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

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.

Poor midterm clinical outcomes and a high percentage of unsatisfying results are reported after seizure-related shoulder injuries, especially after posterior proximal humerus fracture-dislocations

BACKGROUND

Treating seizure-related shoulder injuries is challenging, and an evidence-based consensus to guide clinicians is lacking. The aim of this prospective single-center observational clinical trial was to evaluate the clinical results of a cohort of patients undergoing treatment of seizure-related shoulder injuries, to categorize them according to the lesion's characteristics, with special focus on patients with proximal humerus fracture-dislocations (PHFDs), and to define groups at risk of obtaining unsatisfactory results. We hypothesized that patients with a PHFD, considered the worst-case scenario among these injuries, would report worse clinical results in terms of the quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (qDASH) as compared to the other patients.

METHODS

Patients referred to a tertiary epilepsy center who have seizure-related shoulder injuries and with a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included. A quality-of-life assessment instrument (EQ-5D-5L), a district-specific patient-reported outcome measure (qDASH), and a pain assessment tool (visual analog scale [VAS]) were used for the clinical outcome evaluation. Subjective satisfaction and fear of new shoulder injuries was also documented. Categorization and subgroup analysis according to the presence and features of selected specific lesions were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 111 patients were deemed eligible and 83 were available for follow-up (median age 38 years, 30% females), accounting for a total of 107 injured shoulders. After a median follow-up of 3.9 (1.6-8.2) years, overall moderate clinical results were reported. In addition, 34.1% of the patients reported a VAS score ≥35 mm, indicating moderate to severe pain, and 34.1% a qDASH score ≥40 points, indicating severe disability of an upper limb. These percentages rose to, respectively, 45.5% and 48.5% in the subgroup of patients with PHFDs and to 68.8% and 68.8% in patients experiencing posterior PHFD. Overall, 46.9% of the patients considered themselves unsatisfied with the treatment and 62.5% reported a persistent fear of a new shoulder injury.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with seizure-related shoulder injuries reported only moderate clinical results at their midterm follow-up. Older age, male sex, and absence or discontinuation of antiepileptic drug (AED) treatment were identified as characterizing features of patients with posterior dislocation episodes. In patients with PHFD, a tendency to worse clinical results was observed, with posterior PHFD patients emerging as a definite subgroup at risk of reporting unsatisfying results after treatment.

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.

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.

The Continuous Fragility Index of Statistically Significant Findings in Randomized Controlled Trials That Compare Interventions for Anterior Shoulder Instability

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based care relies on robust research. The fragility index (FI) is used to assess the robustness of statistically significant findings in randomized controlled trials (RCTs). While the traditional FI is limited to dichotomous outcomes, a novel tool, the continuous fragility index (CFI), allows for the assessment of the robustness of continuous outcomes.

PURPOSE

To calculate the CFI of statistically significant continuous outcomes in RCTs evaluating interventions for managing anterior shoulder instability (ASI).

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

A search was conducted across the MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL databases for RCTs assessing management strategies for ASI from inception to October 6, 2022. Studies that reported a statistically significant difference between study groups in ≥1 continuous outcome were included. The CFI was calculated and applied to all available RCTs reporting interventions for ASI. Multivariable linear regression was performed between the CFI and various study characteristics as predictors.

RESULTS

There were 27 RCTs, with a total of 1846 shoulders, included. The median sample size was 61 shoulders (IQR, 43). The median CFI across 27 RCTs was 8.2 (IQR, 17.2; 95% CI, 3.6-15.4). The median CFI was 7.9 (IQR, 21; 95% CI, 1-22) for 11 studies comparing surgical methods, 22.6 (IQR, 16; 95% CI, 8.2-30.4) for 6 studies comparing nonsurgical reduction interventions, 2.8 for 3 studies comparing immobilization methods, and 2.4 for 3 studies comparing surgical versus nonsurgical interventions. Significantly, 22 of 57 included outcomes (38.6%) from studies with completed follow-up data had a loss to follow-up exceeding their CFI. Multivariable regression demonstrated that there was a statistically significant positive correlation between a trial's sample size and the CFI of its outcomes (r = 0.23 [95% CI, 0.13-0.33]; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

More than a third of continuous outcomes in ASI trials had a CFI less than the reported loss to follow-up. This carries the significant risk of reversing trial findings and should be considered when evaluating available RCT data. We recommend including the FI, CFI, and loss to follow-up in the abstracts of future RCTs.

Editorial Commentary: Immediate Surgical Stabilization Following a First-Time Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Dislocation Is Still the Best Evidence-Based Approach

Traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations are unfortunately common. The initial dislocation is enough to cause permanent anatomic and biomechanical alterations to the glenohumeral joint, which increases the likelihood of further events. When a patient crosses into the multiple dislocator category, further soft-tissue and bony injury occurs. This is almost certainly the reason that the number of preoperative dislocations significantly diminishes the success of an arthroscopic stabilization and increases the need for a more aggressive approach that may carry greater risks of complications. When it comes to recurrent instability, there remains very little doubt regarding the appropriate treatment for a first-time traumatic dislocation: immediate surgical stabilization! Assuming no significant glenoid or humeral bone loss, arthroscopic stabilization remains an effective surgery with a high-benefit, low-risk profile, especially when combined with a remplissage in high-risk circumstances. At least 4 randomized controlled trials support immediate versus nonoperative management for every outcome measured: recurrence, return to sport, patient-reported outcomes, and sustained event-free survival, especially pronounced at 2 years. The decision to recommend surgery, is of course, not always straightforward, necessitating an informed discussion with the patient and the family, especially when other outcomes such as return to play are deemed equally relevant and can be successfully achieved with nonoperative management. Nonetheless, more than any other outcome measure, is there a more important outcome than recurrence regarding long-term health implications? Lastly, can we do better with study designs and outcome measures to better understand risk factors to identify patients better suited for surgery after a first-time event than others? Absolutely. But until then, when up to 60% can sustain a recurrent dislocation in this population, and up to 90% in high-risk individuals, the odds are not in my favor with nonoperative treatment. Despite potential limitations in our current literature, immediate surgery following a first-time dislocation is still the best evidence-based approach.

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.

Functional and Sport-Specific Outcome Following Traumatic First-Time Shoulder Dislocation and Arthroscopic Surgical Repair in Rock Climbers

INTRODUCTION

Traumatic shoulder dislocations rank among the most common shoulder injuries in climbers, with rising numbers over the last years. The objective of this study was to analyze the outcome following traumatic first-time shoulder dislocation and subsequent surgical treatment in this population.

METHODS

In a retrospective study, climbers who experienced a traumatic shoulder dislocation were treated with an arthroscopic repair of the labrum-ligament complex (LLC). The functional outcome was assessed with a standardized questionnaire and clinical examination, including the Constant Murley and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores. The sport-specific outcome was analyzed using the Union Internationale des Associations d'Alpinisme (UIAA) scale of difficulty and a sport-specific outcome score.

RESULTS

The functional and sport-specific outcome for 27 climbers (20 men; 7 women; 3 with bilateral injuries; age, 34±11 [17-61] y; data presented as mean±SD [range]) was assessed 53±29 (12-103) mo after surgery. The postoperative Constant Murley score was 95±8 (67-100) points. At follow-up, 93% (n=25) of patients had started climbing again. Twenty-one climbers (78%) reached a climbing level within the range of ±0.33 UIAA grades of their initial capability or even exceeded their preinjury grade. Only 7% (n=2) of the patients had a recurrent shoulder dislocation, leading to a secondary surgery, and, therefore, required ongoing postoperative treatment at the time of follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic repair of the LLC following first-time traumatic shoulder dislocation in climbers shows a good outcome and a low recurrence rate. After surgery, most patients are able to regain a high level of rock-climbing ability.

Arthroscopic Repair Versus Conservative Treatment for First-time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation

To systematically compare the clinical efficacy of conservative treatment and arthroscopic one-stage repair for patients with first-time anterior dislocation of the shoulder. A retrieval and systematic review of randomized controlled studies of primary anterior shoulder dislocation with conservative versus arthroscopic repair was conducted and further pooled analysis was performed to compare the overall difference in clinical outcomes, including redislocation and revision surgery rates, shoulder function scores and related complications. Preliminary meta-analysis showed that the risk of anterior shoulder redislocation was 4.73-fold higher in patients treated conservatively than those undergoing arthroscopic repair (RR:4.73 [2.95-7.58], p<0.000; I²=0%, p=0.920),and that the revision surgery rate was 5.91 times higher in the conservative group than in the arthroscopic repair group (RR:5.91 [2.82-12.39], p<0.000; I²⁼0%, p=0.560).Early arthroscopic repair can significantly reduce the redislocation and revision surgery rates and also improve the shoulder joint function score, without serious complications. However, it is necessary to recognize the subset of patients with a higher risk of redislocation in young patients through a high quality, blinded, prospective cohort study when early arthroscopic repair intervention in this subset of high-risk patients will be of significant clinical value.

Increased Failure Rates After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair After Second Dislocation Compared to Primary Dislocation With Comparable Clinical Outcomes

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare rates of recurrent dislocation and postsurgical outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability immediately after a first-time traumatic anterior dislocation versus patients who sustained a second dislocation event after initial nonoperative management.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed of patients undergoing primary arthroscopic stabilization for anterior shoulder instability without concomitant procedures and minimum 2-year clinical follow-up. Primary outcome was documentation of a recurrent shoulder dislocation. Secondary clinical outcomes included range of motion, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (ASES), and Shoulder Activity Scale (SAS).

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients (mean age 21.3 years ± 7.3 years) met inclusion criteria. Sixty-three shoulders underwent surgical stabilization after a single shoulder dislocation, and 14 underwent surgery after 2 dislocations. Average follow-up was 35.9 months. The rate of recurrent dislocation was significantly higher in the 2-dislocation group compared to single dislocations (42.8% vs 14.2%, P = .03). No significant difference was present in range of motion, VAS, ASES, and SAS scores. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was 1.4 for VAS and 1.8 for SAS scores. The MCID was met or exceeded in the primary dislocation group in 31/38 (81.6%) patients for VAS, 23/31 (74.1%) for ASES, and 24/31 for SES (77.4%) scores. For the second dislocation cohort, MCID was met or exceeded in 7/9 (77.8%) for VAS, 4/7 (57.1%) for ASES, and 5/7 for SES (71.4%) scores.

CONCLUSION

Immediate arthroscopic surgical stabilization after a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation significantly decreases the risk of recurrent dislocation in comparison to those who undergo surgery after 2 dislocation events, with comparable clinical outcome scores. These findings suggest that patients who return to activities after a primary anterior shoulder dislocation and sustain just 1 additional dislocation event are at increased risk of a failing arthroscopic repair.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective comparative study; Level of evidence, 3.

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 Surgery Postoperative Immobilization: An International Survey of Shoulder Surgeons

BACKGROUND

There is currently no consensus on immobilization protocols following shoulder surgery. The aim of this study was to establish patterns and types of sling use for various surgical procedures in the United States (US) and Europe, and to identify factors associated with the variations.

METHODS

An online survey was sent to all members of the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) and European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow (ESSSE). The survey gathered member data, including practice location and years in practice. It also obtained preferences for the type and duration of sling use after the following surgical procedures: arthroscopic Bankart repair, Latarjet, arthroscopic superior/posterosuperior rotator cuff repair (ARCR) of tears <3 cm and >3 cm, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse TSA (rTSA), and isolated biceps tenodesis (BT). Relationships between physician location and sling type for each procedure were analyzed using Fisher's exact tests and post-hoc tests using Bonferroni-adjusted p-values. Relationships looking at years in practice and sling duration preferred were analyzed using Spearman's correlation tests.

RESULTS

In total, 499 surgeons with a median of 15 years of experience (IQR = 9-25) responded, with 54.7% from the US and 45.3% from Europe. US respondents reported higher abduction pillow sling use than European respondents for the following: Bankart repair (62% vs. 15%, p < 0.0001), Latarjet (53% vs. 12%, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (80% vs. 42%, p < 0.001) and >3 cm (84% vs. 61%, p < 0.001), aTSA (50% vs. 21%, p < 0.001) and rTSA with subscapularis repair (61% vs. 22%, p < 0.001) and without subscapularis repair (57% vs. 17%, p < 0.001), and isolated BT (18% vs. 7%, p = 0.006). European respondents reported higher simple sling use than US respondents for the following: Bankart repair (74% vs. 31%, p < 0.001), Latarjet (78% vs. 44%, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (50% vs. 17%, p < 0.001) and >3 cm (34% vs. 13%, p < 0.001), and aTSA (69% vs. 41%, p < 0.001) and rTSA with subscapularis repair (70% vs. 35%, p < 0.001) and without subscapularis repair (73% vs. 39%, p < 0.001). Increasing years of experience demonstrated a negative correlation with the duration of sling use after Bankart repair (r = -0.20, p < 0.001), Latarjet (r = -0.25, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (r = -0.14, p = 0.014) and >3 cm (r = -0.20, p < 0.002), and aTSA (r = -0.37, p < 0.001), and rTSA with subscapularis repair (r = -0.10, p = 0.049) and without subscapularis repair (r = -0.19, p = 0.022. Thus, the more experienced surgeons tended to recommend shorter durations of post-operative sling use. US surgeons reported longer post-operative sling durations for Bankart repair (4.8 vs. 4.1 weeks, p < 0.001), Latarjet (4.6 vs. 3.6 weeks, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (5.2 vs. 4.5 weeks p < 0.001) and >3 cm (5.9 vs. 5.1 weeks, p < 0.001), aTSA (4.9 vs. 4.3 weeks, p < 0.001), rTSR without subscapularis repair (4.0 vs. 3.6 weeks, p = 0.031), and isolated BT (3.7 vs. 3.3 weeks, p = 0.012) than Europe respondents. No significant differences between regions within the US and Europe were demonstrated.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable variation in the immobilization advocated by surgeons, with geographic location and years of clinical experience influencing patterns of sling use. Future work is required to establish the most clinically beneficial protocols for immobilization following shoulder surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

First-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: current concepts

The management of first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations has been a topic of extensive study yet remains controversial. Development of a treatment plan requires an understanding of patient-specific considerations, including demographics, functional demands, and extent of pathology. Each of these can influence rates of recurrence and return to activity. The purpose of this review is to provide a framework for decision-making following a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation, with particular focus on the high-risk young and athletic population. A summary of surgical treatment options and their outcomes is outlined, along with future biomechanical and clinical perspectives.

The arthroscopic Bankart operation: a 10-year follow-up study

INTRODUCTION

Traumatic shoulder instability most frequently occurs in young people often during sports events. Currently, the arthroscopic Bankart repair is the therapy of choice in the absence of extensive glenoid bone loss and has proved to be a safe and effective procedure. Nevertheless, we see recurrence of instability-especially if new trauma happens-and further data are needed to guide the right decision-making for these often young patients. The purpose of this study was to determine the long-term outcome 10 years after arthroscopic Bankart operation in terms of satisfaction of the patient, functional result, complications, recurrent instability, and development of osteoarthritis, and to look after possible risk factors for recurrence of instability and statistical proof of these.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty-nine out of 49 patients underwent physical examination of both shoulders. We could perform a postoperative shoulder a-p X-ray in 28 patients. According to Samilson, [24] the extent of osteoarthritis was measured. The Constant score and the postoperative ROWE score were determined for both shoulders as well as the WOSI Score. In 25 cases, we calculated the ISIS Score.

RESULTS

We could reach out to 89.6% of patients and 79.6% could be physically examined. The vast majority of 95.5% are either very satisfied or satisfied with the result at the time we ended the follow-up. The mean Constant score of 95.5 reflects this result. In contrast to this, we found at the same time in 15.3% ongoing clinical signs of instability of the concerning shoulder, even though 9.1% had to be re-operated for recurrent instability in between the follow-up timeline and we found in the X-rays (57.1% of all patients) in 35.7% at least moderate and in 10.7% severe signs of osteoarthritis. The Constant score but not the ROWE score differed significantly in patients with no or mild compared to those with moderate-to-severe osteoarthritis.

CONCLUSIONS

The arthroscopic Bankart stabilization procedure showed after 10 years to be a very safe operation and to be able to produce a satisfying and functional very good long-term result-reflected by the Constant score. We assume that the extent of osteoarthritis seems to be the determining factor of the very good functional result, even though ongoing instability was present in 15.3% of the patients.

The Effect of Blood Flow Restriction Therapy on Shoulder Function Following Shoulder Stabilization Surgery: A Case Series

Background

Traumatic shoulder instability is a common injury in athletes and military personnel. Surgical stabilization reduces recurrence, but athletes often return to sport before recovering upper extremity rotational strength and sport-specific abilities. Blood flow restriction (BFR) may stimulate muscle growth without the need for heavy resistance training post-surgically.

Hypothesis/Purpose

To observe changes in shoulder strength, self-reported function, upper extremity performance, and range of motion (ROM) in military cadets recovering from shoulder stabilization surgery who completed a standard rehabilitation program with six weeks of BFR training.

Study Design

Prospective case series.

Methods

Military cadets who underwent shoulder stabilization surgery completed six weeks of upper extremity BFR training, beginning post-op week six. Primary outcomes were shoulder isometric strength and patient-reported function assessed at 6-weeks, 12-weeks, and 6-months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included shoulder ROM assessed at each timepoint and the Closed Kinetic Chain Upper Extremity Stability Test (CKCUEST), the Upper Extremity Y-Balance Test (UQYBT), and the Unilateral Seated Shotput Test (USPT) assessed at the six-month follow-up.

Results

Twenty cadets performed an average 10.9 BFR training sessions over six weeks. Statistically significant and clinically meaningful increases in surgical extremity external rotation strength (p < 0.001; mean difference, .049; 95% CI: .021, .077), abduction strength (p < 0.001; mean difference, .079; 95% CI: .050, .108), and internal rotation strength (p < 0.001; mean difference, .060; CI: .028, .093) occurred from six to 12 weeks postoperatively. Statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements were reported on the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (p < 0.001; mean difference, 17.7; CI: 9.4, 25.9) and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (p < 0.001; mean difference, -31.1; CI: -44.2, -18.0) from six to 12 weeks postoperatively. Additionally, over 70 percent of participants met reference values on two to three performance tests at 6-months.

Conclusion

While the degree of improvement attributable to the addition of BFR is unknown, the clinically meaningful improvements in shoulder strength, self-reported function, and upper extremity performance warrant further exploration of BFR during upper extremity rehabilitation.

Level of Evidence

4, Case Series.

Development and training of a machine learning algorithm to identify patients at risk for recurrence following an arthroscopic Bankart repair (CLEARER): protocol for a retrospective, multicentre, cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Shoulder instability is a common injury, with a reported incidence of 23.9 per 100 000 person-years. There is still an ongoing debate on the most effective treatment strategy. Non-operative treatment has recurrence rates of up to 60%, whereas operative treatments such as the Bankart repair and bone block procedures show lower recurrence rates (16% and 2%, respectively) but higher complication rates (<2% and up to 30%, respectively). Methods to determine risk of recurrence have been developed; however, patient-specific decision-making tools are still lacking. Artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms use self-learning complex models that can be used to make patient-specific decision-making tools. The aim of the current study is to develop and train a machine learning algorithm to create a prediction model to be used in clinical practice-as an online prediction tool-to estimate recurrence rates following a Bankart repair.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is a multicentre retrospective cohort study. Patients with traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations that were treated with an arthroscopic Bankart repair without remplissage will be included. This study includes two parts. Part 1, collecting all potential factors influencing the recurrence rate following an arthroscopic Bankart repair in patients using multicentre data, aiming to include data from >1000 patients worldwide. Part 2, the multicentre data will be re-evaluated (and where applicable complemented) using machine learning algorithms to predict outcomes. Recurrence will be the primary outcome measure.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

For safe multicentre data exchange and analysis, our Machine Learning Consortium adhered to the WHO regulation 'Policy on Use and Sharing of Data Collected by WHO in Member States Outside the Context of Public Health Emergencies'. The study results will be disseminated through publication in a peer-reviewed journal. No Institutional Review Board is required for this study.

Short- and long-term outcomes in Bankart repair vs. conservative treatment for first-time anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

First-time anterior shoulder dislocations are associated with a high rate of residual instability. Therefore, many surgeons support initial Bankart repair surgery over conservative management to address this issue. However, the optimal treatment remains controversial because of uncertainty regarding long-term surgical outcomes. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the short- and long-term rates of residual instability following Bankart repair or conservative management after a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ScienceDirect databases were accessed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Bankart repair to conservative management. RoB (Risk of Bias) 2 was used to check study quality. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines were followed in assessing primary outcomes. The inverse-variance method for continuous variables and the Mantel-Haenszel method for dichotomous variables was used.

RESULTS

A total of 348 patients from 6 RCTs published across 8 articles, with a mean age of 23.7 years, were included. Bias was graded low in 3 studies, some concerns in 3 studies, and high in 2 studies. In the short term (2-3 years), surgery lowered recurrent instability (risk ratio [RR] 0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08, 0.27; I² = 0%; P < .0001). Similar findings were seen in the long term (5-12 years) (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.14, 0.39; I² = 0%; P < .0001). No difference was observed in return to sport (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.91, 1.52; I² = 78%; P = .21). Initial surgery lowered subsequent stabilization surgery in the short (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.09, 0.43; I² = 0%; P < .0001) and long term (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.07, 0.39; I² = 25%; P < .0001). Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) scores did not differ in the short term (MD, 2.54, 95% CI -0.51, 5.59; I² = 48%; P = .1) but were higher in the surgical group at long-term follow-up. Patient satisfaction was also higher with surgery (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.4, 2.2; I² = 88%; P < .0001). Certainty of evidence was low for only 1 long-term outcome measure.

CONCLUSION

Bankart repair surgery for first-time anterior shoulder dislocation results in a large reduction in the risk of recurrent shoulder instability and subsequent stabilization surgery in both short- (2-3 years) and long-term (5-12 years) follow-up intervals. Additionally, slight improvements in overall patient satisfaction and WOSI score can be seen at long-term follow-up. However, surgical intervention failed to significantly improve the rate of return to sport when compared with conservative management.

Long-Term Results of Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Anterior Glenohumeral Instability: Does Associated Postero-inferior Capsulolabral Repair Still Have a Role?

PURPOSE

To compare the outcomes of arthroscopic anterior Bankart repair with and without associated postero-inferior capsulolabral repair as treatment of anterior glenohumeral instabiliy at minimun 10 year follow-up.

METHODS

A retrospective comparative study including patients who underwent arthroscopic anterior Bankart repair to treat anterior glenohumeral instability with glenoid bone-loss < 15% between January 2000 and February 2010 was performed. Outcomes were reported as recurrence rate, type of recurrence (dislocation or subluxation), need for revision surgery, range of motion, complications, and functional status. Outcomes were compared depending on whether a postero-inferior capsulolabral repair was added to the anterior Bankart repair.

RESULTS

70 shoulders [59 males, mean age 28.2 (range 14-56), mean follow-up 146.1 (range 120-208) months] were included. Recurrence occurred in 9 cases (12.8%), including 3 dislocations and 6 subluxations. Revision surgery was needed in 8 (11.4%). Mean Rowe score improved from 29.7 (11.6) preoperatively to 87.1 (12.3) postoperatively. 83.3% returned to previous sports activities. Mean forward flexion changed from 173.5° (19.2) to 168.4º(10.4) (P < 0.01), external rotation from 81.4° (18) to 75.7° (10.5) (P < 0.01), and internal rotation decreased from 66.2% reaching T12 to 14.1% (P < 0.01). Addition of postero-inferior capsulolabral repair did not influence any of the outcomes significantly.

CONCLUSION

Postero-inferior capsulolabral repair added to anterior Bankart repair as treatment of anterior glenohumeral instability in abscence of significant glenoid bone-loss did not influence the outcomes in terms of recurrence, range of motion, return to sports, or functional status, compared to isolated anterior Bankart repair at 12.2 year follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Shoulder Stabilization Versus Immobilization for First-Time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Level 1 Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Multiple studies have compared redislocation rates after stabilization and immobilization for patients experiencing a traumatic, first-time anterior shoulder dislocation (ASD).

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature to compare rates of recurrent instability and subsequent instability surgery in patients undergoing treatment for a first-time ASD with surgical stabilization versus shoulder immobilization.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify level 1 randomized studies that compared outcomes of surgical stabilization versus immobilization for treatment of primary ASD. The following search phrase was used: (glenohumeral OR anterior shoulder) AND (conservative OR nonoperative OR nonsurgical OR physiotherapy) AND (Bankart OR repair OR stabilization OR surgical OR surgery OR arthroscopic OR arthroscopy) AND (instability OR dislocation). Patients with soft tissue disruption alone as well as those with additional minor bony lesions (Hill-Sachs, Bankart) were included. Recurrent instability and subsequent instability surgery rates, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), and range of motion were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies met inclusion criteria, including 126 patients undergoing surgical stabilization (mean age, 23.6 years; range, 15.0-39.0 years) and 133 patients undergoing treatment with sling immobilization only (mean age, 23.1 years; range, 15.0-31.0 years). Mean follow-up was 59.7 months. Overall, 6.3% of operative patients experienced recurrent instability at latest follow-up compared with 46.6% of nonoperative patients (P < .00001). Similarly, 4.0% of operative patients underwent a subsequent instability surgery compared with 30.8% of nonoperative patients (P < .00001). These same trends were demonstrated when data were isolated to nonoperative patients immobilized in internal rotation. When comparing the operative and nonoperative groups at latest follow-up, 1 study found significantly improved WOSI scores among operative patients (P = .035) and 1 study found significantly improved abducted external rotation in nonoperative patients (P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Patients, particularly active men in their 20s and 30s, undergoing treatment for a first-time ASD with a surgical stabilization procedure can be expected to experience significantly lower rates of recurrent instability and a significantly decreased need for a future stabilization procedure when compared with patients treated nonoperatively.

Functional Rehabilitation and Return to Play After Arthroscopic Surgical Stabilization for Anterior Shoulder Instability

BACKGROUND

There exists limited objective functional return-to-play criteria after surgical stabilization for anterior shoulder instability in the competitive athlete.

HYPOTHESIS

The proposed functional rehabilitation program and psychological evaluation after arthroscopic Bankart repair will help athletes return to sport with a decreased redislocation rate on return.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4.

METHODS

Participants were contact or overhead athletes at the high school or collegiate level. Each underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair after a single dislocation event, with less than 10% glenoid bone loss. Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) scores, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores were evaluated pre- and postoperatively. Athletes were only allowed to return to competition after completing the proposed functional and psychological rehabilitation protocol.

RESULTS

A total of 62 participants were enrolled (52 male, 10 female; average age, 18.7 years (range 16-24 years); mean Instability Severity Index Score, 5.63 ± 0.55). All returned to sport for 1 full season and completed a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. The average time to pass functional testing was 6.2 ± 0.7 months, psychological testing was 5.2 ± 0.5 months, and return to sport was 6.5 ± 0.7 months. SANE scores improved from 44.3 to 90.0, ASES from 45.5 to 89.3, and WOSI from 1578.0 to 178.9 (all P < 0.001). Redislocation rate was 6.5% (4 of 62).

CONCLUSION

The proposed functional rehabilitation and psychological assessment protocol is safe and effective in returning athletes to sport after arthroscopic surgical intervention for anterior shoulder instability. This demonstrated a low redislocation rate after 2-year follow-up.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Most return-to-play protocols after arthroscopic Bankart repair are centered on recovery time alone, with limited focus on functional rehabilitation, psychological assessment, and return-to-play testing parameters. To our knowledge, this is the first study to propose a dedicated rehabilitation program incorporating functional testing, psychological readiness, and return-to-play criteria for competitive athletes recovering from arthroscopic shoulder stabilization.

Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment Following First-Time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation

BACKGROUND

There is an ongoing debate about whether to perform operative or nonoperative treatment following a first-time anterior dislocation or wait for recurrence before operating. The aim of this systematic review is to compare recurrence rates following operative treatment following first-time anterior dislocation (OTFD) with recurrence rates following (1) nonoperative treatment (NTFD) or (2) operative treatment after recurrent anterior dislocation (OTRD).

METHODS

A literature search was conducted by searching PubMed (Legacy), Embase/Ovid, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews/Wiley, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials/Wiley, and Web of Science/Clarivate Analytics from 1990 to April 15, 2020, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. The revised tool to assess risk of bias in randomized trials (RoB 2) developed by Cochrane was used to determine bias in randomized controlled trials, and the methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS) was used to determine the methodological quality of non-randomized studies. The certainty of evidence was assessed with the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach using GRADEpro software.

RESULTS

Of the 4,096 studies for which the titles were screened, 9 comparing OTFD and NTFD in a total of 533 patients and 6 comparing OTFD and OTRD in a total of 961 patients were included. There is high-quality evidence that OTFD is associated with a lower rate of recurrence (10%) at >10 years of follow-up compared with NTFD (55%) (p < 0.0001). There is very low-quality evidence that patients receiving OTFD had a lower recurrence rate (11%) compared with those receiving OTRD (17%) (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

There is high-quality evidence showing a lower recurrence rate at >10 years following OTFD compared with NTFD (or sham surgery) in young patients. There is evidence that OTFD is more effective than OTRD, but that evidence is of very low quality.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Comparable clinical outcomes using knotless and knot-tying anchors for arthroscopic capsulolabral repair in recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability at mean 5-year follow-up

PURPOSE

To compare rates of recurrent instability, revision surgery and functional outcomes following arthroscopic anterior capsulolabral repair for recurrent anterior instability using knot-tying versus knotless suture anchor techniques.

METHODS

 Patients who had undergone arthroscopic anterior labrum and capsular repair for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability using knotless anchors were identified. Those with minimum 2-year follow-up were matched (1:2) to knot-tying anchor repair patients. Rates of failure and recurrent instability were compared, as well as Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (QuickDASH), University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and Rowe scores.

RESULTS

One hundred and two patients (89 males, 13 females) with a mean age of 24.3 ± 9.6 were included. Repair was performed with knotless anchors in 34 and knot-tying anchors in 68 shoulders. At mean follow-up of 4.8 ± 2.5 years, re-dislocation rates between groups were not significantly different (knotless anchor: 9% versus knot-tying group: 15%, n.s.), but the knot-tying group showed a higher re-subluxation rate (p = 0.039). 12 (18%) revisions were performed in the knot-tying group at a mean 2.9 years after surgery and 1 (3%) revision in the knotless anchors group at 1.4 years (n.s.). There was no difference in mean VAS with use (1.3 ± 1.9 versus 0.8 ± 1.5, n.s.), SANE scores (91.8 ± 12.7 versus 92.0 ± 11.0, n.s.), QuickDASH scores (4.1 ± 5.5 versus 3.0 ± 6.5, n.s.), UCLA Shoulder Score (32.5 ± 3.6 versus 33.2 ± 3.1, n.s.), or Rowe scores (90.5 ± 18.5 versus 92.2 ± 16.6, n.s.) between knotless and knot-tying groups, respectively. VAS at rest was higher in the knotless group (0.7 ± 1.5 vs 0.1 ± 0.4, p = 0.021).

CONCLUSIONS

Knotless anchors demonstrated similar rates of re-dislocation and revision surgery, and lower rates of recurrent subluxation, compared to knot-tying anchors. Patients achieved good-to-excellent functional outcomes. This supports the efficacy of knotless anchors as an alternative to knot-tying anchors for arthroscopic anterior labral repair of recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

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.

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.

The Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: State of the Art in 2020: Decision-making and Operative Technique

Traumatic anterior shoulder instability is prevalent among young athletes, and recurrent dislocations can result in compromised upper extremity function, increasing glenohumeral bone loss, and ultimately, posttraumatic arthritis. Although management algorithms have evolved in response to contemporary data and technical innovation, the arthroscopic Bankart repair continues to be a mainstay for the primary surgical management of first-time or recurrent anterior shoulder instability with marginal attritional glenoid bone loss (ie, <10% to 15%) and/or "on track" Hill-Sachs defects. The advantages of arthroscopic stabilization include its minimally invasive technique, high cost effectiveness, and relatively low recurrence rates and propensity for perioperative complications. The current article reviews contemporary indications/contraindications, management of the first-time dislocator, critical glenoid bone loss, surgical technique, and reported clinical outcomes of the arthroscopic Bankart repair.