of the best available evidence and results with regards to diagnostic considerations, comorbidities, position of immobilization, surgical versus conservative management, and time to return to play for the management of primary anterior shoulder dislocations. Three independent reviewers performed literature searches using PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews meeting inclusion criteria from 1930 to April 2019 were appraised and discussed with the intent to consolidate the best available evidence with regards to lowering recurrence rates. A majority of studies support early surgical intervention for individuals between 21 and 30 years of age following primary shoulder dislocations, as this group is particularly susceptible to recurrence. Conservative treatment plans favor 1–3 weeks of immobilization in internal rotation, followed by rehabilitation. Surgical methods are associated with longer time to return to play, but lower recurrence rates. Return to play time is best determined on an individualized basis, when subjective and objective function of both shoulders is determined to be symmetric. This paper broadly summarizes the best available evidence for the management of primary anterior shoulder dislocations. There remains a need for randomized studies to determine ideal long-term treatment following conservative or surgical management, as general timelines for returning to play following injury remain vague.

Level of evidence

IV, Narrative Review