Factors Related to Patient Dissatisfaction Versus Objective Failure After Arthroscopic Shoulder Stabilization for Instability

Surgical Intervention Following a First Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Dislocation Is Worthy of Consideration

Up to 60% of patients experience recurrence after a first traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (FTASD), which is often defined as having experienced either dislocation or subluxation. Thus surgical intervention after FTASD is worthy of consideration and is guided by the number of patients who need to receive surgical intervention to prevent 1 redislocation (i.e., number needed to treat), (subjective) health benefit, complication risk, and costs. Operative intervention through arthroscopic stabilization can be successful in reducing recurrence risk in FTASD, as has been shown in multiple randomized controlled trials. Nevertheless, there is a large "gray area" for the indication of arthroscopic stabilization, and it is therefore heavily debated which patients should receive operative treatment. Previous trials showed widely varying redislocation rates in both the intervention and control group, meta-analysis shows 2% to 19% after operative and 20% to 75% after nonoperative treatment, and redislocation rates may not correlate with patient-reported outcomes. The literature is quite heterogeneous, and a major confounder is time to follow-up. Furthermore, there is insufficient standardization of reporting of outcomes and no consensus on definition of risk factors. As a result, surgery is a reasonable intervention for FTASD patients, but in which patients it best prevents redislocation requires additional refinement.

Correlation of Glenoid Concavity With Surgical Failure After Arthroscopic Stabilization for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability

BACKGROUND

Glenoid concavity compression by rotator cuff muscle contraction is one of the key mechanisms in the stability of the glenohumeral joint.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of glenoid concavity, as represented by the bony shoulder stability ratio (BSSR) and other factors, including glenoid bone defect size, on the surgical failure of arthroscopic stabilization procedures for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The authors also aimed to determine the critical value of BSSR. It was hypothesized that both glenoid concavity and glenoid bone defect size would be correlated with surgical failure, with glenoid concavity having a stronger correlation.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A total of 120 patients who underwent arthroscopic stabilization procedures for recurrent anterior shoulder instability were included. Patients with bony Bankart lesions were excluded to eliminate the postoperative effects of bony fragment restoration on the glenoid concavity. For each patient, variable factors including BSSR, glenoid bone defect size, presence of off-track Hill-Sachs lesions, and age at first dislocation were recorded. Chi-square analysis and Student t test were performed to analyze the effect of each variable on surgical failure. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to determine the combined effect of >2 variables on surgical failure. The critical value of BSSR was analyzed using a receiver operating characteristic curve.

RESULTS

Nine patients (7.5%) had recurrent instability requiring revision surgery. BSSR (patients with recurrence, 18.6% ± 19.4%; patients without recurrence, 41.8% ± 10.5%; P = .01), glenoid bone defect size (17.5% ± 3.6% vs 11.7% ± 7.0%; P = .02), age at the time of first dislocation (18.8 ± 3.9 years vs 22.0 ± 6.5 years; P = .04), and number of suture anchors used (4.1 ± 0.3 vs 5.8 ± 1.6; P < .001) showed significant differences between patients with and without surgical failure. Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed surgical failure to be correlated with BSSR (odds ratio, 0.849; P = .02) and the number of suture anchors used (odds ratio, 0.070; P = .03). The critical value of BSSR was 29.3% (area under the curve, 0.84; 95% CI, 0.67-1.00; P < .001; sensitivity, 78%; specificity, 93%).

CONCLUSION

Glenoid concavity is strongly correlated with surgical failure after arthroscopic stabilization procedures for anterior shoulder instability. The value of BSSR reflects shoulder instability caused by glenoid bone morphology more accurately than glenoid bone defect size.

"Nearly off-track lesions" or a short distance from the medial edge of the Hill-Sachs lesion to the medial edge of the glenoid track does not seem to be accurate in predicting recurrence after an arthroscopic Bankart repair in a military population: a case-control study

BACKGROUND

On-track lesions with a short distance from the medial edge of the Hill-Sachs lesion to the medial edge of the glenoid track (nearly off-track) may predispose recurrence after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) in the general population. The aim of this study was to determine if a shorter distance between the medial edge of the Hill-Sachs lesion and the medial edge of the glenoid track could accurately predict recurrence after an ABR in a high-demand military population. It was hypothesized that a shorter distance would not accurately predict recurrence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective monocenter case-control study was performed at the Dutch Central Military Hospital. Patients with an on-track Hill-Sachs lesion who underwent a primary ABR between 2014 and 2019 with a minimal follow-up of 2 years and a preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assessment received a questionnaire. The primary outcome was recurrence, defined as a complete dislocation or subluxation. Glenoid bone loss was assessed using a linear-based method on MRI. The distance from the medial edge of the Hill-Sachs lesion to the medial edge of the glenoid track was defined as the distance to dislocation (DTD). A receiver operating characteristic curve was created to determine the predictive value of the DTD for recurrence. Logistic regression was used to determine preoperative risk factors that predispose recurrence. Covariates were selected based on univariable analysis and included gender, body mass index, age at surgery and first dislocation, laterality, smoking habits, overhead shoulder activity during work, preoperative dislocations, sports type and level, bony or labral lesions on MRI, and DTD.

RESULTS

In total, 80 patients with an average follow-up of 4.8 ± 1.9 years completed the questionnaire and were included in the analyses. Seventeen patients (21%) experienced recurrence at the final follow-up. No difference in DTD was observed among patients who experienced recurrence (9 ± 4 mm) compared with patients who did not (9 ± 5 mm; P = .81). The receiver operating characteristic curve demonstrated no predictive power of DTD for recurrence (area under the curve = 0.49). Smoking at the time of surgery (odds ratio: 3.9; confidence interval: 1.2-12.7; P = .02) and overhead shoulder movement during work (odds ratio: 9.3; confidence interval: 1.1-78.0; P = .04) were associated with recurrence according to the logistic regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

A shorter DTD demonstrated no accuracy in predicting recurrence in a military population. Smoking at the time of surgery and overhead shoulder activity during work were associated with recurrence; however, these analyses were underpowered to draw valid conclusions.

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.

Bony reconstruction after failed labral repair is associated with higher recurrence rates compared to primary bony reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 1319 shoulders in studies with a minimum of 2-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty with regard to the optimal revision procedure after failed labral repair for anterior shoulder instability. An overview of outcomes of these procedures with quantitative analysis is not available in literature. The aim of this review is (1) to compare recurrence rates after revision labral repair (RLR) and revision bony reconstruction (RBR), both following failed labral repair. In addition, (2) recurrence rates after RBR following failed labral repair and primary bony reconstruction (PBR) are compared to determine if a previous failed labral repair influences the outcomes of the bony reconstruction.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies with a minimum follow-up of 2 years and reporting recurrence rates of (1) RBR following failed labral repair and PBR and/or (2) RLR following failed labral repair and RBR following failed labral repair were identified by searching PubMed, Embase/Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Wiley, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials/Wiley, and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and comprised 1319 shoulders. Meta-analyses showed that RBR has a significantly higher recurrence rate than PBR (risk ratio [RR] 0.51, P < .008) but found no significant difference in the recurrence rates for RLR and RBR (RR 1.40, P < .49). Also, no significant differences were found between PBR and RBR in return to sport (RR 1.07, P < .41), revision surgery (RR 0.8, P < .44), and complications (RR 0.84, P < .53). Lastly, no significant differences between RLR and RBR for revision surgery (RR 3.33, P < .19) were found.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this meta-analyses show that (1) RBR does not demonstrate a significant difference in recurrence rates compared with RLR and that (2) RBR has a significantly higher recurrence rate than PBR.

Preoperative Factors Associated with Patient Satisfaction Two Years After Elective Shoulder Surgery

Background Purpose

Patient satisfaction has become an increasingly important component of quality measures for both hospital reimbursement and quality assessment. Additionally, patient satisfaction influences patient behavior and patient follow-up. The purpose of this study was to identify preoperative factors associated with patient satisfaction 2 years after shoulder surgery.

Methods

Electronic surveys were used to collect patient information including demographic, surgical, and social history, as well as outcome data. Satisfaction was measured 2 years after surgery using the Surgical Satisfaction Questionnaire.

Results

Multivariable linear regression identified preoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference, annual income, and American Society of Anesthesiologists score as independent predictors of lower patient satisfaction, while total shoulder arthroplasty was an independent predictor of greater patient satisfaction. The model accounted for 15% of the variance in satisfaction scores (R² = 0.15).

Conclusion

Patient satisfaction 2 years after shoulder surgery is associated with preoperative patient-reported outcome scores. Lower patient satisfaction is independently predicted by greater preoperative PROMIS PI, income less than $70,000, and ASA score >1, while higher patient satisfaction is predicted by total shoulder arthroplasty.

Development of the Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Framework: A Context-Specific Expansion of the Risk-as-Feelings Hypothesis

BACKGROUND

Over the past 2 decades, numerous decision-making interventions have been developed to guide the prostate cancer (PrCA) treatment choices of patients and families. These interventions are often supported by economic decision frameworks, which do not account for the role of emotions in treatment decisions. In some instances, emotion-driven decisions can override an individual's cognitive evaluation of a decision, leading to unfavorable outcomes such as decision regret.

OBJECTIVES

To produce a Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Framework based on the Risk-as-Feelings Hypothesis.

METHODS

The authors reviewed seminal research in emotion and decision-making in an effort to create a context-specific decision framework.

RESULTS

Five variables, not germane to the Risk-as-Feelings Hypothesis, play prominent roles in PrCA decision-making including age, spirituality, family support, healthcare provider communication, and perception of treatment outcomes. While family support only affects decision outcomes by influencing emotion and cognitive evaluation of a PrCA decision, age, spirituality, and healthcare provider communication can have direct effects on an individual's perception of treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

The Prostate Cancer Treatment Decision Framework combines new variables with older models to explain the PrCA treatment decision-making process and elucidate relationships affecting treatment outcomes and survivors' perceptions of these outcomes. The core premise of this model can be applied to other high-risk health decisions.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Healthcare providers have the greatest influence on PrCA treatment decision-making. Using a shared decision-making approach, providers should take into account a patient's personal characteristics and values, in addition to clinical presentation, to help patients with treatment decisions.

Criteria-based return-to-sport testing is associated with lower recurrence rates following arthroscopic Bankart repair

HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND

This study aimed to analyze the impact of a criteria-based return-to-sport (CBRTS) testing protocol on recurrent instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair. We hypothesized that patients who underwent an objective CBRTS testing protocol to guide their clearance to return to sports would have less recurrent instability than those who did not undergo testing.

METHODS

Thirty-six consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair from 2016 to 2018, had a minimum of 1 year of follow-up, and completed functional and strength testing to evaluate readiness to return to sports were included in this retrospective case-control study. Patients with critical glenoid bone loss > 13.5%, multidirectional instability, and off-track Hill-Sachs lesions necessitating a remplissage or bone augmentation procedure were excluded from the study. Recurrence was defined as dislocation or subluxation symptoms requiring revision surgery. Statistical analysis included analysis of variance and the independent t test.

RESULTS

There was no difference between the study and control groups regarding age (P = .15), sex (P = .11), hand dominance (P = .56), or participation in contact sports (P = .78). Patients who underwent the CBRTS testing protocol had a reduced rate of recurrent shoulder instability (5% vs. 22%; odds ratio, 4.85; P < .001). There was no difference in the time from surgery to recurrence between the groups (12 months vs. 13.6 months, P = .43).

CONCLUSION

Athletes who underwent an objective CBRTS testing protocol to guide their clearance to return to sports had a lower rate of recurrent instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair than those cleared to return based on the time from surgery. Athletes who did not undergo CBRTS testing after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization had a 4.85 times increased likelihood of recurrent instability development after return to sports.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair with and without arthroscopic infraspinatus remplissage in anterior shoulder instability with a Hill-Sachs defect: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare patient-reported and clinic outcomes between arthroscopic Bankart repair with (REMP) and without (NO REMP) arthroscopic infraspinatus remplissage in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability with a Hill-Sachs lesion and minimal glenoid bone loss.

METHODS

Patients 14 years or older with a recurrent anterior shoulder instability with the presence of an engaging Hill-Sachs defect (of any size) confirmed on computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging were eligible to participate. Consented patients were randomized intraoperatively to NO REMP or REMP. Study visits were conducted preoperatively and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability score. Secondary outcomes included incidence of postoperative recurrent shoulder instability, Simple Shoulder Test, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, range of motion, complications, and revision surgery. To compare groups, a mixed-effects linear model was used for continuous variables and a χ² or Fisher's exact test for categorical data. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis assessed survival distribution between groups.

RESULTS

One hundred and eight patients were randomized to Bankart repair with (n = 54) or without (n = 54) remplissage. The mean follow-up was 26.5 months (21-53 months) and 24.3 months (23-64 months) for the REMP and NO REMP groups, respectively. Rates of postoperative recurrent instability were higher (P = .027) in the NO REMP group with 9 of 50 (18%) vs. 2 of 52 (4%) postoperative dislocations in the REMP group. There were no significant differences in patient-reported outcomes between groups at any time point. Survival curve distributions were also significantly different favoring REMP (χ² = 5.255, P = .022). There was a significant difference in rate of revision surgery between groups with 6 in the NO REMP and none in the REMP groups (P = .029). Post hoc, patients were noted to have a higher risk for re-dislocation if their Hill-Sachs lesion was ≥20 mm in width or ≥15% of humeral head diameter. One intraoperative complication was reported in the REMP group.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significantly greater risk of postoperative recurrent instability in patients who did not have a remplissage performed in conjunction with an arthroscopic Bankart repair for the treatment of traumatic recurrent anterior shoulder instability with Hill-Sachs lesions of any size and minimal glenoid bone loss (<15%) at 2 years postoperatively. Otherwise, there are no differences in patient-reported outcomes, complications, or shoulder function at 2 years postoperatively. In addition, the remplissage procedure has significantly lower rates of re-dislocation in high-risk patients with Hill-Sachs lesions ≥20 mm and/or ≥15% in size.

Failure Rates After Revision Arthroscopic Stabilization for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability Based on Anterior Capsulolabral Complex Conditions

Background:

A labral retear is an important contributing factor to surgical failure after arthroscopic soft tissue stabilization for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. However, surgeons frequently encounter poor tissue conditions in the anterior capsule, such as capsular tears, during revision surgery.

Purpose:

To analyze the clinical outcomes and failure rates of revision arthroscopic stabilization after failed Bankart repair based on the tissue conditions of the anterior capsule and the labrum. Outcomes were compared for revision after failed Bankart repair because of a labral retear versus a healed labrum but with capsular tears.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

A total of 55 patients who underwent revision arthroscopic stabilization after failed Bankart repair were included. Revision surgery was indicated if patients had a history of recurrent instability with positive apprehension test results, regardless of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings of a labral retear. Patients were allocated into 2 groups based on arthroscopic findings at the time of revision surgery: group 1 consisted of patients who had a healed labrum with definite anterior capsular tears, and group 2 comprised patients who had labral retears without capsular tears. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Rowe score, and surgical failure rate.

Results:

Overall, 10 patients were included in group 1, and 45 patients were included in group 2. No capsular tears were detected on preoperative MRI or magnetic resonance arthrography scans in either group, whereas all patients in group 2 had evidence of anterior labral retears on imaging scans. After revision surgery, 9 patients (16.4%) showed surgical failure by 25.6 months postoperatively. Patients in group 1 had a significantly higher surgical failure rate than did those in group 2 (4 patients [40.0%] vs 5 patients [11.1%], respectively; P = .04). The incidence of capsular tears was significantly higher in patients with surgical failure versus those without surgical failure (44.4% vs 13.0%, respectively; P = .04).

Conclusion:

A capsular tear of the anterior capsulolabral complex was an important indicator for surgical failure after revision arthroscopic stabilization. If patients demonstrate symptomatic instability after arthroscopic soft tissue stabilization without evidence of labral retears on imaging scans, an anterior capsular tear should be considered as a possible factor for recurrence.

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.

Does an "Off-Track" Hill-Sachs Lesion That Is Misclassified as "Non-Engaging" Affect Outcomes From Bankart Repair Alone Compared With Bankart Repair Combined With Remplissage?

PURPOSE

To determine how intraoperative assessment (engagement test) may affect recurrent dislocation rate and to compare the clinical outcomes, recurrence rates, and presence of on-/off-track conditions between cases that received arthroscopic Bankart repair alone (nonengaged Hill-Sachs lesion) and Bankart repair with remplissage (engaged Hill-Sachs lesion).

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 213 patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair alone (186 patients with nonengaging lesions, group A) or with remplissage (27 patients with engaging lesion, group B) for recurrent anterior shoulder instability with <25% glenoid bone defect. The presence of an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion was determined during arthroscopic evaluation. On-track or off-track lesions were assessed retrospectively from preoperative 3-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT).

RESULTS

Mean glenoid bone defect was 13.7% in group A and 20.7% in group B (P < .001). Off-track lesions were identified in 8.1% (15/186) and 100% (27/27) in group B. At the final follow-up (minimum 2 years; mean follow-up periods after surgery of 50.1 months in group A and 47.7 months in group B), there were no significant differences in shoulder functional scores and recurrence rates between groups, despite improvement after surgery. In the off-track lesion (group A-1: nonengaging but off-track lesion), recurrence instability occurred in 9 patients (60%, 9/15). Also, comparing group A-1 and group B, we noted significant differences in shoulder functional scores and recurrence rates (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

Of 186 patients, 8.1% with nonengaging Hill-Sachs lesions during direct arthroscopic examination under anesthesia actually demonstrated off-track lesions on preoperative 3D CT scans retrospectively, with 60% experiencing recurrent instability. Intraoperative manual assessment for Hill-Sachs engagement was inferior to 3D CT scan in establishing the presence of off-track defects.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective comparative study.

Age, participation in competitive sports, bony lesions, ALPSA lesions, > 1 preoperative dislocations, surgical delay and ISIS score > 3 are risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 4584 shoulders

PURPOSE

Determining the risk of recurrent instability following an arthroscopic Bankart repair can be challenging, as numerous risk factors have been identified that might predispose recurrent instability. However, an overview with quantitative analysis of all available risk factors is lacking. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review is to identify risk factors that are associated with recurrence following an arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

Relevant studies were identified by searching PubMed, Embase/Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Wiley, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials/Wiley, CINAHL/Ebsco, and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics from inception up to November 12th 2020. Studies evaluating risk factors for recurrence following an arthroscopic Bankart repair with a minimal follow-up of 2 years were included.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies met the inclusion criteria and comprised a total of 4582 shoulders (4578 patients). Meta-analyses were feasible for 22 risk factors and demonstrated that age ≤ 20 years (RR = 2.02; P < 0.00001), age ≤ 30 years (RR = 2.62; P = 0.005), participation in competitive sports (RR = 2.40; P = 0.02), Hill-Sachs lesion (RR = 1.77; P = 0.0005), off-track Hill-Sachs lesion (RR = 3.24; P = 0.002), glenoid bone loss (RR = 2.38; P = 0.0001), ALPSA lesion (RR = 1.90; P = 0.03), > 1 preoperative dislocations (RR = 2.02; P = 0.03), > 6 months surgical delay (RR = 2.86; P < 0.0001), ISIS > 3 (RR = 3.28; P = 0.0007) and ISIS > 6 (RR = 4.88; P < 0.00001) were risk factors for recurrence. Male gender, an affected dominant arm, hyperlaxity, participation in contact and/or overhead sports, glenoid fracture, SLAP lesion with/without repair, rotator cuff tear, > 5 preoperative dislocations and using ≤ 2 anchors could not be confirmed as risk factors. In addition, no difference was observed between the age groups ≤ 20 and 21-30 years.

CONCLUSION

Meta-analyses demonstrated that age ≤ 20 years, age ≤ 30 years, participation in competitive sports, Hill-Sachs lesion, off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, glenoid bone loss, ALPSA lesion, > 1 preoperative dislocations, > 6 months surgical delay from first-time dislocation to surgery, ISIS > 3 and ISIS > 6 were risk factors for recurrence following an arthroscopic Bankart repair. These factors can assist clinicians in giving a proper advice regarding treatment.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

What Are the Predictors of Poor Patient-Reported Outcomes After Shoulder Instability Surgery?

Background:

Prospectively collected responses to Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) questions after shoulder instability surgery are limited. Responses to these outcome measures are imperative to understanding their clinical utility.

Purpose/Hypothesis:

The purpose of this study was to evaluate which factors predict unfavorable patient-reported outcomes after shoulder instability surgery, including “no” to the PASS question. We hypothesized that poor outcomes would be associated with male adolescents, bone loss, combined labral tears, and articular cartilage injuries.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

Methods:

Patients aged ≥13 years undergoing shoulder instability surgery were included in point-of-care data collection at a single institution across 12 surgeons between 2015 and 2017. Patients with anterior-inferior labral tears were included, and those with previous ipsilateral shoulder surgery were excluded. Demographics, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores, and surgical findings were obtained at baseline. ASES and SANE scores, PASS responses, and early revision surgery rates were obtained at a minimum of 1 year after the surgical intervention. Regression analyses were performed.

Results:

A total of 234 patients met inclusion criteria, of which 176 completed follow-up responses (75.2%). Nonresponders had a younger age, greater frequency of glenoid bone loss, fewer combined tears, and more articular cartilage injuries (P < .05). Responders’ mean age was 25.1 years, and 22.2% were female. Early revision surgery occurred in 3.4% of these patients, and 76.1% responded yes to the PASS question. A yes response correlated with a mean 25-point improvement in the ASES score and a 40-point improvement in the SANE score. On multivariate analysis, combined labral tears (anterior-inferior plus superior or posterior tears) were associated with greater odds of responding no to the PASS question, while both combined tears and injured capsules were associated with lower ASES and SANE scores (P < .05). Sex, bone loss, and grade 3 to 4 articular cartilage injuries were not associated with variations on any patient-reported outcome measure.

Conclusion:

Patients largely approved of their symptom state at ≥1 year after shoulder instability surgery. A response of yes to the PASS question was given by 76.1% of patients and was correlated with clinically and statistically significant improvements in ASES and SANE scores. Combined labral tears and injured capsules were negative prognosticators across patient-reported outcome measures, whereas sex, bone loss, and cartilage injuries were not.

When to Abandon the Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review

CONTEXT

Bone loss is a major factor in determining surgical choice in patients with anterior glenohumeral instability. Although bone loss has been described, there is no consensus on glenoid, humeral head, and bipolar bone loss limits for which arthroscopic-only management with Bankart repair can be performed.

OBJECTIVE

To provide guidelines for selecting a more complex repair or reconstruction (in lieu of arthroscopic-only Bankart repair) in the setting of glenohumeral instability based on available literature.

DATA SOURCES

An electronic search of the literature for the period from 2000 to 2019 was performed using PubMed (MEDLINE).

STUDY SELECTION

Studies were included if they quantified bone loss (humeral head or glenoid) in the setting of anterior instability treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4.

DATA EXTRACTION

Study design, level of evidence, patient demographics, follow-up, recurrence rates, and measures of bone loss (glenoid, humeral head, bipolar).

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 10 measured glenoid bone loss, 5 measured humeral head bone loss, and 2 measured "tracking" without explicit measurement of humeral head bone loss. Measurement techniques for glenoid and humeral head bone loss varied widely. Recommendations for maximum glenoid bone loss for arthroscopic repair were largely <15% of glenoid width in recent studies. Recommendations regarding humeral head loss were more variable (many authors providing only qualitative descriptions) with increasing attention on glenohumeral tracking.

CONCLUSION

It is essential that a standardized method of glenoid and humeral head bone loss measurements be performed preoperatively to assess which patients will have successful stabilization after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Glenoid bone loss should be <15%, and humeral head lesions should be "on track" if an arthroscopic-only Bankart is planned. If there is greater bone loss, adjunct or open procedures should be performed.

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.

Editorial Commentary: Glenoid Track Instability Management Score or Instability Severity Index Score-Will This Decrease Latarjet Abuse?

Open treatment of anterior shoulder instability using a coracoid transfer, such as the Latarjet procedure, is associated with low recurrence rates but with significant complications such as nerve injury, arthrosis, and graft osteolysis. However, an arthroscopic Bankart procedure, although less invasive and with a low complication rate, has the possibility of a higher recurrent instability rate. Scoring systems such as the Instability Severity Index Score, created to select patients for an arthroscopic Bankart procedure or coracoid transfer, have varying levels of success. Often, the scoring system selects a relatively high percentage of patients for the coracoid transfer, possibly undermining its widespread adoption. The relation between glenoid and humeral bone loss has produced the concept of "on-track" and "off-track," which impacts recurrent instability rates. Merging the on-track and off-track concept with the new Glenoid Track Instability Management Score may produce an algorithm that more accurately assesses the need for the Latarjet procedure or arthroscopic stabilization.