Early Results of Concurrent Arthroscopic Repair of Rotator Cuff and Type II Superior Labral Anterior Posterior Tears

[Continuous Passive Motion in Orthopaedic Rehabilitation of the Shoulder Girdle - A Literature Survey]

BACKGROUND

Continuous passive motion (CPM) of the shoulder is predominantly used during postoperative rehabilitation of the shoulder girdle. It is often used after rotator cuff repair (RM suture). Incapacity to work and therapy of shoulder diseases cause significant costs for the healthcare system in Germany.

METHODS

In a literature analysis, studies and reviews of the CPM treatment in scientific databases were therefore identified and analysed with regard to the functional outcome particular after shoulder joint surgery. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

After rotator cuff suturing, clinical studies have predominantly shown a faster improvement in pain level and shoulder mobility when using CPM treatment compared to other forms of treatment. In the case of frozen shoulder, only studies with the scope of CPM in conservative treatment could be identified. Here predominantly faster pain reduction could be observed. Studies addressing CPM in the therapy of Impingement of the shoulder, fracture of the humeral head or arthroplasty of the glenohumeral joint could not be identified. The health economic effects of CPM use are controversially discussed. In the available studies, equipment and other costs are assessed differently.

CONCLUSION

The analysed clinical studies showed overall positive effects, e. g. a faster improvement of pain level and shoulder mobility, in the postoperative therapy of the shoulder after rotator cuff repair as well as in the conservative therapy of shoulder stiffness for the CPM treatment compared to other forms of treatment. For other entities no meaningful studies are available in the literature to date. Since the health economic effects of the use of CPM have been discussed controversial so far, potential health economic benefits of the use of CPM treatment should be evaluated in future studies.

Current Practice for the Surgical Treatment of SLAP Lesions: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To analyze current literature reporting surgical treatment of SLAP lesions to examine the consistency of reported surgical details (surgical indications, surgical technique, and postoperative rehabilitation) that are deemed important for best treatment outcomes and to try to establish a consensus regarding treatment.

METHODS

A systematic review of papers reporting surgical treatment of a SLAP lesion was performed. Each paper was analyzed for the description of (1) the arthroscopic indications for surgery; (2) surgical aspects including type, location, and number of anchors and sutures; (3) description of criteria for determination of completeness of the repair; and (4) postoperative rehabilitation details. These findings were also analyzed to determine whether a consensus could be developed regarding surgical treatment.

RESULTS

Twenty-six papers were included, with 12 focused on isolated SLAP repair and 14 focused on combined SLAP repair with other lesions; 54% did not report indications for surgery. Reporting of the anchor/suture details was not consistent, with 35% reporting some variation of 12:00 placement but 31% not reporting the position of placement; 89% of papers did not report the criteria for determining completeness of the repair; 85% reported general postoperative rehabilitation guidelines, but only 4% reported in-depth details.

CONCLUSIONS

This review demonstrated a wide variability in the reported surgical aspects and that a relatively high percentage of papers did not report many of the details. This lack of precision and consistency makes analysis of individual papers and comparison between papers and their outcomes difficult and does not allow a consensus regarding current practice to be developed. These findings may be some of the factors responsible for the variability in treatment outcomes and suggest that efforts could be directed toward consistency in documenting and reporting surgical indications, surgical techniques, surgical endpoints, and efficacious rehabilitation programs.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of level III-IV studies.

Current Practice for the Diagnosis of a SLAP Lesion: Systematic Review and Physician Survey

PURPOSE

To evaluate current practice reported in the literature for making a SLAP lesion diagnosis and compare the findings with a survey sent to experienced shoulder surgeons assessing how they make a SLAP diagnosis.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of articles reporting surgical repair of SLAP lesions, documenting the use of 4 diagnostic areas of evaluation: history, clinical examination, imaging, and diagnostic arthroscopy. A survey was distributed electronically to 175 surgeons with expertise in shoulder surgery. The survey listed common components within the 4 diagnostic areas and asked surgeons to indicate components they used in establishing the diagnosis. The 4 diagnostic areas were ranked from 1 to 4 (most to least important).

RESULTS

Of the articles, 23% reported using all 4 diagnostic areas, 58% used 3 areas, and 19% used 2 areas or fewer. Thirty-five percent did not report history components, 31% did not report clinical examination elements, 27% did not report imaging findings, and 4% did not report arthroscopic findings. Eight percent reported using a comprehensive history and examination but without describing specific symptoms or tests. The most common components reported in the literature were pain (42%), the active compression test (65%), magnetic resonance imaging/arthrography (65%), and tear/unstable biceps-labral complex (27%). A total of 70 surgeons (40%) responded to the survey. More specific history components, examination maneuvers, and imaging/arthroscopy variants were reported on the survey compared with the literature. Diagnostic arthroscopy and history ranked as the most important for a SLAP diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

The current literature and practice for making the SLAP diagnosis are variable and inconsistent. The SLAP diagnosis appears to be a clinical impression; however, the criteria described within the literature vary among the evaluation areas and differ from the results of the survey. These types of variability may have a significant influence on consistency and accuracy in making the diagnosis of the SLAP injury, developing the subsequent treatment, and maximizing outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies with cross-sectional survey.

SLAP Repairs With Combined Procedures Have Lower Failure Rate Than Isolated Repairs in a Military Population: Surgical Outcomes With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up

BACKGROUND

Injuries to the superior glenoid labrum represent a significant cause of shoulder pain among active patients. The physical requirements of military service may contribute to an increased risk of injury. Limited data are available regarding the success of superior labral anterior posterior (SLAP) repairs in an active military population.

PURPOSE

To quantify the rate of clinical failure and surgical revision after isolated and combined SLAP repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

All consecutive active-duty servicemembers undergoing arthroscopic repair of type II SLAP lesions at a single institution between 2006 and 2012 were identified. Patients with less than 2-year clinical follow-up and nonmilitary status were excluded. Demographic variables, surgical variables, and occupational outcomes were extracted from electronic medical records and confirmed with the US Army Physical Disability Agency database. Failure was defined as subsequent revision surgery or medical discharge with persistent shoulder complaints.

RESULTS

A total of 192 patients with SLAP repair were identified with a mean follow-up of 50.0 months (SD, 17.0 months). Isolated SLAP repair occurred in 31.3% (n = 60) versus 68.8% (n = 132) with concomitant procedures. At final follow-up, 37.0% (n = 71) of patients reported some subjective activity-related shoulder pain. Postoperative return to duty occurred in 79.6% (n = 153), and only 20.3% (n = 39) were discharged with continuing shoulder disability. The combined rotator cuff repair (96%; P = .023) and anteroinferior labral repair group (88%; P = .056) had a higher rate of functional return than isolated SLAP repair (70%). Thirty-one (16.1%) patients were classified as surgical failure and required revision. Of these, the majority of patients undergoing biceps tenodesis (76%) returned to active duty, as compared with revision SLAP repair (17%). Lower demand occupation and the presence of combined shoulder injuries (P = .011 and .016, respectively) were significantly associated with a lower risk of medical discharge and revision surgery, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Favorable outcomes can be anticipated in the majority of military servicemembers after arthroscopic SLAP repair, particularly with combined shoulder injuries. Revision surgery occurred in 16% of patients after primary SLAP repair.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Isolated repair of unstable SLAP lesions and/or increased upper extremity demands are associated with higher failure rates in this population.