Arthroscopic Posterior Labral Repair in Active-Duty Military Patients: A Reliable Solution for an At-Risk Population, Regardless of Anchor Type

The Perfect-Circle Technique Demonstrates Poor Inter-Rater Reliability in Measuring Posterior Glenoid Bone Loss on Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Purpose

To evaluate the reliability of the "perfect-circle" methodology for measurement of glenoid bone loss with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with posterior glenohumeral instability.

Methods

A prospective chart review was performed on patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic posterior labral repairs in our institution's electronic medical records between January 1, 2021, and June 30, 2021. Inclusion criteria included isolated posterior shoulder instability with posterior labral repair and corroborated tears on MRI. A total of 9 raters, either sports or shoulder and elbow fellowship-trained orthopaedic surgeons, each evaluated the affected shoulder MRI scans twice, at over 2 weeks apart. Measurements followed the "perfect-circle" technique and included projected anterior-to-posterior (AP) glenoid diameter, amount of posterior bone loss, and percentage of posterior bone loss.

Results

Ten consecutive patients between the ages of 17 and 46 years with diagnosed posterior glenohumeral instability were selected. The average age was 28 ± 10 years, and 60% of patients were male. The patient's dominant arm was affected in 40%, and 50% of cases involved the right shoulder. The average glenoid diameter was 29.62 ± 3.69 mm, and the average measured bone loss was 2.8 ± 1.74 mm. The average percent posterior glenoid bone loss was 9.41 ± 5.78%. The inter-rater reliability was poor for the AP diameter and for the posterior glenoid bone loss with intraclass correlation coefficients at 0.30 (0.12-0.62) and 0.22 (0.07-0.54) respectively. The intrarater reliability was poor for AP diameter and moderate for posterior glenoid bone loss, with intraclass correlation coefficients at 0.41 (0.22-0.57) and 0.50 (0.33-0.64), respectively.

Conclusions

Using the "perfect-circle" technique for evaluating posterior glenohumeral bone loss has poor-to-moderate inter- and intrarater reliability from MRI.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, prospective diagnostic study.

Outcomes of Concomitant Glenohumeral Stabilization After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair in Military Patients Younger Than 40 Years

Background

While concomitant rotator cuff and inferior labral tears are relatively uncommon in young civilians, military populations represent a unique opportunity to study this injury pattern.

Purpose

To (1) evaluate the long-term outcomes after combined arthroscopic rotator cuff and inferior labral repair in military patients <40 years and (2) compare functional outcomes with those after isolated arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Military patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair between January 2011 and December 2016 and had a minimum of 5-year follow-up data were included in this study. The patients were categorized into those who had undergone combined arthroscopic rotator cuff and inferior labral repair (RCIL cohort) and those who had isolated arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR cohort). Pre- and postoperative outcome measures-visual analog scale for pain, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder score, Rowe Instability Score, and range of motion-were compared between the groups.

Results

A total of 50 shoulders (27 in the RCIL cohort and 23 in the ARCR cohort) were assessed. The RCIL and ARCR groups were similar in terms of age (mean, 33.19 years [range, 21-39 years] vs 35.39 years [range, 26-39 years], respectively) and sex (% male, 88.46% vs 82.61%, respectively). All patients were active-duty military at the time of surgery. The mean final follow-up was at 106.93 ± 16.66 months for the RCIL group and 105.70 ± 7.52 months for the ARCR group (P = .75). There were no differences in preoperative outcome scores between groups. Postoperatively, both groups experienced statistically significant improvements in all outcome scores (P < .0001 for all), and there were no significant group differences in any final postoperative outcome measures. At the final follow-up, 26 (96.30%) patients in the RCIL cohort and 20 (86.96%) in the ARCR cohort had returned to unrestricted active-duty military service (P = .3223).

Conclusion

The study findings indicate that concomitant glenohumeral stabilization does not prevent worse outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair in this military cohort. Combined repair produced statistically and clinically significant improvements in outcome scores at the long-term follow-up, indicating that simultaneous repair of combined lesions was an appropriate treatment option in this patient population.

Occult, Incomplete, and Complete Posterior Labral Tears Without Glenohumeral Instability on Imaging Underestimate Labral Detachment

PURPOSE

To introduce a classification of posterior labral tear and describe clinical characteristics, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)/magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) findings, arthroscopic findings, and outcomes after arthroscopic repair for patients with posterior labral tears without glenohumeral instability.

METHODS

Sixty patients with posterior labral tear who underwent arthroscopic repair were analyzed retrospectively. Patients with shoulder instability were excluded. Tear patterns were classified into 3 types; occult (type 1), incomplete (type 2), and complete (type 3) based on MRI/MRA studies. A visual analog scale score for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score for satisfaction, and return to sports were evaluated at a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Computed tomography arthrography was performed at a year follow-up for assess labral healing. The diagnosis was confirmed in arthroscopy, and arthroscopic labral repair without capsular plication was performed.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 30.4 ± 6.9 years, and all patients were male. Forty-four patients (73.3%) were participating in sports. MRI/MRA studies identified 10 patients with type 1, 18 with type 2, and 32 with type 3 tears. Type 1 tear patients showed a significantly longer symptom duration than those with type 3 (32.5 ± 17.2 vs 18.2 ± 17.1 months; P = .015). In arthroscopic findings, 70% of type 1 tear was confirmed as incomplete or complete tears. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved from 79.6 ± 10.3 to 98.1 ± 3.7, and pain was relieved from 2.4 ± 0.7 to 0.2 ± 0.5 at the last follow-up visit with high labral healing rate (95%). Thirty-nine (88.6%) patients returned to sports at preinjury levels.

CONCLUSIONS

In active young men with shoulder pain during daily activities or sports despite programmed conservative treatment, posterior labral tears should be considered even when MRI/MRA findings are ambiguous. Arthroscopic posterior labral repair without capsular plication provided satisfactory clinical outcomes and a high labral healing rate.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level Ⅳ, case series.

Establishing the Minimal Clinically Important Difference, Substantial Clinical Benefit, and Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State After Arthroscopic Posterior Labral Repair for Posterior Glenohumeral Instability

BACKGROUND

Posterior glenohumeral instability is an increasingly recognized cause of shoulder pain and dysfunction among young, active populations. Outcomes after posterior stabilization procedures are commonly assessed using patient-reported outcome measures including the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), the Rowe instability score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. The clinical significance thresholds for these measures after arthroscopic posterior labral repair (aPLR), however, remain undefined.

PURPOSE

We aimed to define the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for the SANE, Rowe score, and ASES score as well as the VAS pain after aPLR. Additionally, we sought to determine preoperative factors predictive of reaching, as well as failing to reach, clinical significance.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

This study was a retrospective analysis of patient-reported outcome scores collected from patients who underwent aPLR between January 2011 and December 2018. To determine the clinically significant threshold that corresponded to achieving a meaningful outcome, the MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated for the SANE, Rowe score, ASES score, and VAS pain utilizing either an anchor- or distribution-based method. Additionally, univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine the factors associated with achieving, or not achieving, the MCID, SCB, and PASS.

RESULTS

A total of 73 patients with a mean follow-up of 82.55 ± 24.20 months were available for final analysis. MCID, SCB, and PASS values for the VAS pain were 1.10, 6, and 3, respectively; for the ASES score were 7.8, 34, and 80, respectively; for the SANE were 10.15, 33, and 85, respectively; and for the Rowe score were 11.3, 60, and 90, respectively. To meet the MCID, male sex (odds ratio [OR], 1.1639; P = .0293) was found to be a positive predictor for the VAS pain, and a lower preoperative SANE score (OR, 0.9939; P = .0003) was found to be a negative predictor for the SANE. Dominant arm involvement was associated with lower odds of achieving the PASS for the ASES score (OR, 0.7834; P = .0259) and VAS pain (OR, 0.7887; P = .0436). Patients who reported a history of shoulder trauma were more likely to reach the PASS for the SANE (OR, 1.3501; P = .0089), Rowe score (OR, 1.3938; P = .0052), and VAS pain (OR, 1.3507; P = .0104) as well as the SCB for the ASES score (OR, 1.2642; P = .0469) and SANE (OR, 1.2554; P = .0444). A higher preoperative VAS pain score was associated with higher odds of achieving the SCB for both the VAS pain (OR, 1.1653; P = .0110) and Rowe score (OR, 1.1282; P = .0175). Lastly, concomitant biceps tenodesis was associated with greater odds of achieving the SCB for the ASES score (OR, 1.3490; P = .0130) and reaching the PASS for the SANE (OR, 1.3825; P = .0038) and Rowe score (OR, 1.4040; P = .0035).

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this study is the first to define the MCID, SCB, and PASS for the ASES score, Rowe score, SANE, and VAS pain in patients undergoing aPLR. Furthermore, we found that patients who reported a history of shoulder trauma and those who underwent concomitant biceps tenodesis demonstrated a greater likelihood of achieving clinical significance. Dominant arm involvement was associated with lower odds of achieving clinical significance.

Risk Factors for Glenoid Bone Loss in the Setting of Posterior Glenohumeral Instability

Background

Posterior instability has been reported to account for up to 24% of cases of shoulder instability in certain active populations. However, there is a paucity of data available regarding the risk factors associated with posterior glenoid bone loss.

Purpose

To characterize the epidemiology of, and risk factors associated with, glenoid bone loss within a cohort of patients who underwent primary arthroscopic shoulder stabilization for isolated posterior-type glenohumeral instability.

Study Design

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent primary arthroscopic shoulder stabilization for posterior-type instability between January 2011 and December 2019. Preoperative magnetic resonance arthrograms were used to calculate posterior glenoid bone loss using a perfect circle technique. Patient characteristics and revision rates were obtained. Bone loss (both in millimeters and as a percentage) was compared between patients based on sex, age, arm dominance, sports participation, time to surgery, glenoid version, history of trauma, and number of anchors used for labral repair.

Results

Included were 112 patients with a mean age of 28.66 ± 10.07 years; 91 patients (81.25%) were found to have measurable bone loss. The mean bone loss was 2.46 ± 1.68 mm (8.98% ± 6.12%). Significantly greater bone loss was found in athletes versus nonathletes (10.09% ± 6.86 vs 7.44% ± 4.56; P = .0232), female versus male patients (11.17% ± 6.53 vs 8.17% ± 5.80; P = .0212), and patients dominant arm involvement versus nondominant arm involvement (10.26% ± 5.63 vs 7.07% ± 6.38; P = .0064). Multivariate regression analysis identified dominant arm involvement as an independent risk factor for bone loss (P = .0033), and dominant arm involvement (P = .0024) and athlete status (P = .0133) as risk factors for bone loss >13.5%. At the conclusion of the study period, 7 patients had experienced recurrent instability (6.25%).

Conclusion

The findings of this study are in alignment with existing data suggesting that posterior glenoid bone loss is highly prevalent in patients undergoing primary arthroscopic stabilization for posterior-type shoulder instability. Our results suggest that patients with dominant arm involvement are at risk for greater posterior glenoid bone loss. Athlete status and dominant arm involvement were identified as independent risk factors for bone loss >13.5%.

Simultaneous Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair and Glenoid Microfracture in Active-Duty Military Patients Younger Than 50 Years: Outcomes at Midterm Follow-up

Background

While concomitant full-thickness rotator cuff tears and glenoid osteochondral defects are relatively uncommon in younger patients, military patients represent a unique opportunity to study this challenging injury pattern.

Purpose/Hypothesis

To compare the outcomes of young, active-duty military patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) with those who underwent ARCR plus concurrent glenoid microfracture (ARCR+Mfx). It was hypothesized that ARCR+Mfx would produce significant improvements in patient-reported outcome measures.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of consecutive active-duty military patients from a single base who underwent ARCR for full-thickness rotator cuff tears between January 2012 and December 2020. All patients were <50 years and had minimum 2-year follow-up data. Patients who underwent ARCR+Mfx were compared with those who underwent isolated ARCR based on the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score, and range of motion.

Results

A total of 88 patients met the inclusion criteria for this study: 28 underwent ARCR+Mfx and 60 underwent isolated ARCR. The mean final follow-up was 74.11 ± 33.57 months for the ARCR+Mfx group and 72.87 ± 11.46 months for the ARCR group (P = .80). There were no differences in baseline patient characteristics or preoperative outcome scores between groups. Postoperatively, both groups experienced statistically significant improvements in all outcome scores (P < .0001 for all). However, the ARCR+Mfx group had significantly worse VAS pain (1.89 ± 2.22 vs 1.03 ± 1.70; P = .05), SANE (85.46 ± 12.99 vs 91.93 ± 12.26; P = .03), and ASES (86.25 ± 14.14 vs 92.85 ± 12.57; P = .03) scores. At the final follow-up, 20 (71.43%) patients in the ARCR+Mfx group and 53 (88.33%) patients in the ARCR group were able to remain on unrestricted active-duty military service (P = .05).

Conclusion

Concomitant ARCR+Mfx led to statistically and clinically significant improvements in patient-reported outcome measures at the midterm follow-up. However, patients who underwent ARCR+Mfx had significantly worse outcomes and were less likely to return to active-duty military service than those who underwent isolated ARCR. The study findings suggest that ARCR+Mfx may be a reasonable option for young, active patients who are not candidates for arthroplasty.

The influence of posterior acromial morphology on outcomes and return to pushups in young patients undergoing arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair

Background

Prior evidence has identified specific posterior acromial morphology as significantly associated with unidirectional posterior shoulder instability. The purpose of this study is to determine the influence of posterior acromial morphology on the outcomes of arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair (APCLR) for unidirectional posterior shoulder instability. Additionally, we sought to determine the influence of posterior acromial morphology on the rate and time to return to pushups following APCLR.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of prospectively collected data. The study included consecutive patients undergoing APCLR. Data collected included demographics, radiographic measurements including posterior acromial height (PAH) and posterior acromial tilt on preoperative scapular-Y radiographs, and patient-reported outcome measures at the preoperative and postoperative visits. In addition, starting at 6 months postoperative, patients were asked if they could perform pushups defined as at least 10 repetitions. At the final follow-up, we collected the number of pushups patients were able to perform.

Results

Thirty-two consecutive patients underwent APCLR with a mean follow-up of 26 months (range, 12-41). Significant improvement from preoperative to 2 years postoperative was demonstrated in Subjective Shoulder Value (50-85), VAS (6-2.5), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (48 to 83), and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) (1437-777), P = .001. The recurrent instability rate was 3/32 (9%). Patients with PAH > 23 (N = 17) had a recurrent instability rate of 18% (3/17) versus PAH ≤ 23 (N = 15) 0% (0/15), worse WOSI scores (P = .41), and a lower number of pushups (P = .48). The percentage of patients reporting the ability to perform pushups was (6 months/1 year/2 years) (50%/78%/95%). The mean number of pushups reported at the final follow-up was 33 (range, 1-60).

Discussion

Following APCLR, approximately 50% of patients resume pushups at 6 months postoperatively, and 80% return at 1 year. Patients reported performing a mean of 33 pushups following APCLR at the final follow-up. Patients with a PAH greater than 23 on preoperative scapular-Y radiographs had a higher rate of recurrent posterior instability, worse WOSI scores, and lower return to pushups; however, the results did not meet statistical significance. Therefore, future larger studies are needed to determine if posterior acromial morphology is independently associated with worse outcomes and increased recurrent instability rates following APCLR.

Prevalence and Risk Factors of Glenoid Bone Loss in Combined Shoulder Instability in Young, Active-Duty Military Patients

Background

US military servicemembers experience higher rates of posterior and combined-type instability as compared with their nonmilitary peers.

Purpose

(1) To determine the prevalence of glenoid bone loss (GBL) in young, active-duty military patients with combined-type shoulder instability who underwent operative shoulder stabilization; (2) to evaluate whether GBL is associated with differences in postoperative outcomes; and (3) to identify factors associated with larger defects.

Study Design

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods

This study included active-duty military patients who underwent primary surgical shoulder stabilization for combined anterior and posterior capsulolabral tears between January 2012 and December 2018. Preoperative magnetic resonance arthrograms were used to calculate anterior, posterior, and total GBL using the "perfect circle" technique. We recorded patient characteristics, revisions, complications, return to duty, range of motion, and scores on multiple outcome measures (visual analog scale for pain, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and Rowe). GBL prevalence was compared by time to surgery, glenoid version, history of trauma, and number of anchors used for labral repair. Outcome scores, return to active duty, and revision procedures were compared by degree of anterior or posterior GBL: <13.5% (mild) versus ≥13.5% (subcritical).

Results

GBL was noted in 28 (77.8%) of the 36 patients. Nineteen (52.8%) patients had anterior GBL, 18 (50.0%) had posterior, and 9 (25.0%) had combined. Four (11.1%) patients had subcritical anterior or posterior GBL. Increased posterior GBL was associated with history of trauma (P = .041), time to surgery >12 months (P = .024), and glenoid retroversion ≥9° (P = .010); increased total GBL was associated with longer time to surgery (P = .023) and labral repair requiring >4 anchors (P = .012); and increased anterior GBL was associated with labral repair requiring >4 anchors (P = .011). There were statistically significant improvements on all outcome measures, with no changes in range of motion postoperatively. No significant difference on any outcome score was observed between patients with mild and subcritical GBL.

Conclusion

In our analysis, 78% of patients had appreciable GBL, suggesting that GBL is highly prevalent in this patient population. Longer time to surgery, traumatic cause, significant glenoid retroversion, and large labral tears were identified as risk factors for increased GBL.

Posterior Labral Repair Using Knotless "All-Suture" Suture Anchors

Isolated posterior instability is well described but relatively uncommon, accounting for less than 10% of all shoulder instability cases. When nonoperative management fails, surgical outcomes demonstrate improved patient-reported outcomes with a high level of return to sport. Knotless suture anchor and "all-suture" suture anchor technology are now available and used for instability procedures in the shoulder. This technical description describes knotless "all-suture" suture anchor fixation for isolated posterior labral tears.