Risk factors for recurrence after Bankart repair a systematic review

Risk Factors for Recurrent Instability After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Pediatric and Adolescent Patients: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

While risk factors for recurrent instability (RI) after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) for anterior glenohumeral instability (aGHI) have been well established in adult populations, there is much less evidence in pediatric and adolescent patients, despite being the most affected epidemiologic subpopulation.

PURPOSE

To identify the clinical, demographic, radiologic, and operative risk factors for RI after ABR for aGHI in pediatric and adolescent patients.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

This systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses). Three databases (PubMed, Embase, and Ovid [MEDLINE]) were searched from data inception to July 5, 2023, using the terms "pediatric,""shoulder instability," and "Bankart repair," allowing data on patients with age up to 19 years. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies tool was used to assess the quality of included studies.

RESULTS

Eleven studies met the criteria, with 767 patients (770 shoulders) with a mean age of 16.4 years (range, 12-19; 18% female). The pooled RI rate was 28%, and the revision aGHI surgery rate was 20%. The following risk factors were identified for RI after ABR, in descending order of frequency of identification, in terms of number of studies: younger age and greater glenoid bone loss, as well as the presence and/or greater size of a Hill-Sachs lesion (HSL) (2 studies each), followed by off-track HSL, >1 dislocation before index surgery, overhead and/or contact sports participation, larger anterior labral tear size, loss of glenoid retroversion, greater number of anchors used, lower postoperative patient-reported outcome scores (PROs), nonunion after bony Bankart repair, and absence of concomitant remplissage (1 study each).

CONCLUSION

In pediatric and adolescent patients with aGHI, the most common risk factors identified for RI after ABR were younger age, greater glenoid bone loss, and the presence and greater size of an HSL. Other risk factors included >1 dislocation before index surgery, participation in overhead and/or contact sports, larger anterior labral tear size, loss of glenoid retroversion, greater number of anchors used, lower postoperative PROs, nonunion after bony Bankart repair, and absence of concomitant remplissage.

No Clear Difference in Clinical Outcomes Between Knotted and Knotless Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To analyze whether the arthroscopic Bankart repair using a knotless suture anchor has a better functional outcome than the conventional knot-tying Bankart repair.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was done in the PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane databases in May 2023. Studies comparing the clinical outcome of Bankart repair using knotless and knot-tying techniques were included in the study. In vitro, animal, and Level IV and V studies were excluded. The risk of bias in randomized controlled trials was calculated according to the RoB 2 tool, and for nonrandomized studies, Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria were used. Statistical analysis was done using RevMan software.

RESULTS

A total of 9 studies, including 2 randomized controlled trials and 7 nonrandomized comparative studies involving 720 patients, were included in the systematic review. The ROWE score ranged from 81.7 to 94.3 in the knot-tying group and 86 to 96.3 in the knotless group. Visual Analog Scale scores at the final follow-up ranged from 0.1 to 1.7 in the knot-tying group and 0.7 to 2.5 in the knotless group. The rate of redislocation, subluxation, and revision surgery in the knot-tying group ranged from 0% to 14.7%, 16.7% to 29.7%, and 1.6% to 17.6%, respectively, whereas that in the knotless group ranged from 2.4% to 23.8%, 7.4% to 22.2%, and 2.4% to 19%, respectively. The mean external rotation was 54° to 65° in the knot-tying group and 61° to 99° in the knotless group. The mean forward-flexion was 164 to 172 in the knot-tying group and 165 to 174 in the knotless group. Our subjective synthesis does not reveal any difference in the outcome between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The available literature does not demonstrate a clear difference in functional outcomes, residual pain, and rate of complications as redislocation, subluxation, and revision surgery between Bankart repairs performed with knotted and knotless anchors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review of Level I to III studies.

Disaggregation of sex in orthopedic research is essential but rare

Disaggregation of research data promotes transparency and is critical to identifying gaps in current knowledge and direct future research. Disaggregation of sex in orthopedic research is essential but rare. As an example, anterior shoulder instability is affected by sex-based differences in anatomy that impact structural and clinical outcomes, yet less than 5% of studies disaggregate by sex. Adherence to the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines is needed to improve research and promote equity.

Conversion to Arthroscopic Surgery for Anterior Shoulder Instability Does Not Significantly Increase Patient Out-of-Pocket Costs, But Both Conversion and Initial Arthroscopic Management Are Twice as Costly as Isolated Nonoperative Management

PURPOSE

The primary objective of this study is to elucidate patient out-of-pocket cost associated with arthroscopicand nonoperative treatment of anterior shoulder instability with a secondary aim to examine the costs of conversion from nonoperative to arthroscopic treatment within 12 months from initial shoulder instability diagnosis.

METHODS

The Merative MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters database was used to identify patients aged 18 to 40 with anterior shoulder instability using diagnosis codes from 2014 to 2017. Three cohorts were created: an operative cohort, a nonoperative cohort, and an operative conversion cohort. The operative cohort was initially treated with primary arthroscopic shoulder surgery. The nonoperative cohort was treated with physical therapy. The conversion cohort was initially treated nonoperatively and then converted to operative management. 81 failed arthroscopic patients were excluded. Open stabilization procedures were excluded as well. Patient out-of-pocket costs were calculated for each cohort and compared.

RESULTS

713 operative, 1,144 nonoperative, and 79 conversion cohort patients were identified. Approximately 6% (79/1,223) of patients failed initial nonoperative treatment. Patients in the operative cohort were more likely to be male (percentage of males: 78% vs 69% [p < 0.001]) and younger (median age: 21 vs 26 [p < 0.001]) than those in the nonoperative cohort. Nonoperative treatment had the lowest patient out-of-pocket cost (nonoperative: $998 vs. operative: $1,961 [p < 0.001]), and conversion to operative treatment had the highest patient cost (conversion: $2,230). The additional cost of physical therapy, when patients fail nonoperative treatment, played a significant role in this difference.

CONCLUSION

Among patients presenting for evaluation of anterior shoulder instability, converting from nonoperative to arthroscopic treatment does not significantly increase patient costs compared to initial arthroscopic intervention. However, both treatment pathways are roughly two times more costly to the patient than isolated nonoperative management.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study demonstrates that nonoperative management of anterior shoulder instability is associated with the lowest patient out-of-pocket costs, while conversion from nonoperative to arthroscopic treatment results in the highest costs. These findings highlight the financial implications of treatment selection and the potential cost burden for patients who fail initial conservative management.

Assessment of primary stability of glenoid bone block procedures used for patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability - a biomechanical study in a synthetic bone model

Anterior glenoid reconstruction using bone blocks is increasingly recognised as treatment option after critical bone loss. In this study, a biomechanical test setup is used to assess micromotion after bone block augmentation at the glenoid, comparing bone block augmentation with a spina-scapula block to the standard coracoid bone block (Latarjet). Twenty-four synthetic shoulder specimens were tested. Two surgical techniques (coracoid and spina-scapula bone block augmentation) were used on two different types of synthetic bone (Synbone and Sawbone). The specimens were cyclically loaded according to the 'rocking horse' setup defined in ASTM F2028. A mediolateral force of 170 N was applied on the bone block and a complete test comprised 5000 cycles. The Micromotion between bone block and glenoid was measured using a 3D Digital Image Correlation system. The measured micromotion divided into irreversible and reversible displacement of the augmented block. Medial irreversible displacement was the dominant component of the micromotion. The spina-scapula bone block showed a significantly higher irreversible displacement in medial direction compared to the coracoid block, when aggregating both types of synthetic bone (spina: 1.00 ± 0.39 mm, coracoid: 0.56 ± 0.39 mm, p = 0.01). The dominant irreversible medial displacement can be interpreted as initial settling behaviour.

Posterior Shoulder Instability, Part I-Diagnosis, Nonoperative Management, and Labral Repair for Posterior Shoulder Instability-An International Expert Delphi Consensus Statement

PURPOSE

To establish consensus statements on the diagnosis, nonoperative management, and labral repair for posterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

A consensus process on the treatment of posterior shoulder instability was conducted, with 71 shoulder/sports surgeons from 12 countries participating on the basis of their level of expertise in the field. Experts were assigned to 1 of 6 working groups defined by specific subtopics within posterior shoulder instability. Consensus was defined as achieving 80% to 89% agreement, whereas strong consensus was defined as 90% to 99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was indicated by 100% agreement with a proposed statement.

RESULTS

Unanimous agreement was reached on the indications for nonoperative management and labral repair, which include whether patients had primary or recurrent instability, with symptoms/functional limitations, and whether there was other underlying pathology, or patient's preference to avoid or delay surgery. In addition, there was unanimous agreement that recurrence rates can be diminished by attention to detail, appropriate indication and assessment of risk factors, recognition of abnormalities in glenohumeral morphology, careful capsulolabral debridement and reattachment, small anchors with inferior placement and multiple fixation points that create a bumper with the labrum, treatment of concomitant pathologies, and a well-defined rehabilitation protocol with strict postoperative immobilization.

CONCLUSIONS

The study group achieved strong or unanimous consensus on 63% of statements related to the diagnosis, nonoperative treatment, and labrum repair for posterior shoulder instability. The statements that achieved unanimous consensus were the relative indications for nonoperative management, and the relative indications for labral repair, as well as the steps to minimize complications for labral repair. There was no consensus on whether an arthrogram is needed when performing advanced imaging, the role of corticosteroids/orthobiologics in nonoperative management, whether a posteroinferior portal is required.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level V, expert opinion.

Recurrence, Return to Sport, and Reoperation Rates Appear Similar Between Males and Females After Surgery for Anterior Shoulder Instability: Future Research Requires Disaggregation by Sex

PURPOSE

To evaluate sex-based disparities in outcomes following surgery for anterior shoulder instability and to assess the quality of the current literature on this topic.

METHODS

Following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a June 2023 database search (PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, Cinahl) identified Level I to III clinical studies on anterior shoulder instability (January 2003 to May 2023). Eligible studies included male and female outcomes after anterior shoulder stabilization. Systematic reviews, case reports, and case series were excluded. A meta-analysis examined sex-specific results: recurrence, reoperation, return to sport, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) index.

RESULTS

The initial search identified 7,028 studies, with 14 meeting inclusion criteria, totaling 1,262 patients (73.9% male, 26.1% female). Of the studies, 53% were excluded due to failure to disaggregate by sex. The meta-analysis found comparable outcomes by sex for recurrence (odds ratio [OR] = 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.74-1.50; P = .77), reoperation rate (OR = 0.84; 95% CI, 0.69-1.02; P = .08), or return to sport (OR = 1.09; 95% CI, 0.54-2.22; P = .81) after arthroscopic Bankart, open Bankart, and open Latarjet procedures. Mean ASES scores were 91.08 ± 13.59 standard error of the mean (SEM) for males and 89.85 ± 16.73 SEM for females, while WOSI scores were 81.32 ± 19.23 SEM and 87.26 ± 14.09 SEM, respectively. Comparable outcomes were found in ASES (mean difference = -1.20; 95% CI, -4.28 to 1.88; P = .45) or WOSI scores (mean difference = 4.94; 95% CI, -0.31 to 10.00; P = .06).

CONCLUSIONS

Recurrence, return to sport, and reoperation rates were similar between males and females after arthroscopic Bankart, open Bankart, and open Latarjet procedures. Comparable outcomes were found in postoperative ASES and WOSI scores between sexes. Most relevant studies were excluded due to lack of disaggregation by sex, limiting the certainty of the conclusion and suggesting an opportunity to improve future research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review of Level I and III studies.

Surgical treatment of anterior glenohumeral instability: a historical review

BACKGROUND

Glenohumeral instability is a common pathology, particularly in young, active patients.

METHODS

A narrative review was performed to describe the history of surgical treatments for anterior shoulder instability.

RESULTS

Open surgical techniques were first described by Bankart in 1923. Techniques include both anatomic soft tissue repairs and nonanatomic procedures to provide constraint to motion and dislocation. Osseous techniques to address glenoid bone loss include both autograft techniques, such as the Latarjet procedure, and the use of various allografts. Technologic advances, particularly arthroscopy, have continued to drive the evolution of treatments. The concept of the glenoid track has furthered our understanding of this pathology to guide appropriate treatment to reduce recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical treatment for anterior shoulder instability continues to evolve in an effort to restore function and prevent additional injury.

Bone formation of the coracoid bone graft after the Bristow procedure assessed using three-dimensional computed tomography

BACKGROUND

The Bristow procedure has been shown to be a reliable method to prevent recurrent anterior shoulder instability by compensating for glenoid bone loss and producing the sling effect. The degree of postoperative morphological change in the coracoid bone graft is speculated to influence glenohumeral joint stability; however, the details of these changes after the Bristow procedure remain unknown. This study was performed to quantify the postoperative change in the coracoid bone graft volume as assessed by three-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT).

METHODS

The Bristow procedure was performed on 17 shoulders in 17 patients from August 2018 to January 2020. All patients were men, and their mean age at surgery was 17.9 years. The mean follow-up duration was 21.4 months. Within the first week after the operation (Time 0) and at the final follow-up, 3D-CT was used to determine the total coracoid bone graft volume. The clinical outcomes were evaluated using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) shoulder score, the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) shoulder score, and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI).

RESULTS

The mean volume of the total coracoid bone graft was 1.26 ± 0.29 cm3 at Time 0 and 1.90 ± 0.36 cm3 at the final follow-up (p < 0.0001). The mean JOA score, UCLA score, and WOSI were significantly better at the final follow-up than preoperatively (p < 0.001). No postoperative infection, neurovascular injury, or recurrent instability of the glenohumeral joint occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

In the Bristow procedure, the volume of the total coracoid bone graft as shown by 3D-CT was significantly greater at the final follow-up than at Time 0, and bone formation of the coracoid bone graft was found after the Bristow procedure.

Comparative efficacy of treatments for a first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

First-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (FASD) is a common trauma associated with shoulder dysfunction. Although several randomized controlled trials have compared conservative and surgical treatments for FASD, the comparative efficacy of these treatments is poorly understood. In this network meta-analysis (NMA), we compared the available evidence on the efficacy of various interventions in patients with FASD.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases in March 2023. This NMA included randomized controlled trials comparing conservative and surgical treatments for FASD, including arthroscopic Bankart repair, arthroscopic lavage, external rotation (ER) immobilization, and internal rotation (IR) immobilization. The primary outcomes were redislocation rates, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) scores, and adverse events (AEs). We conducted random-effects NMA within the frequentist framework. To rank the treatments, the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve was calculated using a Bayesian framework. We evaluated confidence in each outcome using the CINeMA tool.

RESULTS

Of the 2999 reviewed studies, 15 were included and analyzed. Regarding the primary outcomes, arthroscopic Bankart repair likely results in a large reduction in redislocation rates compared to IR immobilization (risk ratio [RR], 0.15; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.07-0.33). Both arthroscopic lavage (RR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.20-1.11) and ER immobilization (RR 0.70; 95% CI, 0.50-1.00) may reduce the redislocation rates slightly compared with IR immobilization. According to these results, arthroscopic Bankart repair ranked first in terms of reducing the redislocation rate, followed by arthroscopic lavage, ER and IR immobilization. Regarding the WOSI score, no substantial differences were observed in the WOSI scores among the four treatments. AEs showed that ER immobilization tended to cause greater shoulder stiffness than IR immobilization, and postoperative erythema, swelling, and adhesive capsulitis were observed after arthroscopic Bankart repair and lavage. However, a meta-analysis was not performed because the definitions of AEs differed between the studies.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic Bankart repair showed a significant effect in reducing the redislocation rate compared to IR immobilization. Although both arthroscopic lavage and ER immobilization seemed to be effective in reducing the redislocation rates, it was not statistically significant. Moreover, these four treatments may result in little to no difference in disease-specific quality of life and there is no clear evidence of AEs.

Risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Recurrent instability remains a major source of morbidity following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Many risk factors and predictive tools have been described, but there remains a lack of consensus surrounding individual risk factors and their contribution to outcomes. The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature to identify and quantify risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using the PubMed/MEDLINE databases based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were included if they evaluated risk factors for recurrent instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair.

RESULTS

Overall, 111 studies were included in the analysis, including a total of 19,307 patients and 2750 episodes of recurrent instability with 45 risk factors described. Age at operation was reported by 60 studies, with 35 finding increased risk at younger ages. Meta-analysis showed a 2-fold recurrence rate of 27.0% (171 of 634) for patients <20 years old compared with 13.3% (197 of 1485) for older patients (P < .001). Seventeen studies completed multivariable analysis, 13 of which were significant (odds ratio 1.3-14.0). Glenoid bone loss was evaluated by 39 studies, with 20 finding an increased risk. Multivariable analysis in 9 studies found odds ratios ranging from 0.7 to 35.1; 6 were significant. Off-track Hill-Sachs lesions were evaluated in 21 studies (13 significant), with 3 of 4 studies that conducted multivariable analysis finding a significant association with odds ratio of 2.9-8.9 of recurrence. The number of anchors used in repair was reported by 25 studies, with 4 finding increased risk with fewer anchors. Pooled analysis demonstrated a 25.0% (29 of 156) risk of recurrence with 2 anchors, compared with 18.1% (89 of 491) with 3 or more anchors (P = .06). Other frequently described risk factors included glenohumeral joint hyperlaxity (46% of studies reporting a significant association), number of preoperative dislocations (31%), contact sport participation (20%), competitive sport participation (46%), patient sex (7%), and concomitant superior labral anterior-posterior tear (0%).

CONCLUSION

Younger age, glenoid bone loss, and off-track Hill-Sachs lesions are established risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Other commonly reported risk factors included contact and competitive sports participation, number of fixation devices, and patient sex.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair using a single anterior working portal technique: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To evaluate the efficacy and outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair using a single anterior working portal and determine whether they are comparable to the standard two-portal technique.

METHODS

A search following PRISMA guidelines was performed in July 2024 in the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Library databases. Studies evaluating outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair using a single anterior portal technique were included. A meta-analysis comparing outcomes was performed using a random-effects model. A P-value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

Seven studies in patients undergoing Bankart repair with a single anterior portal were included (311 patients, 84.6% male, mean age 27.8 years, mean follow-up 37.4 months). Five of seven studies compared outcomes of a single anterior portal versus the standard two-portal technique. The duration of surgery was significantly shorter in the single anterior portal group (P < 0.00001). The postoperative Oxford Instability Score (P = 0.84), Rowe score (P = 0.26), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (P = 0.73), Constant-Murley score (P = 0.92), and Visual Analog Scale Pain score (P = 0.07) were similar between both groups. The postoperative degree of shoulder abduction (P = 0.84) and external rotation (P = 0.64) were similar between both groups. The risk of redislocation (P = 0.98) was similar between both groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair with a single anterior portal had significantly lower operative times and comparable PROs, ROM, and risk of redislocation relative to patients undergoing repair with a standard two-portal technique.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair With Remplissage in Anterior Shoulder Instability Results in Fewer Redislocations Than Bankart Repair Alone at Medium-term Follow-up of a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

A multicenter, double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing isolated Bankart repair (NO REMP) to Bankart repair with remplissage (REMP) reported benefits of remplissage in reducing recurrent instability at 2 years postoperative. The ongoing benefits beyond this time point are yet to be explored.

PURPOSE

To (1) compare medium-term (3 to 9 years) outcomes of these previously randomized patients undergoing isolated Bankart repair (NO REMP) or Bankart repair with remplissage (REMP) to manage recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability; (2) examine the failure rate, overall recurrent instability, and reoperation rate.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

Recruitment and randomization for the original randomized trial occurred between 2011 and 2017. Patients ≥14 years diagnosed with recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability with an engaging Hill-Sachs defect of any size were included. Those with a glenoid defect >15% were excluded. In 2020, participants were contacted by telephone and asked standardized questions regarding ensuing instances of subluxation, dislocation, or reoperation on their study shoulder. "Failure" was defined as a redislocation, and "overall recurrent instability" was described as a redislocation or ≥2 subluxations. Descriptive statistics, relative risk, and Kaplan-Meier survival curve analyses were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 108 participants were randomized, of whom 50 in the NO REMP group and 52 in the REMP group were included in the analyses in the original study. The mean number of months from surgery to the final follow-up was 49.3 and 53.8 months for the NO REMP and REMP groups, respectively. Failure rates were 22% (11/50) in the NO REMP group versus 8% (4/52) in the REMP group. Rates of overall recurrent instability were 30% (15/50) in the NO REMP group versus 10% (5/52) in the REMP group. Survival curves were significantly different, favoring REMP in both scenarios.

CONCLUSION

For the treatment of traumatic recurrent anterior shoulder instability with a Hill-Sachs lesion and subcritical glenoid bone loss (<15%), a significantly lower rate of overall postoperative recurrent instability was observed with arthroscopic Bankart repair and remplissage than with isolated Bankart repair at a medium-term follow-up (mean of 4 years). Patients who did not receive a remplissage experienced a failure (redislocated) earlier and had a higher rate of revision/reoperation than those who received a concomitant remplissage.

REGISTRATION

NCT01324531 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Prognostic factors for recurrent instability in recreational athletes following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a retrospective study with an average 4.1-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Extensive research has been conducted to investigate the short-term and long-term outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair, yielding varying results across different populations. However, there remains a dearth of studies specifically focused on evaluating outcomes in recreational athletes.

METHODS

A retrospective case series study was conducted on recreational athletes who underwent isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair between 2013 and 2021. The primary outcome assessed was recurrent instability, defined as dislocation or subluxation. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction, rates of returning to the same sports (RTS) and RTS at preinjury level, and patient-reported outcomes. Evaluation of the Rowe score, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and VAS pain score were performed. Prognostic factors for recurrent instability, including demographic and clinical characteristics, as well as postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) appearance of the labrum were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 191 patients met the selection criteria, with 150 (78.5%) available for the final follow-up. Recurrent instability occurred in 10.7% of patients, with a mean follow-up duration of 4.1 years. Younger age at surgery and more critical glenoid bone loss were significantly associated with recurrent instability (p = .038 and p = .011, respectively). The satisfaction rate regarding surgery was 90.0%. Rates of return to the same sports (RTS) and RTS at preinjury level were 82.0% and 49.3%, respectively. Clinical outcomes measured at the final follow-up were as follows: Rowe score - 92.8; Constant score - 98.0; ASES score - 98.3; VAS pain score - 0.2. Patients with recurrent instability had significantly inferior outcomes in terms of satisfaction rate, RTS at preinjury level rate, Rowe score, and Constant score (p = .000, p = .039, p = .000, and p = .015, respectively). A total of thirty-seven patients underwent MRI examination six months after surgery in our institution. The T2-weighted anterior labrum morphology was found to be poorer in patients with recurrent instability. No significant difference was observed between patients with or without recurrent instability in terms of anterior Slope, anterior labral glenoid height index (LGHI), inferior Slope, inferior LGHI, and T2-weighted inferior labrum morphology.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic Bankart repair can yield satisfactory medium-term outcomes for recreational athletes. Younger age at surgery, more critical glenoid bone loss, and poorer T2-weighted anterior labrum morphology assessed six months postoperatively were significantly associated with recurrent instability.

The New Double-row Bankart Repair Recovered Shoulder Stability without Excessive Motion Limitation: A Case-Control Study with Single-row Bankart Repair

OBJECTIVES

Bankart lesion is one of the most common lesions of the glenohumeral joint. Several double-row suture methods were reported for Bankart repair, which could provide more stability, yet more motion limitation and complications. Therefore, we introduced a new double-row Bankart repair technique, key point double-row suture which used one anchor in the medial line. The purpose of this article is to investigate the clinical outcomes of this new method and to compare it with single-row suture.

METHODS

Seventy-eight patients receiving key point double-row suture or single-row suture from October 2010 to June 2014 were collected retrospectively. The basic information including gender, age, dominant arm, and number of episodes of instability was collected. Before surgery, the glenoid bone loss was measured from the CT scan. The visual analogue scale, American shoulder and elbow surgeons, the University of California at Los Angeles shoulder scale, and subjective shoulder value were valued before surgery and at the last follow-up.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients (24 patients receiving single-row suture and 20 patients receiving key point double-row suture) were followed up successfully. The follow-up period was 9.2 ± 1.1 years (range, 7.8-11.4 years). At the last follow-up, no significant differences were detected for any of the clinical scores. The recurrence rate was 12.5% for the single-row group and 10% for the double-row group, respectively (p = 0.795) 14 patients (31.8%) in the single-row group and nine patients (26.5%) in the double-row group were tested for active range of motion. A statistically significant difference was found only for the internal rotation at 90° abduction (48.9° for single-row and 76.7° for key point double-row, p = 0.033).

CONCLUSION

The key point double-row sutures for Bankart lesions could achieve similar long-term outcomes compared with single-row suture, and one medial anchor did not result in a limited range of motion. The low recurrence rate and previous biomechanical results also indicate the key point double-row suture is a reliable method.

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.

Long-term Effectiveness and Outcome-Determining Factors of Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Recreational Sports Population: An Assessment of 100 Patients With a Mean Follow-up of 12.7 Years

BACKGROUND

A limited number of studies have reported the long-term effectiveness of and associated factors for recurrence of anterior shoulder instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR).

PURPOSE

To report the long-term clinical outcomes after ABR in a recreational sports population and identify the associated factors that influence the final instability status.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed in patients treated with ABR between 2007 and 2013 by a single surgeon. Patient data, magnetic resonance imaging measurements of bone loss and glenoid track, and intra- and perioperative factors were analyzed. After a minimum follow-up of 10 years, patient-reported outcomes including the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score, the Rowe score, the visual analog scale for pain and function, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and sports activity were assessed. The current instability status was classified into 3 groups: stable, apprehensive, and redislocated. These groups were statistically compared with respect to outcomes and associated factors.

RESULTS

A total of 100 patients with a mean age of 22.4 ± 5.5 years and a mean follow-up of 12.7 ± 2.1 years were included. At the final follow-up, 38 patients (38%) showed recurrent symptoms: 19 patients (19%) with subjective apprehension and 19 patients (19%) with redislocation, including 10 patients (10%) with revision surgery. At the final follow-up, the redislocated group showed the lowest patient-reported outcomes and return to sports (both P < .001). The apprehensive group also showed a lower Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score (P = .011), Rowe score (P = .003), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (P = .027), and return to sports (P = .005) than the stable group. Participation in contact sports (P = .026), glenoid bone loss (P = .005), size of Hill-Sachs lesion (P = .009), and off-track lesions (P = .016) were all associated with recurrent symptoms, whereas age <20 years (P = .012), participation in contact sports (P = .003), and off-track lesions (P = .042) were associated with redislocation.

CONCLUSION

After long-term follow-up in a recreational sports population, ABR demonstrated a 19% rate of subjective apprehension and 19% rate of redislocation, with a gradual decline in clinical outcomes and sports activity over time. Therefore, candidates for ABR should be selected based on consideration of risk factors such as off-track lesions, age <20 years, and participation in contact sports.

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.

Results After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Contact Athletes Should Not Be Reported Globally Because of the High Variability in Recurrences Among the Different Contact or Collision Sports: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To describe and compare the recurrence rates in contact or collision (CC) sports after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and to compare the recurrence rates in CC versus non-collision athletes after ABR.

METHODS

We followed a prespecified protocol registered with PROSPERO (registration No. CRD42022299853). In January 2022, a literature search was performed using the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), as well as clinical trials records. Clinical studies (Level I-IV evidence) that evaluated recurrence after ABR in CC athletes with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years postoperatively were included. We assessed the quality of the studies using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, and we described the range of effects using synthesis without meta-analysis and described the certainty of the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations).

RESULTS

We identified 35 studies, which included 2,591 athletes. The studies had heterogeneous definitions of recurrence and classifications of sports. The recurrence rates after ABR varied significantly among studies between 3% and 51% (I2 = 84.9%, 35 studies and 2,591 participants). The range was at the higher end for participants younger than 20 years (range, 11%-51%; I2 = 81.7%) compared with older participants (range, 3%-30%; I2 = 54.7%). The recurrence rates also varied by recurrence definition (I2 = 83.3%) and within and across categories of CC sports (I2 = 83.8%). CC athletes had higher recurrence rates than did non-collision athletes (7%-29% vs 0%-14%; I2 = 29.2%; 12 studies with 612 participants). Overall, the risk of bias of all the included studies was determined to be moderate. The certainty of the evidence was low owing to study design (Level III-IV evidence), study limitations, and inconsistency.

CONCLUSIONS

There was high variability in the recurrence rates reported after ABR according to the different types of CC sports, ranging from 3% to 51%. Moreover, variations in recurrence among CC sports were observed, with ice hockey players being in the upper range but field hockey players being in the lower range. Finally, CC athletes showed higher recurrence rates when compared with non-collision athletes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level II, III, and IV studies.

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

BACKGROUND

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

PURPOSE

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

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Lesion prevalence and patient outcome comparison between primary and recurrent anterior shoulder instability

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare lesion prevalence and treatment outcomes in patients with primary and recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

Patients who were admitted to the institution with a diagnosis of anterior shoulder instability and who underwent arthroscopic surgery between July 2006 and February 2020 were retrospectively evaluated. Minimum follow-up duration of the patients was 24 months. The recorded data and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the patients were examined. Patients aged ≥40 years, with a history of shoulder region fracture, inflammatory arthritis, a history of epilepsy, multidirectional instability, nontraumatic dislocation, and off-track lesions were excluded from the study. Shoulder lesions were documented and patient outcome evaluation was made with the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) and visual analog scale (VAS).

RESULTS

A total of 340 patients were included in the study. The mean age of patients was 25.6 years (±6.49). The recurrent instability group had a significantly higher rate of anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) lesions compared to the primary instability group (40.6% vs. 24.6% respectively) (P = .033). Twenty-five patients (43.9%) had superior labrum anterior and posterior (SLAP) lesions in the primary instability group and 81 patients (28.6%) had SLAP lesions in the recurrent instability group (P = .035). OSS increased for both primary (from 35 [16-44] to 46 [36-48]) (P = .001) and recurrent instability groups (from 33 [6-45] to 47 [19-48]) (P = .001). There was no significant difference between the groups regarding postoperative VAS and OSS scores (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Successful results were obtained in patients younger than 40 years with both primary and recurrent anterior shoulder instability after arthroscopic treatment. ALPSA lesion prevalence was higher whereas SLAP lesion prevalence was lower in patients with recurrent instability. Although the postoperative OSS was comparable between the patient groups, the failure rate was higher in the recurrent instability patients.

Outcomes After Revision Posterior Shoulder Capsulolabral Repair in Adolescent Athletes

Background

Few studies have evaluated the outcomes of posterior arthroscopic capsulolabral repair in adolescents, especially with regard to outcomes after revision repair.

Hypothesis

Adolescent athletes who undergo revision arthroscopic posterior unidirectional capsulolabral repair will have similar outcomes and return to play when compared with adolescent athletes who underwent primary arthroscopic posterior unidirectional capsulolabral repair.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

Data were reviewed from patients who underwent posterior shoulder stabilization between 2000 and 2019 and had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Patients <11 and >19 years of age and those with multidirectional instability were excluded. Revision surgery was defined as repeat arthroscopic posterior capsular repair. The ability to return to sport (and level of sport), clinical outcomes scores (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES] and visual analog scale for pain), and patient-reported perception of range of motion, strength, and satisfaction were recorded. Comparisons between the primary and revision cohorts were made using the chi-square or the Mann-Whitney U test.

Results

Included were 180 adolescent patients (182 shoulders) who underwent a primary unidirectional posterior stabilization, with an average follow-up of 6.1 years. Of these patients, 17 patients required revision surgery (9.3% revision rate). At the final follow-up, patients who underwent revision surgery returned to sport at similar rates to those who did not (70.6% vs 85.9%; P = .095) and were similarly likely to return to their presurgery level of play (41.1% vs 23.7%; P = .10). The no-revision patients had higher ASES scores (76.1 vs 87.1; P = .007) as well as less pain and improved subjective range of motion scores. However, both groups had similar subjective strength scores, and both reported that surgical repair was satisfactory (no revision, 93.2% vs revision, 88.2%; P = .45).

Conclusion

Adolescent athletes had a low risk of revision surgery and frequently returned to play after arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair, often at a lower level of play. Those who required revision surgery had poorer outcome scores but still reported a high rate of satisfaction.

Surgical Outcomes and Associated Injuries of Anterior Labroligamentous Periosteal Sleeve Avulsion (ALPSA) Lesions: A Systematic Review

Introduction

Anterior Labroligamentous Periosteal Sleeve Avulsion (ALPSA) lesions can lead to chronic shoulder instability and repetitive dislocations in active populations.

Objective

The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate associated injuries and postoperative outcomes following ALPSA lesion repairs.

Methods

Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science were searched through May 2022 for studies that investigated management and surgical outcomes of ALPSA lesion repair. Data was extracted on the following topics: surgical management, surgical complications, associated injuries, follow-up duration, and outcome parameters, including recurrence rates, functional outcome scores, range-of-motion (ROM), and return to activity.

Results

A total of 6 studies covering 202 patients met the inclusion criteria. In the included studies, 79% of patient were male with a mean age of 25.1 years. A total of 192 associated injuries were reported amongst 176 patients with the most common being Hill Sachs lesions (84, 43.8%), synovitis (35, 18.2%), SLAP tears (32, 16.7%) and glenoid erosions or lesions (30, 15.6%). All 202 patients were treated arthroscopically with no reported complications. 26 patients (12.9%) experienced operative failure as evidenced by recurrence of shoulder instability over a mean follow-up of 4.3 years. Various clinical outcome scores showed postoperative functional improvement and one study reported a 100% return to activity rate in 26 patients.

Conclusion

Our findings suggest a high 12.9 % risk of recurrence following ALPSA repair but satisfactory functional outcomes, both of which should be weighed by physicians when considering arthroscopic repair. Physicians should also be cognizant of co-pathologies when examining patients with suspected ALPSA lesions.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair: how many knotless anchors do we need for anatomic reconstruction of the shoulder?-a prospective randomized controlled study

PURPOSE

The optimal strategy for surgical repair of traumatic anterior shoulder instability remains controversial. While several study groups have reported that the clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic procedures performed with two anchors are not fully adequate, these conclusions are not supported by the findings published in other studies. A prospective randomized study was conducted to compare the structural and clinical outcomes of surgical procedures involving two vs. three anchors.

METHODS

Patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair were randomly assigned to either Group I, which underwent procedures involving two double-loaded 3.5-mm knotless anchors, or Group II, which underwent procedures involving three single-loaded 2.9-mm knotless anchors. All patients underwent bilateral MRI assessments at a minimum of 12 months and clinical assessment at a minimum of 24 months postoperatively. To evaluate the reconstruction of the labral capsular ligamentous complex (LCLC), the labrum-glenoid height index (LGHI), restored labral height (LH), and labral slope (LS) were measured for both shoulders. For clinical assessment, the redislocation rate and functional outcome scores (Constant score (CS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon score (ASES), Walch Duplay score (WDS), and Rowe score (RS)) were evaluated at follow-up visits.

RESULTS

Bankart repair with two knotless anchors showed lower values for anterior reconstruction of the LCLC compared to the uninjured contralateral shoulder. Likewise, significant differences were noted when comparing these measurements to those from patients who underwent reconstruction with three anchors. No differences were demonstrated with regard to the reconstruction of the inferior LCLC. Clinical assessment showed good to excellent results in both groups. In total, three patients experienced redislocation of the shoulder: two in group I and one in group II. No significant differences were found with respect to clinical outcomes and redislocation rates.

CONCLUSION

Bankart repair with both two and three knotless anchors results in effective anatomical reconstruction of the labral capsular ligamentous complex. Although the two-anchor technique yields significantly lower values for the anterior portion compared with the contralateral side, none of these differences reach clinical relevance as per our original definition.

Quality of life following an open Latarjet-Bristow procedure in a general population with recurrent anterior shoulder instability

BACKGROUND

Despite the extensive literature on anterior glenohumeral instability, to date, there are no studies that report on the quality of life following a Latarjet-Bristow procedure with recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the quality of life in patients who had a Latarjet-Bristow procedure.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective review with a prospective recall of patients who underwent a Latarjet-Bristow technique for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability between January 2017 and March 2020. Outcomes measures included health-related quality of life using the Short Form-36 (SF-36) questionnaire and patient-related outcome measures using the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index and Rowe scores.

RESULTS

A total of 66 patients were identified to participate in the study; 40 (60.6%) responded and were included in the analysis. There were nine females and 31 males, with a median age of 32 years (27.5‒41 years). Three cases had bilateral anterior shoulder instability with a single joint being operated and three patients were epileptic. Physical and mental components summary of the SF-36 showed a better health-related quality of life in the general population. There was a significant strong correlation between SF-36 and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index. However, SF-36 and Rowe score showed a fair correlation.

CONCLUSION

The Latarjet-Bristow procedure improves the quality of life in a general population similarly to an athletic population. The number of episodes of dislocation before surgery and the delayed surgical intervention did not increase the recurrent anterior shoulder instability rates postoperatively.

The Glenoid Track Paradigm Does Not Reliably Affect Military Surgeons’ Approach to Managing Shoulder Instability

Purpose

To report the frequencies of surgical stabilization procedures performed by military shoulder surgeons and to use decision tree analysis to describe how bipolar bone loss affects surgeons' decision to perform arthroscopic versus open stabilization procedures.

Methods

The Military Orthopaedics Tracking Injuries and Outcomes Network (MOTION) database was queried for anterior shoulder stabilization procedures from 2016 to 2021. A nonparametric decision tree analysis was used to generate a framework for classifying surgeon decision making based on specified injury characteristics (labral tear location, glenoid bone loss [GBL], Hill-Sachs lesion [HSL] size, and on-track vs off-track HSL).

Results

A total of 525 procedures were included in the final analysis, with a mean patient age of 25.9 ± 7.2 years and a mean GBL percentage of 3.6% ± 6.8%. HSLs were described based on size as absent (n = 354), mild (n = 129), moderate (n = 40), and severe (n = 2) and as on-track versus off-track in 223 cases, with 17% (n = 38) characterized as off-track. Arthroscopic labral repair (n = 428, 82%) was the most common procedure, whereas open repair (n = 10, 1.9%) and glenoid augmentation (n = 44, 8.4%) were performed infrequently. Decision tree analysis identified a GBL threshold of 17% or greater that resulted in an 89% probability of glenoid augmentation. Shoulders with GBL less than 17% combined with a mild or absent HSL had a 95% probability of an isolated arthroscopic labral repair, whereas a moderate or severe HSL resulted in a 79% probability of arthroscopic repair with remplissage. The presence of an off-track HSL did not contribute to the decision-making process as defined by the algorithm and data available.

Conclusions

Among military shoulder surgeons, GBL of 17% or greater is predictive of a glenoid augmentation procedure whereas HSL size is predictive of remplissage for GBL less than 17%. However, the on-track/off-track paradigm does not appear to affect military surgeons' decision making.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective cohort study.

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

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

Similar Clinical, Return to Sports, Recurrence, and Revision Outcomes Between Female and Male Athletes Following Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

PURPOSE

To compare return to sports, functional outcomes, and recurrences rates between female and male athletes following arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR).

METHODS

A retrospective comparative study was performed between male and female athletes who underwent an ABR between January 2008 and December 2019. Sports practiced primarily by men in our practice (including rugby, soccer, boxing, and martial arts) were excluded. Functional outcomes included the Rowe score, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and shoulder-dependent sports ability measured with the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS). Return to sport, recurrence, and revisions were evaluated. Additionally, we assessed the period (months) between surgery and recurrence events.

RESULTS

A total of 58 female and 106 male patients were available for analysis at a median follow-up of 60 (interquartile range [IQR], 36-84) months. Ninety-one percent of the patients (n = 150) returned to sports and 84% (n = 126) returned to their preinjury level at a median of 6 months (IQR, 5-8) postoperatively. There were no differences in the rate of return to sports between females and males (91 vs 92% respectively, P = .997). There were no differences between the groups regarding postoperative functional outcomes, with most patients achieving the minimal clinically significant difference (Rowe: 98% female and 99% male, P = .584; ASOSS: 100% female and 99% male, P = .646). The overall recurrence rate was 9.7% (n = 16), with a rate of 10.3% (n = 6) in female and 9.4% (n = 10) in male athletes (P = .851). Time to event analysis showed that the median time to recurrence was 48 months in both groups (P = .848). The overall revision rate was 3% (n = 4), without significant differences between groups (P = .556).

CONCLUSIONS

When compared within similar sports, there does not appear to be sex-related differences in functional outcomes, recurrence, or return to play following ABR.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, retrospective comparative study.

Arthroscopic Dynamic Anterior Stabilization Using Either Long Head of the Biceps or Conjoined Tendon Transfer for Anterior Shoulder Instability Results in a Similarly Low Recurrence Rate

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic dynamic anterior stabilization (DAS) between transferring the long head of the biceps (DAS-LHB) and the conjoined tendon (DAS-CT) for anterior shoulder instability with <15% glenoid bone loss.

METHODS

From January 2016 to May 2019, a total of 63 patients who underwent DAS for recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation with <15% glenoid bone loss were included, comprising 33 patients in DAS-LHB group and 30 patients in DAS-CT group. Clinical outcomes were assessed preoperatively and at a minimum 3-year follow-up, including patient-reported outcomes, range of motion, and return to sports (RTS). Postoperative recurrent instability (including dislocation, subluxation, and subjective instability with a positive apprehension test), revisions and complications also were recorded.

RESULTS

No significant demographic characteristics difference was detected between the DAS-LHB (26.3 ± 7.9 years) and DAS-CT groups (26.0 ± 6.7 years). At the latest follow-up, there were no significant differences between the 2 groups in functional scores: Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (14.8 ± 2.8 vs 15.2 ± 3.6), Rowe score (95.9 ± 6.5 vs 93.2 ± 10.2), visual analog scale for pain (0.8 ± 1.2 vs 0.7 ± 1.7), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (95 ± 8.8 vs 95.2 ± 9.1) (all P > .218). No significant difference was detected between groups in the rates of RTS (90.1% vs 86.7%, P = .700) and RTS at previous level (78.7% vs 73.3%, P = .258), respectively. No recurrent dislocation occurred in either group. One patient felt occasional subluxation in the DAS-LHB group, and one was positive for the apprehension test in each group. One patient presented with postoperative shoulder stiffness and underwent a secondary arthroscopic debridement in the DAS-CT group.

CONCLUSIONS

Comparable rates of recurrence, complication, return to sports, and subjective shoulder function were observed between DAS-LHB and DAS-CT groups.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Ⅲ; retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Distance to Dislocation and Recurrent Shoulder Dislocation After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: Rethinking the Glenoid Track Concept

BACKGROUND

The "distance to dislocation" (DTD) calculation has been proposed as 1 method to predict the risk of recurrent dislocation after arthroscopic Bankart repair for an "on-track" shoulder. Rates of recurrent dislocation at specific DTD values are unknown.

HYPOTHESIS

Among patients with "on-track" shoulder lesions who underwent primary arthroscopic Bankart repair, the rate of recurrent dislocation would increase as DTD values decrease.

STUDY DESIGN

Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of 188 patients with "on-track" shoulder lesions who underwent primary arthroscopic anterior labral repair between 2007 and 2019, with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs interval, glenoid track, and DTD were determined from preoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans. The rate of recurrent dislocation was determined at 2-mm DTD intervals. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between recurrent dislocation, patient characteristics, and bone loss variables. A multivariate regression model was created to predict the probability of failure at continuous DTD values. A subgroup analysis of failure rate based on collision sports participation was also performed.

RESULTS

A total of 29 patients (15.4%) sustained recurrent dislocations. Patient age (P = .046), multiple dislocations (P = .03), glenoid bone loss (P < .001), Hill-Sachs interval length (P < .001), and DTD (P < .001) were all independent predictors of failure. As the DTD decreased, the rate of recurrent dislocation increased. Below a DTD threshold of 10 mm, the recurrent dislocation rate increased exponentially. Up to a threshold of 24 mm, the failure rate for collision athletes remained >12.3%, independent of the DTD. Conversely, the failure rate among noncollision athletes decreased steadily as the DTD increased.

CONCLUSION

For "on-track" shoulder lesions, as the DTD approached 0 mm ("off-track" threshold), the risk of recurrent dislocation after arthroscopic Bankart repair increased significantly. Below a DTD threshold of 10 mm, the risk of failure increased exponentially. The risk of recurrent dislocation for collision sports athletes remained elevated at higher DTD values than for noncollision athletes.

The "purse string" technique for anterior glenohumeral instability: long-term results 7-13-year follow-up

PURPOSE

The "Purse-String Technique" (PST) is an arthroscopic horizontal mattress suture technique for recurrent anterior shoulder instability that uses a single double-loaded suture anchor at the 4-o' clock position, achieving a Bankart labral repair and an infero-superior capsular shift. In this study, we describe the long-term results of the PST.

METHODS

The study included 69 individuals (70 shoulders), with a mean age of 30 years, who had recurrent post-traumatic anteroinferior instability. A purse-string suture anchor at the 4-o'clock position was used to address the Bankart lesion and capsular laxity, recreating the anterior glenoid bumper. All patients were assessed via telephone interview at a mean of 116 months after surgery (7-13-year follow-up).

RESULTS

Postoperatively, the mean Constant score was 94, mean Rowe score was 93 and mean Walch-Duplay score was 89. 89% of patients resumed their preinjury sport activities, with 61% of patients achieving preinjury levels and most professional athletes returning to full activity. Seven patients had recurrent dislocation postoperatively (10% failure rate). Of these patients, three had revision arthroscopic stabilization, one patient had revision arthroscopic stabilization with remplissage, two had a Latarjet procedure, whereas one patient decided to seek no further treatment.

CONCLUSION

The long-term results of PST are promising, with a low failure rate, high patient satisfaction and a high rate of return to sport.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV; Case series; Treatment study.

Inconsistencies in Controlling for Risk Factors for Recurrent Shoulder Instability After Primary Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Failure rates after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization are highly variable in the current orthopaedic literature. Predictive factors for risk of failure have been studied to improve patient selection, refine surgical techniques, and define the role of bony procedures. However, significant heterogeneity in the analysis and controlling of risk factors makes evidence-based management decisions challenging.

PURPOSE

The goals of this systematic review were (1) to critically assess the consistency of reported risk factors for recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair, (2) to identify the existing studies with the most comprehensive inclusion of confounding factors in their analyses, and (3) to give recommendations for which factors should be reported consistently in future clinical studies.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. An initial search yielded 1754 titles, from which 56 full-text articles were screened for inclusion. A total of 29 full-text articles met the following inclusion criteria: (1) clinical studies regarding recurrent anterior shoulder instability; (2) surgical procedures performed including arthroscopic anterior labral repair; (3) reported clinical outcome data including failure rate; and (4) assessment of risk factors for surgical failure. Further subanalyses were performed for 15 studies that included a multivariate analysis, 17 studies that included glenoid bone loss, and 8 studies that analyzed the Instability Severity Index Score.

RESULTS

After full-text review, 12 of the most commonly studied risk factors were identified and included in this review. The risk factors that were most consistently significant in multivariate analyses were off-track lesions (100%), glenoid bone loss (78%), Instability Severity Index Score (75%), level of sports participation (67%), number of anchors (67%), and younger age (63%). In studies of bone loss, statistical significance was more likely to be found using advanced imaging, with critical bone loss thresholds of 10% to 15%. Several studies found predictive thresholds of 2 to 4 for Instability Severity Index Score by receiver operating characteristic or multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Studies reporting risk factors for failure of arthroscopic Bankart repair often fail to control for known confounding variables. The factors with the most common statistical significance among 15 multivariate analyses are off-track lesions, glenoid bone loss, Instability Severity Index Score, level of sports participation, number of anchors, and younger age. Studies found significance more commonly with advanced imaging measurements or arthroscopic assessment of glenoid bone loss and with lower thresholds for the Instability Severity Index Score (2-4). Future studies should attempt to control for all relevant factors, use advanced imaging for glenoid bone loss measurements, and consider a lower predictive threshold for the Instability Severity Index Score.

Morphometric and Biomechanical Comparison of the Scapular Spine and Coracoid Graft in Anterior Shoulder Instability

BACKGROUND

The scapular spine has been described as a relatively new bone graft alternative used in glenoid augmentation. The classic Latarjet procedure, which transfers the coracoid as a graft, is regarded as the gold standard. The comparison of these 2 techniques has not been fully reported.

PURPOSE

To compare the anatomic and biomechanical properties of glenoid augmentation using scapular spine graft or coracoid graft.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

The study used 20 fresh-frozen human cadaveric shoulders. A 25% anterior glenoid defect was created, and the specimens were divided randomly to receive glenoid augmentation by scapular spine or coracoid grafts. For both procedures, the grafts were secured to the glenoid defect with 2 screws. Morphometric data, including the glenoid articular area, amount of restoration, and graft dimensions, were obtained. A biomechanical test was conducted in a direct-loading scenario. The construct stiffness, cyclic displacement, and ultimate failure of each specimen were collected.

RESULTS

No significant difference was found in glenoid articular restoration between the scapular spine group and the coracoid group (31% vs 33%, respectively; P = .311). Morphometric analysis indicated that coracoid grafts exhibited significantly greater thickness and height than scapular spine grafts. In biomechanical results, the scapular spine group exhibited significantly greater construct stiffness than the coracoid group (206.3 ± 58.8 vs 148.3 ± 76.0 N/mm, respectively; P = .023). The average failure load in the scapular spine group was not significantly higher than that in the coracoid group. No significant differences in cyclic displacement were found between the 2 techniques.

CONCLUSION

In a simulated 25% anterior glenoid bony defect, a scapular spine graft was comparable with the classic Latarjet procedure in restoring the glenoid articular dimension and exhibited superior construct stiffness in a cadaveric model.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The scapular spine may serve as an alternative graft choice in glenoid augmentation surgery considering the amount of articular restoration and initial fixation stability.

Arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction has a lower rate of recurrent instability compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair while otherwise maintaining a similar complication and safety profile

OBJECTIVES

The primary purpose of this study was to determine the frequency and type of complications, including subluxation, infection, hardware complication, graft/glenoid fracture, chondrolysis, neurovascular deficits and stiffness following an Arthroscopic Bankart Repair (ABR) or an Arthroscopic Anatomic Glenoid Reconstruction (AAGR) using a distal tibia allograft for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Secondary purposes were to determine the frank dislocation rate and the associations of post-operative complications with demographic patient factors.

METHODS

Demographic and clinical data were reviewed using means ± standard deviations or frequencies in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability who underwent either an ABR or an AAGR. Post-operative patient records were analysed to identify any post-operative complications. The numerical variables of the two groups were compared using the independent t-test or Mann-Whitney U test. Categorical variables and complications were tested using the chi-square test, Fisher's exact test, or the two-sided Monte Carlo test with a significance level of 0.05.

RESULTS

We included 174 patients in this cohort, with 61.5% of patients receiving ABR and 38.5% receiving AAGR. Most of our patients were male (70.1%) with an average age of 23.41 ± 8.26 years in the ABR group and 29.37 ± 13.54 years in the AAGR group (p = 0.001). The two groups were similar with respect to their post-operative complication rates when excluding frank dislocation (ABR: 11%, AAGR: 12%). The AAGR group had statistically significantly higher rates of hardware removal compared to the ABR group (p = 0.004). The ABR group had 25 post-operative frank dislocations, with none reported in the AAGR cohort (p < 0.001). The total complication rate for each procedure was found to be 35% for ABR and 12% for AAGR.

CONCLUSION

AAGR has a comparable safety profile to the ABR when assessing post-operative complications such as subluxation, infection, graft/glenoid fracture, chondrolysis, neurovascular deficits and stiffness. AAGR is superior to ABR with respect to rates of recurrent instability and should be considered as a first-line treatment in certain patients with specific risk factors such as younger age, competitive contact sports participation, and higher number of instability events pre-operatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Anteroinferior Glenoid Rim Fractures Are a Relatively Common Finding in Shoulder Instability Patients Aged 50 Years or Older but May Not Portend a Worse Prognosis

Purpose

To investigate the incidence of anteroinferior glenoid rim fractures (AGRFs) after anterior shoulder instability (ASI) in patients aged 50 years or older, identify risk factors for surgical intervention for AGRFs, compare initial treatment strategies, and compare clinical outcomes of patients with and without associated AGRFs.

Methods

An established geographic medical record system was used to identify patients aged 50 years or older with ASI between 1994 and 2016. Patients with radiographic evidence of AGRFs were identified and matched 1:1 to patients without AGRFs. Outcome measures included recurrent instability, recurrent pain events, conversion to arthroplasty, and osteoarthritis graded with the Samilson-Prieto classification for post-instability arthritis.

Results

Overall, 177 patients were identified, with a mean follow-up period of 10.8 years. Of these patients, 41 (23.2%) had AGRFs and were matched to 41 control patients without AGRFs. The average age was 58.6 and 58.2 years for the AGRF and control groups, respectively. Rates of surgical intervention (27% vs 49%), recurrent instability (12% vs 20%), progression of osteoarthritis (34% vs 39%), and conversion to arthroplasty (2% vs 5%) were similar between AGRF patients and controls. For patients with AGRFs, increased bone fragment size (odds ratio, 1.1) and increased body mass index (odds ratio, 1.2) correlated with an increased risk of surgery. The cutoff value for an increased risk of surgery in patients with AGRFs was a fragment size 33% of the glenoid width or greater.

Conclusions

Of patients aged 50 years or older at presentation of ASI, 23.2% presented with an associated AGRF. A fragment size 33% of the glenoid width or greater and a higher patient body mass index were significant factors for surgical intervention; however, most patients did not require surgery and still showed acceptable clinical outcomes, and the most common reason for surgical intervention was a rotator cuff tear. Overall, the presence of an AGRF did not portend a worse prognosis as treatment strategies and long-term outcomes including recurrent instability, progression of osteoarthritis, and conversion to arthroplasty were similar to those in patients without AGRFs.

Level of Evidence

Level III, retrospective comparative study.

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.

MRI Allows Accurate Measurement of Glenoid Bone Loss

BACKGROUND

Bony Bankart lesions larger than a certain size can lead to a high redislocation rate, despite treatment with Bankart repair. Detection and measurement of glenoid bone loss play key roles in selecting the appropriate surgical therapy in patients with shoulder instability. There is controversy about which diagnostic modalities, using different measurement methods, provide the best diagnostic validity.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) What are the diagnostic accuracies of true AP radiographs, West Point (WP) view radiographs, MRI, and CT to detect glenoid bone loss? (2) Are there differences in the measurements of glenoid bone loss on MRI and CT? (3) What are the intrarater and interrater reliabilities of CT and MRI to measure glenoid bone loss?

METHODS

Between August 2012 and February 2017, we treated 80 patients for anterior shoulder instability. Of those, we considered patients with available preoperative true AP radiographs, WP radiographs, CT images, and MR images of the affected shoulder as potentially eligible. Based on that, 63% (50 of 80) of patients were eligible for analysis; 31% (25 of 80) were excluded because not all planes or slices (such as sagittal, axial, or frontal) of each diagnostic imaging modalities were available and 7% (5 of 80) because of the insufficient quality of diagnostic images (for example, setting of the layers did not allow adequate en face view of the glenoid). Preoperative true AP radiographs, WP radiographs, CT images and MR images of the affected shoulders were retrospectively assessed for the presence of glenoid bone loss by two blinded observers at a median (range) 25 months (12 to 66) postoperatively. To evaluate sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, accuracy, diagnostic odds ratio, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and area under the curve (AUC), we compared the detection of glenoid bone loss at follow-up achieved with the aforementioned imaging modalities with intraoperative arthroscopic detection. In all patients with glenoid bone loss, two blinded observers measured the size of the glenoid bone loss on preoperative CT and MR images using six measuring techniques: depth and length of the glenoid bone loss, Bigliani classification, best-fit circle width loss method, AP distance method, surface area method, and Gerber X ratio. Subsequently, the sizes of the glenoid bone loss determined using CT and MRI were compared. To estimate intraobserver and interobserver reliability, measurements were performed in a blinded fashion by two observers. Their level of experience was equivalent to that of orthopaedic residents, and they completed a training protocol before the measurements.

RESULTS

For the ability to accurately diagnose Bankart lesions, the AUC (accuracy of a diagnostic test; the closer to 1.0, the more accurate the test) was good for MRI (0.83 [95% confidence interval 0.70 to 0.94]; p < 0.01), fair for CT (0.79 [95% CI 0.66 to 0.92]; p < 0.01), poor for WP radiographs (0.69 [95% CI 0.54 to 0.85]; p = 0.02) and failed for true AP radiographs (0.55 [95% CI 0.39 to 0.72]; p = 0.69). In paired comparisons, there were no differences between CT and MRI regarding (median [range]) lesion width (2.33 mm [0.35 to 4.53] versus 2.26 mm [0.90 to 3.47], p = 0.71) and depth (0.42 mm [0.80 to 1.39] versus 0.40 mm [0.06 to 1.17]; p = 0.54), and there were no differences concerning the other measurement methods: best-fit circle width loss method (15.02% [2.48% to 41.59%] versus 13.38% [2.00% to 36.34%]; p = 0.66), AP distances method (15.48% [1.44% to 42.01%] versus 12.88% [1.43% to 36.34%]; p = 0.63), surface area method (14.01% [0.87% to 38.25] versus 11.72% [2.45% to 37.97%]; p = 0.68), and Gerber X ratio (0.75 [0.13 to 1.47] versus 0.76 [0.27 to 1.13]; p = 0.41). Except for the moderate interrater reliability of the Bigliani classification using CT (intraclass correlation coefficient = 0.599 [95% CI 0.246 to 0.834]; p = 0.03) and acceptable interrater reliability of the Gerber X ratio using CT (0.775 [95% CI 0.542 to 0.899]; p < 0.01), all other measurement methods had good or excellent intrarater and interrater reliabilities on MRI and CT.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study show that CT and MRI can accurately detect glenoid bone loss, whereas WP radiographs can only recognize them poorly, and true AP radiographs do not provide any adequate diagnostic accuracy. In addition, when measuring glenoid bone loss, MRI images of the analyzed measurement methods yielded sizes that were no different from CT measurements. Finally, the use of MRI images to measure Bankart bone lesions gave good-to-excellent reliability in the present study, which was not inferior to CT findings. Considering the advantages including lower radiation exposure and the ability to assess the condition of the labrum using MRI, we believe MRI can help surgeons avoid ordering additional CT imaging in clinical practice for the diagnosis of anterior shoulder instability in patients with glenoid bone loss. Future studies should investigate the reproducibility of our results with a larger number of patients, using other measurement methods that include examination of the opposite side or with three-dimensional reconstructions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I diagnostic study.

The playing position significantly influences return to sports and recurrences after an arthroscopic Bankart repair in competitive rugby players

BACKGROUND

The purpose of our study was to investigate the influence of the different rugby playing positions on return to sports, functional outcomes, and recurrences after an arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHODS

A total of 88 rugby players were treated for anterior shoulder instability in our institution between 2010 and 2018. Functional outcomes, return to sports, recurrences, complications, and revisions rates were evaluated according to the playing position.

RESULTS

Overall, 73.8% of the patients returned to rugby and 60% returned at the same level as before the injury. The tight forwards and outside backs experienced a significant decrease in their competitive level after surgery, and showed the lowest functional outcomes. The tight forwards and outside backs showed a statistically significant increase in recurrence and revision rates, and an OR for recurrence of 12.8 and 9.6, respectively.

DISCUSSION

The playing position significantly influenced return to sports and recurrences after an arthroscopic Bankart repair in competitive rugby players. Specifically, the tight forwards and outside backs have returned to a lower level than they had before surgery, showed the lowest functional outcomes, and a significant increase in recurrences and revisions rates than the other groups.

The Latarjet procedure in competitive athletes younger than 20 years old with a significant glenoid bone loss

PURPOSE

To analyze return to sports, functional outcomes, and complications following the Latarjet procedure in competitive athletes younger than 20 years old with a significant glenoid bone loss.

METHODS

Between 2010 and 2017, 60 competitive athletes younger than 20 years old with a significant glenoid bone loss were operated with the Latarjet procedure. Return to sports, range of motion, and the Rowe and the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System score were used to assess functional outcomes. Complications and bone consolidation were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 58 months and the mean age was 16.3 years. Overall, 93% were able to return to sports and 84% returned at the same level. The Rowe and Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System scores showed statistical improvement after operation (P <  .001). The total complication rate was 22% and the revision rate was 1.6%. The recurrence rate was 3.3%. The bone block healed in 93% of the cases.

CONCLUSIONS

In competitive athletes younger than 20 years old with a significant glenoid bone loss, the Latarjet procedure resulted in excellent functional outcomes, with most of the patients returning to sports and at the same level they had before injury with a low rate of recurrences. However, this procedure is associated with a significant rate of complications and should preferably be performed by experienced surgeons.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Can We Identify Why Athletes Fail to Return to Sports After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

No previous systematic reviews have reported on athletes who fail to return to sports after arthroscopic Bankart repair.

PURPOSE

To review the literature on athletes who fail to return to sports after arthroscopic Bankart repair to determine the rate of athletes who did not return to sports and to identify the specific reasons for failure to return to sports by nonreturning athletes.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was conducted following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science) were queried for articles meeting the inclusion criteria. Studies were considered eligible only if reporting the rate of failure for return to sports and providing the specific reasons why athletes were unable to return to sports. All records were screened by title, abstract, and full text by 2 authors independently, with any discrepancies resolved by a third senior author. For articles selected for inclusion, data were collected on the number of athletes, average age, average follow-up time, type of sport played, rate of failure to return to sports, and specific reasons for failure to return. A random-effects model was used to conduct the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were selected for inclusion reporting on a total of 813 athletes. The calculated weighted rate of failure to return to sports after arthroscopic Bankart repair was 15.6% (95% CI, 10.9%-21.1%). A significantly higher proportion of athletes cited shoulder-dependent versus shoulder-independent reasons for failure to return to sports (81.7% vs 18.3%; P < .0001). The most cited reasons for failure to return included recurrent or persistent instability (33.3%), fear of reinjury (17.7%), apprehension (9.9%), changes in priorities or personal interest (8.5%), lack of time (7.1%), and discomfort or pain with sports (6.4%).

CONCLUSION

Our study estimated the rate of failure to return to sports after arthroscopic Bankart repair to be 15.6%, with most athletes citing shoulder-related reasons as the primary factor precluding return. Identifying the potential reasons preventing successful return to sports can guide surgeons in counseling athletes regarding postoperative expectations and addressing hesitations for returning to sports.

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

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

Comparison of perioperative complications following surgical treatment of shoulder instability

Background

Surgical repair for shoulder instability includes arthroscopic Bankart, open Bankart, and Latarjet-Bristow.

Methods

This is a cohort study of patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart, open Bankart, or Latarjet-Bristow procedures that were identified within the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2007-2019). Unadjusted and adjusted analyses were performed (α = 0.05). Outcomes included 30-day adverse events, readmission, and operative time.

Results

This study included 10,955 patients (9128 arthroscopic Bankart, 1148 open Bankart, and 679 Latarjet-Bristow). Compared with arthroscopic Bankart, Latarjet-Bristow had longer operative times (129.96 [95% CI: 126.49-133.43] vs. 86.35 [85.51-87.19] minutes), along with a higher percentage of serious adverse events (2.5% vs. 0.4%), reoperation (1.9% vs. 0.1%), readmission (1.8% vs. 0.3%), thromboembolic complications (0.4% vs. 0.1%), and sepsis (0.4% vs. 0.0%) (P < .05 for all). Open Bankart had longer operative times (98.17 [95.52-100.82] vs. 86.35 [85.51-87.19] minutes) and a higher percentage of sepsis (0.2% vs. 0.0%) (P < .05 both). Latarjet-Bristow had increased odds of a serious adverse event (odds ratio [OR]: 7.68 [4.19-14.07]), reoperation (OR: 17.32 [7.58-39.56]), readmission (OR: 5.73 [2.84-11.54]), and deep wound complications (OR: 14.98 [3.92-57.23]) (P < .05 for all). In comparing the relative utilization of arthroscopic versus open Bankart, arthroscopic Bankart increased (83.4% to 91.2%) while open Bankart decreased (16.6% to 8.8%) from the 2011-2013 time period to 2017-2019 (P trend < .001).

Conclusion

In addition to a low complication rate, the relative utilization of arthroscopic Bankart increased compared with open Bankart over the past decade. Furthermore, Latarjet-Bristow was associated with a higher incidence of serious adverse events than arthroscopic Bankart.

Surgical delay for traumatic recurrent shoulder dislocations leads to inferior functional outcomes

BACKGROUND

The effect of time interval between injury and surgery on outcomes of Bankart repair surgery has not been published previously. The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of surgical delay on functional outcomes after arthroscopic Bankart repair.

METHOD

One hundred and five athletes who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair ± remplissage were enrolled in the study. Patients were divided into 2 groups depending upon the injury to surgery time- < 12 months (n = 19), and ≥12 months (n = 86). Depending upon the number of episodes of dislocation, patients were further categorized into 2 groups- <10 episodes (n = 66) and ≥10 episodes (n = 39). All patients were assessed post-operatively for functional outcomes (Modified Rowe's score, Constant Murley score) and return to sports at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up.

RESULTS

The mean injury to surgery time was 31.7 ± 23.1 months. The average number of episodes of dislocation before surgery were 10 (range 3-50). 49/105 (46.7%) patients returned to sports after a mean post-operative duration of 10.9 months. Athletes operated after a surgical delay of ≥12 months had inferior functional outcomes (Modified Rowe's score-89.5 ± 8.9 vs.77.4 ± 21.4; p = 0.02), lower rate of return to sports (14/19 vs. 35/86; p = 0.02) and higher mean time to return to sports (8.7 ± 1.9 vs. 11.5 ± 2.6; p < 0.05). Similarly, athletes who had ≥10 dislocations before surgery had inferior functional outcomes (Modified Rowe's score-84.5 ± 15.2 vs.72.9 ± 25.6; p = 0.004), lower rate of return to sports (37/66 vs. 12/39; p = 0.02) and higher mean time to return to sports (10.3 ± 2.4 vs. 12.6 ± 2.5; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

A delay in surgery (≥12 months) or dislocation episodes of ≥10 are associated with inferior functional outcomes, lower rate of return to sports and higher surgical failure rate.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III; Prospective cohort study.

Bone Fragment Resorption and Clinical Outcomes of Traumatic Bony Bankart Lesion Treated With Arthroscopic Repair Versus Open Latarjet

BACKGROUND

Bony Bankart lesions can perpetuate chronic anterior glenohumeral instability. When surgical treatment is pursued, several factors need to be considered to obtain optimal outcomes.

PURPOSE

To (1) quantitatively describe patterns of bone fragment resorption and associated risk factors for developing glenoid bone loss (GBL) and (2) to compare clinical and radiological results of attritional bone loss treated with either the arthroscopic Bankart or the open Latarjet procedure.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data was conducted for patients who underwent arthroscopic stabilization (group A1, 10%-20% GBL; group A2, >20% GBL) or open Latarjet (group B, >10% GBL) for recurrent shoulder instability with bony Bankart lesion. Patient characteristics, number of dislocations, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) scores were obtained. Pre- and postoperative computed tomography imaging was used to quantitatively describe patterns of bone fragment resorption.

RESULTS

A total of 120 consecutive patients (group A1, 40; group A2, 23; group B, 57) were included in the study, with a mean age of 25.6 years (range, 19-35 years). The average follow-up was 5.0 years for all groups (range, 4.83-5.16 years in group A1, 4.58-5.41 years in group A2, and 4.33-5.67 years in group B). The mean times between dislocation event and surgery were 12.8 months (range, 6-32 months) and 13.6 months (range, 6-38 months) for groups A and B, respectively. Redislocation rates were 7.5% in group A1 versus 13.0% in group A2, and only occurred in patients with ≥13.5% GBL. There were no redislocations for group B (0%). Patients had better WOSI scores in group B (234.1 ± 126.9) than in group A (576.1 ± 224.6) (P < .0001). In group A, smaller preoperative bone fragment size displayed a higher percentage of resorption after surgery (r = -0.64; P < .05).

CONCLUSION

A significant inverse relationship exists between preoperative bone fragment size and percentage of postoperative resorption. Patients treated with arthroscopic bony Bankart repair who had final GBL ≥13.5% had worse outcomes. When planned GBL approaches 13.5% in high-demand patients, a smaller fragment size can result in worse clinical outcomes because of resorption. In these cases, choosing the open Latarjet procedure leads to better clinical results.

Revision Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Anterior Shoulder Instability After a Failed Arthroscopic Soft-Tissue Repair Yields Comparable Failure Rates to Primary Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The management of recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair remains challenging. Of the various treatment options, arthroscopic revision repairs are of increasing interest due to improved visualization of pathology and advancements in arthroscopic techniques and instrumentation.

PURPOSE

We sought to assess the indications, techniques, outcomes, and complications for patients undergoing revision arthroscopic Bankart repair after a failed index arthroscopic soft-tissue stabilization for anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of studies identified by a search of Medline, Embase, and PubMed. Our search range was from data inception to April 29, 2020. Outcomes include clinical outcomes and rates of complication and revision. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) was used to assess study quality. Data are presented descriptively.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were identified, comprising 279 patients (281 shoulders) with a mean age of 26.1 ± 3.8 years and a mean follow-up of 55.7 ± 24.3 months. Patients had improvements in postoperative outcomes (eg, pain and function). The overall complication rate was 29.5%, the most common being recurrent instability (19.9%).

CONCLUSION

With significant improvements postoperatively and comparable recurrent instability rates, there exists a potential role in the use of revision arthroscopic Bankart repair where the glenoid bone loss is less than 20%. Clinicians should consider patient history and imaging findings to determine whether a more rigorous stabilization procedure is warranted. Large prospective cohorts with long-term follow-up and improved documentation are required to determine more accurate failure rates.

Arthroscopic remplissage is safe and effective: clinical and magnetic resonance results at a minimum 3 years of follow-up

BACKGROUND

Large Hill-Sachs lesions are considered a risk factor for recurrence of instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair alone. The aim of this study was to demonstrate that remplissage is a safe procedure that effectively reduces the risk of recurrent dislocations without causing fatty degeneration of the infraspinatus at medium-term follow-up.

METHODS

Patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair and remplissage with a minimum 3 years of follow-up were included. Constant-Murley (CMS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Walch-Duplay scores were evaluated. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed to detect the appearance of fatty infiltration inside the infraspinatus muscle, the percentage of the Hill-Sachs lesion filled by the tendon and its integration, and the onset of rotator cuff tears.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients (14 shoulders) with a mean follow-up of 55.93 (± 18.16) months were enrolled. The Walch-Duplay score was 95.00 [87.25-100.00], with a return to sport rate of 100%. Both the CMS and the ASES indicated excellent results. The affected shoulders showed a statistically significant reduction in active external rotation both with the arm at the side (ER1) and with the arm at 90° of abduction (ER2) (p = 0.0005 and p = 0.0010, respectively). A reduction in infraspinatus isometric strength was found for both ER1 and ER2, but this reduction was only statistically relevant in ER2 (p = 0.0342). There was a traumatic recurrence of instability in two cases (14.28%). MRI evaluation demonstrated an absence of adipose infiltration in 50% of cases and only a minimal amount in the remaining 50%. In 12 cases (85.72%), the capsulotenodesis completely filled the lesion and good tendon-bone integration was observed.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic remplissage provided successful clinical outcomes without fatty infiltration of the infraspinatus and with good healing of the tissues. The low risk of recurrence was associated with an objective limitation on active external rotation, but this did not influence the patients' daily or sports activities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Cohort study, level of evidence 3.

Clinical Outcomes of Revision Arthroscopic Capsulolabral Repair for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability With Moderate Glenoid Bone Defects: A Comparison With Primary Surgery

Background:

The optimal revision surgery for failed primary arthroscopic capsulolabral repair (ACR) has yet to be determined. Revision ACR has shown promising results.

Purpose:

To compare the functional, strength, and radiological outcomes of revision ACR and primary ACR for anterior shoulder instability.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Between March 2007 and April 2017, a total of 85 patients underwent ACR (revision: n = 23; primary: n = 62). Functional outcome scores and positive apprehension signs were evaluated preoperatively, at 1 year, and then annually. Isokinetic internal and external rotation strengths were evaluated preoperatively and at 1 year after surgery.

Results:

The mean follow-up was 36.5 ± 10.2 months (range, 24-105 months). There was no significant difference between the revision and primary groups in the glenoid bone defect size at the time of surgery (17.3% ± 4.8% vs 15.4% ± 5.1%, respectively; P = .197). At the final follow-up, no significant differences were found in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (97.6 ± 3.1 vs 98.0 ± 6.2, respectively; P = .573), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score (636.7 ± 278.1 vs 551.1 ± 305.4, respectively; P = .584), or patients with a positive apprehension sign (17.4% [4/23] vs 11.3% [7/62], respectively; P = .479) between the revision and primary groups. There was no significant difference between the revision and primary groups for returning to sports at the same preoperative level (65.2% vs 80.6%, respectively; P = .136) and anatomic healing failure at 1 year after surgery (13.0% vs 3.2%, respectively; P = .120). Both groups recovered external rotation strength at 1 year after surgery (vs before surgery), although the strength was weaker than in the uninvolved shoulder. In the revision group, a larger glenoid bone defect was significantly related to a positive apprehension sign (22.0% ± 3.8%) vs a negative apprehension sign (16.0% ± 3.2%; cutoff = 20.5%; P = .003).

Conclusion:

In patients with moderate glenoid bone defect sizes (10%-25%), clinical outcomes after revision ACR were comparable to those after primary ACR. However, significant glenoid bone loss was related to a positive remaining apprehension sign in the revision group. Surgeons should consider these findings when selecting their revision strategy for patients with failed anterior shoulder stabilization.