Arthroscopic and open shoulder stabilization using absorbable implants. A clinical and radiographic comparison of two methods

Comparing Biomechanical Properties of Bioabsorbable Suture Anchors: A Comprehensive Review

Suture anchors (SAs) are medical devices used to connect soft tissue to bone. Traditionally these were made of metal; however, in the past few decades, bio-absorbable suture anchors have been created to overcome revision surgeries and other complications caused by metallic SAs. This systematic review aims to analyze the biomechanical properties of these SAs to gain a better understanding of their safety and utilization. A comprehensive systematic review that adhered to the PRISMA guidelines was conducted. Primary outcomes were that the pull-out strength of SAs, the rate of degradation secondarily, and the biocompatibility of all SAs were analyzed. After screening 347 articles, 16 were included in this review. These studies revealed that the pull-out strength of bio-absorbable SAs was not inferior to that of their non-absorbable comparatives. The studies also revealed that the rate of degradation varies widely from 7 to 90 months. It also showed that not all absorbable SAs were fully absorbed within the expected timeframe. This systematic review demonstrates that existing suture anchor materials exhibit comparable pull-out strengths, material-specific degradation rates, and variable biocompatibility. All-suture anchors had promising results in biocompatibility, but evidence fails to identify a single most favorable material. Higher-powered studies that incorporate tissue-specific characteristics, such as rotator cuff tear size, are warranted. To meet demonstrated shortcomings in strength and biocompatibility, we propose silk fibroin as a novel material for suture anchor design for its customizable properties and superior strength.

Arthroscopic Versus Open Anterior Shoulder Stabilization: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial With 15-Year Follow-up With an Assessment of the Glenoid Being "On-Track" and "Off-Track" as a Predictor of Failure

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have demonstrated equivalent short-term results when comparing arthroscopic versus open anterior shoulder stabilization. However, none have evaluated the long-term clinical outcomes of patients after arthroscopic or open anterior shoulder stabilization, with inclusion of an assessment of preoperative glenoid tracking.

PURPOSE

To compare long-term clinical outcomes of patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability randomized to open and arthroscopic stabilization groups. Additionally, preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies were used to assess whether the shoulders were "on-track" or "off-track" to ascertain a prediction of increased failure risk.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A consecutive series of 64 patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability were randomized to receive either arthroscopic or open stabilization by a single surgeon. Follow-up assessments were performed at minimum 15-year follow-up using established postoperative evaluations. Clinical failure was defined as any recurrent dislocation postoperatively or subjective instability. Preoperative MRI scans were obtained to calculate the glenoid track and designate shoulders as on-track or off-track. These results were then correlated with the patients' clinical results at their latest follow-up.

RESULTS

Of 64 patients, 60 (28 arthroscopic and 32 open) were contacted or examined for follow-up (range, 15-17 years). The mean age at the time of surgery was 25 years (range, 19-42 years), while the mean age at the time of this assessment was 40 years (range, 34-57 years). The rates of arthroscopic and open long-term failure were 14.3% (4/28) and 12.5% (4/32), respectively. There were no differences in subjective shoulder outcome scores between the treatment groups. Of the 56 shoulders, with available MRI studies, 8 (14.3%) were determined to be off-track. Of these 8 shoulders, there were 2 surgical failures (25.0%; 1 treated arthroscopically, 1 treated open). In the on-track group, 6 of 48 had failed surgery (12.5%; 3 open, 3 arthroscopic [P = .280]).

CONCLUSION

Long-term clinical outcomes were comparable at 15 years postoperatively between the arthroscopic and open stabilization groups. The presence of an off-track lesion may be associated with a higher rate of recurrent instability in both cohorts at long-term follow-up; however, this study was underpowered to verify this situation.

Large Drill Holes Are Still Present in the Long Term After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair With Absorbable Tacks: An 18-Year Randomized Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

Studies have demonstrated the development of an osseous reaction at the drill sites of anchors after arthroscopic shoulder surgery.

PURPOSE

To investigate the drill-hole size at 18 years after arthroscopic Bankart repair using either fast polygluconate acid (PGA) or slow polylevolactic acid (PLLA) absorbable tacks and to compare the functional outcomes and development of osteoarthritis.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

40 patients with unidirectional anterior shoulder instability, treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair, were randomized into the PGA group (n = 20) or the PLLA group (n = 20). Plain radiographs of both shoulders, as well as computed tomography (CT) images of the operated shoulder, were used to evaluate the drill-hole size, volume, and degenerative changes. Functional outcomes were assessed by use of the Rowe score, Constant score, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) index.

RESULTS

Of the 40 patients, 32 patients returned for the follow-up (15 PGA and 17 PLLA). No significant differences were found in the population characteristics between the study groups. The mean follow-up time was 18 years for both groups. No significant differences were seen in range of motion, strength in abduction, or Constant, Rowe, and WOSI scores between the groups. Recurrence rate was 33% in the PGA group and 6% in the PLLA group during the follow-up period (P = .07). The drill-hole appearance on plain radiographs (invisible/hardly visible/visible/cystic) was 11/2/2/0 and 6/5/5/1 for the PGA and PLLA groups, respectively (P = .036). The mean ± SD drill-hole volume as estimated on CT images was 89 ± 94 and 184 ± 158 mm³ in the PGA and PLLA groups, respectively (P = .051). Degenerative changes (normal/minor/moderate/severe) on plain radiographs were 7/4/4/0 and 3/8/5/1 for the PGA and PLLA groups, respectively (P = .21), and on CT images were 5/7/3/0 and 2/6/6/3 for the PGA and PLLA groups, respectively (P = .030).

CONCLUSION

This long-term follow-up study demonstrated that the PLLA group had significantly more visible drill holes than the PGA group on plain radiographs. However, this difference was not evident on CT imaging, with both groups having several visible cystic drill holes and a substantial drill-hole volume defect. No significant differences were found between the study groups in terms of clinical outcomes.

Mid-term to long-term results of primary arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability: a retrospective study

Background

The arthroscopic method offers a less invasive technique of Bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability. The aim of the study is to determine the mid−/long-term functional outcome, failure rates and predictors of failure after primary arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability.

Methods

A total of 100 patients were primarily operated using arthroscopic Bankart repair after traumatic anterior shoulder instability. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed, and patients were assessed using postal questionnaire after a mean follow-up of 8.3 years [3–14]. Clinical assessment was performed using Constant score, Rowe score, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score.

Results

The overall recurrence rate was 22%. The Kaplan-Meier failure-free survival estimates.

were 80% at 5 years and 70% at 10 years. Nearly half (54.5%) of recurrences occurred at 2 years postoperative. Compared with normal shoulder, there were statistical differences in all 3 scores. Failure rate was significantly affected by age at the time of surgery with 86% of recurrence cases observed in patients aged 30 years or younger. Nevertheless, Younger age at the time of surgery (P = 0.007) as well age at the time of initial instability (P = 0.03) was found to correlate negatively with early recurrence within 2 years of surgery. Among those with recurrent instability, recurrence rate was found to be higher if there had been more than 5 instability episodes preoperatively (P = 0.01). Return to the preinjury sport and occupational level was possible in 41 and 78%, respectively.

Conclusion

Failure-free survival rates dropped dramatically over time. Alternative reconstruction techniques should be considered in those aged ≤30 years due to the high recurrence rate.

Arthroscopic Repair of Type II SLAP Lesions in Overhead Athletes

For overhead athletes and, in particular, baseball pitchers, the rates of success and return to play for those who have undergone arthroscopic repair of type II SLAP lesions are poor, ranging from 7% to 62%. The reasons for the poor results and high failure rates in overhead athletes with type II SLAP repairs are multifactorial and are a combination of many factors. These factors include the failure to establish the diagnosis and treat these athletes preoperatively; the inability of the operating surgeon to differentiate normal anatomic variants from pathologic SLAP lesions at the time of surgery; the surgical technique, which may violate the rotator cuff; or the placement of suture anchors, which restricts external rotation and alters overhead throwing mechanics. The proper diagnosis of SLAP lesions can be difficult because SLAP tears rarely occur in isolation and are often associated with other shoulder pathology. A proper history detailing the onset of symptoms and whether there was an acute episode of trauma or a history of repetitive use is critical. It is important to remember that no single physical examination finding is pathognomonic for SLAP tears. When seen in isolation, SLAP tears may mimic impingement syndrome (52%) or even anterior instability (39%). Surgical treatment of type II SLAP lesions should not be undertaken lightly in overhead athletes. If a 3-month rehabilitation period followed by a return to sports over the following 3 months does not allow the athlete to return to his or her preinjury level, diagnostic arthroscopy with SLAP repair is a reasonable option and can yield excellent results using the proper techniques. The technique described in detail in this article and our video can be technically demanding, but with the key points outlined, it can be reproduced and provide excellent results for overhead athletes undergoing SLAP repair. By not violating the rotator cuff, using a mattress configuration and keeping the suture knot away from the articular surface, and by not going anterior to the biceps tendon for repair, external rotation and strength can be preserved, leading to an excellent result with a predictable return to play for overhead athletes.

Surgical treatment outcomes after primary vs recurrent anterior shoulder instability

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of surgical management after primary anterior shoulder dislocation to the outcomes of patients who have surgical stabilization after recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

A Medline (PubMed) search was performed in November of 2016 using the following key terms: shoulder, labrum, Bankart, instability, repair, outcome, recurrent. In May 2017 a Cochrane search was performed using similar key terms to ensure we included all studies. Only level I and II studies were included.

RESULTS

There were three studies that compared primary repair to delayed repair. In all three studies, the rate of recurrence was higher in group R than group S. When pooled, there was not a statistically significant difference between these groups, but there was a slightly higher odds of recurrence in group R (pooled OR 2.08, CI 0.69-6.26, p = 0.19). No significant differences were appreciated in functional outcomes or complications in these two groups.

CONCLUSION

Further level I and level II studies to compare surgical treatment after first time and recurrent instability are needed. This study failed to find a statistically significant difference in recurrence rates in patients who had stabilization acutely after a single episode compared to patients with recurrent instability events, although results suggest there may be a small benefit in primary stabilization.

Return to Play Criteria Following Surgical Stabilization for Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To identify and describe in the existing literature any criteria used for return to play following surgical stabilization for traumatic, anterior shoulder instability.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review evaluating surgical stabilization for primary traumatic anterior shoulder instability in skeletally mature patients with a minimum of 1-year follow-up using Level I to IV studies in PubMed and EMBASE from January 1994 to January 2017.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight studies with at least 1 explicitly stated criterion for return to play were identified from a review of more than 5,100 published articles. Seven different categories of return to play criteria were identified, the most common of which were time from surgery (89.6%), strength (18.9%), and range of motion (13.8%). Pain, stability, proprioception, and postoperative radiographic evaluation were also used. As hypothesized, in 75.8% of the included studies (44/58), time was the only criterion explicitly used. The most commonly used time for return to play was 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review identifies 7 criteria that have been used in the available literature to determine when patients are ready to return to play; however, consistent with our hypothesis, 75% of studies used time from surgery as the sole listed criterion, with the most commonly used time point of 6 months postoperative. All of these criteria can be used in future research to develop a comprehensive checklist of functional criteria in hopes of reducing recurrent injury.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review.

Radiolucent rings around bioabsorbable anchors after rotator cuff repair are not associated with clinical outcomes

PURPOSE

Various researchers have observed small areas of osteolysis after using bioabsorbable anchors in shoulder surgeries. The purpose of this study is to determine whether radiographic perianchor radiolucent rings after rotator cuff repair are associated with the failure of repair and also assess their clinical implications. Further, the most frequent location of the radiolucent rings in the double-row suture bridge configuration was also assessed.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-nine consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair by suture bridge technique were retrospectively evaluated radiographically and clinically. The number and size of the rings that appeared at each follow-up were recorded. Also, the locations of each ring were recorded as anterior, middle or posterior, and medial or lateral according to the construct of the anchors used for suture bridge technique. The size of the tear, the number of anchors used and age of the patients were compared. Re-tear rates according to ultrasound examinations were also analyzed.

RESULTS

After rotator cuff repair, the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score increased from 46.7 to 88.0 and the overall re-tear rate was 8.5% (11 cases). Seventy-three patients (56.6%) showed RR (total number of 99 rings) at least once during the course of their follow-up and the rings appeared at a mean period of 18.2 months after surgery. Mean size of the rings initially was 5.6 mm and the rings increased or decreased in mean size of 0.4 mm during mean follow-up of 37 months. No correlation was seen with the number of RRs and the rate of re-tears, number of anchors, size of tears, and clinical outcome as determined by the ASES score. Radiolucent ring measurement reproducibility was confirmed by independent, repeated measurements. The rings appeared mostly at anteromedial anchors (75 rings, 75.8%) and the authors suggest that mechanical factors may play a role for the cause of radiolucent rings.

CONCLUSIONS

The number and the size of RRs around bioabsorbable anchors after rotator cuff repair do not appear to adversely affect the healing and clinical outcome of ARCR. Most radiolucent rings appeared at anteromedial anchors, indicating that mechanical factors may play a role for the radiolucencies.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Case series, level IV.

Open versus arthroscopic surgical treatment for anterior shoulder dislocation: a comparative systematic review and meta-analysis over the past 20 years

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis comparing open and arthroscopic surgery for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability by analyzing comparative studies during 2 different time intervals during the last 20 years.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Google Scholar. Two groups were created by dividing studies according to the year of publication, those published from 1995 to 2004 or from 2005 to 2015. Publication bias and risk of bias were assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tools. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistics.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies (n = 1633) met the eligibility criteria. Comparison of the pooled estimate for all of these studies demonstrated no significant differences (P = .64) in clinical outcomes between open and arthroscopic shoulder stabilization. However, studies published from 1995 through 2004 demonstrated significant differences (P = .015) in recurrence rates favoring open surgery. In contrast, no significant differences (P = .09) in recurrence rates were observed for studies published from 2005 through 2015. The pooled estimate for all studies in both groups demonstrated significant differences (P = .001) in external rotation deficits between open and arthroscopic shoulder stabilization favoring arthroscopic surgery.

CONCLUSION

Despite advances in surgical techniques and devices during the last 20 years, either open or arthroscopic surgical treatment of anterior shoulder dislocation results in similar clinical outcomes. The recurrence rate for arthroscopic surgical stabilization has only marginally decreased, from 16.8% to 14.2%. However, during the earlier decade from 1995 through 2004, patients treated with arthroscopic surgery had twice the risk of recurrence compared with an open procedure.

Bankart Repair Using Modern Arthroscopic Technique

As technology continues to improve, surgeons must regularly re-evaluate techniques to improve efficacy and outcomes. The Bankart repair for shoulder instability has evolved from open reconstruction to minimally invasive arthroscopic techniques, which have the benefit of less pain and morbidity. This technical description and video present a modern arthroscopic technique for Bankart repair used at our institution with high success in an athletic population.

A Meta-Analysis of Arthroscopic versus Open Repair for Treatment of Bankart Lesions in the Shoulder

Background

The optimal treatment for Bankart lesion remains controversial. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of patients managed with open Bankart repair versus arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Material/Methods

After systematic review of online databases, a total of 11 trials with 1022 subjects were included. The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed using the PEDro critical appraisal tool, and non-RCTs were evaluated by Newcastle-Ottawa (NO) quality assessment tool. Outcomes of shoulder stability, range of motion (ROM), functional scales, and surgical times were analyzed.

Results

Data synthesis showed significant differences between the two strategies, with regards to stability of the shoulder (P=0.008, RR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.89 to 0.98), and ROM (P<0.001, SMD=−0.47, 95% CI: −0.72 to −0.22).

Conclusions

Open Bankart repair produced a more stable shoulder but had a relatively poor shoulder motion, compared with arthroscopic Bankart repair, for the treatment of Bankart lesion.

Incapacity of work after arthroscopic Bankart repair

BACKGROUND AND INTRODUCTION

The incapacity with respect to work following anterior-inferior shoulder dislocation and subsequent Bankart repair has not been previously examined. The objective of this study was to examine a patient's incapacity according to the classification by the REFA Association. The recovery time was measured and the outcome of patients with heavy workload was compared to those with lower workloads.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 74 patients who underwent isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The Constant-Murley Score, UCLA Shoulder Score and ROWE Score for Shoulder Instability were recorded for clinical assessment. The mean follow-up time was 43.1 months (SD ± 17.4; 24-110 months) with a mean age of 34.7 years (SD ± 12.6). Workload was classified as per the REFA Association classification system. Postoperative duration of a patient's incapacity with respect to work and other subjective ratings were provided by the patients themselves.

RESULTS

The mean incapacity of work was 2.73 months (95 % CI 1.19-5.36). The incapacity of work was 2.06 months (95 % CI 1.55-2.68) in the group with low physical strains at work (REFA 0-1) and 3.40 months (95 % CI 2.70-4.24) in the group with heavy workload (REFA 2-4/p = 0.005). Overall, the mean Constant-Murley Score was 87.7 (SD ± 13.5). The average UCLA Shoulder Score summed up to 31.9 (SD ± 3.87) and the mean ROWE Score was 87.6 (SD ± 21.7). 13 (17.5 %) patients had problems to compete in their jobs. Three patients had to change the job postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

In this study, a relationship between the time of incapacity of work and the workload was observed; patients with low physical strains returned significantly earlier to work after arthroscopic Bankart repair (p = 0.005). In general, the clinical results as measured in the Constant/UCLA/Rowe score were comparable to other studies.

Bristow-Latarjet Technique: Still a Very Successful Surgery for Anterior Glenohumeral Instability - A Forty Year One Clinic Experience

AIM:

To evaluate the functional outcomes of the Bristow-Latarjet procedure in patients with recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability.

PATIENTS AND METHODS:

Personal clinical records of 42 patients with 45 operated shoulders were reviewed retrospectively. Patient age at time of first dislocation, injury mechanism, and number of recurring dislocations before surgery were recorded. The overall function and stability of the shoulder was evaluated.

RESULTS:

Thirty five (78%) of the scapulohumeral humeral instabilities were caused by trauma. The mean number of recurring dislocations was 9 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0–18); one patient had had 17 recurrences. Mean follow-up 46 months (95% CI, 16-88). No dislocation happened postoperatively. Four patients have fibrous union (9%). Only two had clinical sign of pain and discomfort. One of them was reoperated for screw removal with very good post-operative result. The overall functional outcome was good, with a mean Rowe score of 88 points (95% CI, 78–100). Scores of 27 (64%) of the patients were excellent, 9 (22%) were good, 4 (9.5%) were fair, and 2 (4.5%) were poor.

CONCLUSION:

The Bristow-Latarjet procedure is a very good surgical treatment for recurrent anterior-inferior instability of the glenohumeral joint. It must not be used for multidirectional instability or psychogenic habitual dislocations.

Effectiveness and safety of arthroscopic versus open Bankart repair for recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation: a meta-analysis of clinical trial data

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of arthroscopic and open Bankart repair for recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation using meta-analysis of data from clinical trials.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, PUBMED and EMBASE were used to search and identify clinical trials that evaluated arthroscopic and open Bankart repair for recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation. Methodological qualities of studies were assessed by Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Publication bias was detected using Begg's test and Egger's test.

RESULTS

Sixteen trials involving 827 shoulders were included in the study. Based on Cochrane Collaboration tool for assessing risk of bias, three studies were rated as high quality and one study was rated as moderate quality among the randomized controlled trials. Another twelve case-control studies were rated as high quality based on Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. No significant publication bias was detected by Begg's test or Egger's test. Meta-analysis results indicated that arthroscopic repair has a significantly better recovery rate for external rotation at 90° of abduction, external rotation at side (P > 0.05) and forward flexion. However, arthroscopic repair had higher rates of recurrence and reoperation than open Bankart repair.

CONCLUSION

Meta-analysis of available randomized controlled trials and case-control studies demonstrated that arthroscopic repair and open Bankart repair were similar in safety. Arthroscopic repair resulted in better recovery of range of motion, but recurrence and reoperation rates were higher than open Bankart repair.

Outcomes of arthroscopic anterior shoulder instability in the beach chair versus lateral decubitus position: a systematic review and meta-regression analysis

PURPOSE

This study aimed to systematically review the clinical outcomes and recurrence rates after arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization in the beach chair (BC) and lateral decubitus (LD) positions.

METHODS

The authors performed a systematic review of multiple medical databases using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. All English-language literature from 1990 to 2013 reporting clinical outcomes after arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization with suture anchors or tacks with a minimum 2-year follow-up period were reviewed by 2 independent reviewers. Data on recurrent instability rate, return to activity/sport, range of motion, and subjective outcome measures were collected. Study methodological quality was evaluated with the Modified Coleman Methodology Score (MCMS) and the Quality Appraisal Tool (QAT). To quantify the structured review of observational data, meta-analytic statistical methods were used.

RESULTS

Sixty-four studies (38 BC position, 26 LD position) met inclusion criteria. A total of 3,668 shoulders were included, with 2,211 of patients in the BC position (average age, 26.7 ± 3.8 years; 84.5% male sex) and 1,457 patients in the LD position (average age, 26.0 ± 3.0 years; 82.7% male sex). The average follow-up was 49.8 ± 29.5 months in the BC group compared with 38.7 ± 23.3 months in the LD group. Average overall recurrent instability rates were 14.65 ± 8.4% in the BC group (range, 0% to 38%) compared with 8.5% ± 7.1% in the LD group (range, 0% to 30%; P = .002). The average postoperative loss in external rotation motion (in abduction) was reported in 19 studies in the BC group and in13 studies in the LD group, with an average loss of 2.4° ± 1.0° and 3.6° ± 2.6° in each group, respectively (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Excellent clinical outcomes with low recurrence rates can be obtained after arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization in either the BC or the LD position; however, lower recurrence rates are noted in the LD position. Additional long-term randomized clinical trials comparing these positions are needed to better understand the potential advantages and disadvantages of each position.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of studies with Level I through Level IV evidence.

MRI graduation of osseous reaction and drill hole consolidation after arthroscopic Bankart repair with PLLA anchors and the clinical relevance

PURPOSE

Conventionally, radiography studies revealed prolonged glenoidal drill hole visibilities with an unclear influence to the clinical outcome after arthroscopic Bankart repair using Poly-Laevo-Lactic-Acid (PLLA) anchors. The primary aim of the present study was the separated assessment of drill hole consolidation (DHC) and the concomitant osseous reaction (OR) of the glenoidal bio-degradation process in new specific magnetic resonance grading systems. In accordance with the specific DHC and the OR graduation, the clinical relevance was the secondary focus.

METHODS

Twenty-eight patients with arthroscopic Bankart repair using knotless PLLA anchors were prospectively followed and analyzed using a clinical scoring system (3, 6, 15 and 32 months). The T2-weighted OR and T1-weighted DHC were assessed using specific magnetic resonance imaging grading protocols (15 and 32 months).

RESULTS

Longitudinal assessments revealed successive clinical status improvements over time (32 months: Rowe 95.7 ± 3.8; Walch-Duplay 93.8 ± 6.6; Constant 93.9 ± 4.5; ASES 93.8 ± 6.9; DASH 28.6 ± 7.2; NAS(pain) 1.1 ± 1.3; NAS(function) 1.3 ± 1.4). The initial OR level regressed over the 15-32 month period while the DHC showed significant drill hole reductions (P < 0.05). The inferior glenoid revealed a significantly increased bio-degradation capacity (P < 0.05) with drill hole enlargements in 14.3%. Neither the OR nor the drill hole enlargements influenced the clinical status. In no case were clinical or radiologic signs for a foreign body reaction.

CONCLUSION

Knotless bio-anchors provide secure glenoidal fixation for Bankart repair without any specific clinical or MR evidence of an inflammatory response. The clinical status remained unaffected by the bio-degradation process.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Dislocation arthropathy and drill hole appearance in a mid- to long-term follow-up study after arthroscopic Bankart repair

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to perform a prospective mid- to long-term clinical and radiographic follow-up after arthroscopic Bankart repair using absorbable tacks with special emphasis on the development of dislocation arthropathy.

METHODS

Thirty-four shoulders in 32 patients with post-traumatic shoulder instability were included in the study. Clinical and radiographic follow-ups took place after approximately 2 and 8 years.

RESULTS

Thirty-four of 34 (100 %) shoulders in 32 patients returned for the follow-up examination after 95 (53-129) months. Pre-operatively, none of the shoulders had any arthropathy changes. At follow-up, 8/34 (24 %) had minor changes, 6/34 (18 %) had moderate changes, and none had severe arthropathy changes, a significant increment compared with the pre-operative figures (p = 0.005). At follow-up, the drill holes in 24 % of the shoulders still had not healed radiographically. The failure rate in terms of stability was 3/34 (9 %) re-dislocations and 3/34 (9 %) subluxations.

CONCLUSION

Eight years after arthroscopic Bankart repair using absorbable tacks, 41 % of the shoulders displayed some degree of radiographic arthropathy changes and in 24 % the drill holes had not yet radiographically healed. There was no correlation between clinical outcome or drill hole appearance and the development of arthropathy changes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Effectiveness of arthroscopic versus open surgical stabilisation for the management of traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability

Background  Anterior instability is a frequent complication following a traumatic glenohumeral dislocation. Frequently the underlying pathology associated with recurrent instability is a Bankart lesion. Surgical correction of Bankart lesions and other associated pathology is the key to successful treatment. Open surgical glenohumeral stabilisation has been advocated as the gold standard because of consistently low postoperative recurrent instability rates. However, arthroscopic glenohumeral stabilisation could challenge open surgical repair as the gold standard treatment for traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability. Objectives  Primary evidence that compared the effectiveness of arthroscopic versus open surgical glenohumeral stabilisation was systematically collated regarding best-practice management for adults with traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability. Search strategy  A systematic search was performed using 14 databases: MEDLINE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), ISI Web of Science, Expanded Academic ASAP, Proquest Medical Library, Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, TRIP Database, PubMed, ISI Current Contents Connect, Proquest Digital Dissertations, Open Archives Initiative Search Engine, Australian Digital Thesis Program. Studies published between January 1984 and December 2004 were included in this review. No language restrictions were applied. Selection criteria  Eligible studies were those that compared the effectiveness of arthroscopic versus open surgical stabilisation for the management of traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability, which had more than 2 years of follow up and used recurrent instability and a functional shoulder questionnaire as primary outcomes. Studies that used non-anatomical open repair techniques, patient groups that were specifically 40 years or older, or had multidirectional instability or other concomitant shoulder pathology were excluded. Data collection and analysis  Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility of each study for inclusion into the review, the study design used and its methodological quality. Where any disagreement occurred, consensus was reached by discussion with an independent researcher. Studies were assessed for homogeneity by considering populations, interventions and outcomes. Where heterogeneity was present, synthesis was undertaken in a narrative format; otherwise a meta-analysis was conducted. Results  Eleven studies were included in the review. Two were randomised controlled trials. Evidence comparing arthroscopic and open surgical glenohumeral stabilisation was of poor to fair methodological quality. Hence, the results of primary studies should be interpreted with caution. Observed clinical heterogeneity in populations and outcomes was highlighted and should be considered when interpreting the meta-analysis. Authors also used variable definitions of recurrent instability and a variety of outcome measures, which made it difficult to synthesise results. When comparable data were pooled, there were no significant differences (P > 0.05) between the arthroscopic and open groups with respect to recurrent instability rates, Rowe score, glenohumeral external rotation range and complication rates. Conclusions  Statistically, it appears that both surgical techniques are equally effective in managing traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability. In light of the methodological quality of the included studies, it is not possible to validate arthoscopic stabilisation to match open surgical stabilisation as the gold standard treatment. Further research using multicentred randomised controlled trials with sufficient power and instability-specific questionnaires with sound psychometric properties is recommended to build on current evidence. The choice of treatment should be based on multiple factors between the clinician and the patient.

Arthrosis of glenohumeral joint after arthroscopic Bankart repair: a long-term follow-up of 13 years

HYPOTHESIS

The purpose of the study was to establish radiologic and clinical occurrence of glenohumeral arthrosis after arthroscopic Bankart repair.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between January 1994 and December 1998, an arthroscopic Bankart repair was performed in 187 patients at our institution. We were able to assess clinical and radiologic glenohumeral arthrosis in 72 of the 101 patients who met the inclusion criteria (74 shoulders) (71%) after a 13-year follow-up. An additional 9 patients were interviewed by telephone. Radiologic arthrosis was evaluated with the Samilson-Prieto classification and clinical arthrosis with an arthrosis-specific quality-of-life questionnaire (Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder test). In addition, functional impairment was assessed with the Constant score and subjective satisfaction with a questionnaire.

RESULTS

Radiologic arthrosis was diagnosed in 50 of 74 shoulders (68%), with 40 (80%) of them classified as mild. The mean score on the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder questionnaire was 280 points (85% of the best possible score), which is considered relatively good. The mean Constant score was 78 points, and 75% of the patients were extremely satisfied or satisfied with the final results of operative treatment.

DISCUSSION

The radiologic evaluation and self-assessment of the patients imply that the incidence of glenohumeral arthrosis after arthroscopic Bankart repair is quite common but the symptoms are generally mild and comparable to nonoperative treatment.

CONCLUSION

Arthrosis rarely causes more than minor subjective symptoms or a minor objectively perceived disadvantage during 13 years' follow-up.

Minimum 10-year follow-up of arthroscopic intra-articular Bankart repair using bioabsorbable tacks

BACKGROUND

There are few long-term studies evaluating functional outcomes and rates of arthrosis after arthroscopic Bankart repair with bioabsorbable tacks.

PURPOSE

We evaluated the clinical and radiographic results of arthroscopic Bankart repair using intra-articular bioabsorbable tacks at a minimum of 10 years' follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Thirty-two consecutive patients were retrospectively identified. Twenty patients (63%) were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 13.5 years (range, 10.75-17.5 years) and average age of 43 years (range, 28-73 years). The surgical shoulder (SS) was compared with a healthy control shoulder (CS) in 15 of 20 patients. Outcome tools included the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) and Disabilities of the Shoulder, Arm, and Hand (DASH). Blinded, independent evaluators performed physical examinations and reviewed radiographs.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients (65%) had stable shoulders, 5 of 7 (25%) failed by dislocation, and 2 of 7 (10%) failed by signs of anterior instability on examination. Three patients underwent revision stabilization surgery. Average time to failure was 4.2 years (range, 0.25-14.7 years). Average WOSI and DASH scores were 80% and 7.3, respectively. The CS faired better than SS in WOSI scores (97% vs 83%, respectively; P = .008), main DASH scores (0.39 vs 6.79, respectively; P = .024), and the DASH sports module (0.00 vs 10.94, respectively; P = .043). Patients lost 5.9° of passive forward flexion (P = .031) and 4.3° of passive external rotation (P = .001). Forty percent returned to their preoperative sports level. Higher grades of arthrosis were seen in the SS (20% absent, 40% mild, 25% moderate, and 15% severe) versus CS (P = .002).

CONCLUSION

At long-term follow-up, 65% of patients treated with an arthroscopic Bankart repair using bioabsorbable tacks had a well-functioning, stable shoulder. Disability scores were greatest with sports; however, the majority of patients had well-preserved ranges of motion and good functional WOSI scores. Despite this, 40% had evidence of moderate to severe glenohumeral arthrosis.

Inflammatory response with osteolysis related to a bioabsorbable anchor in the finger: a case report

Soft tissue fixation of ligaments and tendons in the hand can be achieved by the use of metal or bioabsorbable suture anchors. Advantages of bioabsorbable suture anchors include lack of interference in magnetic resonance imaging, resorption of anchor, replacement by bone, and no need for hardware removal. However, complications of these bioabsorbable implants include inflammatory response to the material use. We present what we believe to be the first case in the hand of a poly(l-lactide-co-d,l-lacitide) suture anchor causing an inflammatory response leading to significant osteolysis 4 months postoperatively after repair of a ring finger flexor digitorum profundus avulsion. Exploration of the distal phalanx revealed an intact implant and repair, no signs of infection, and an extensive bone defect. Pathology showed chronically inflamed tissue. This case has led us to reconsider the use of bioabsorbable anchor sutures in the hand. Further research is necessary to better define the contraindications to bioabsorbable suture anchor use in the hand.

EXTENSIVE OSTEOLYSIS AFTER THE USE OF A BIOABSORBABLE SUTURE ANCHOR: CASE REPORT AND LITERATURE REVIEW

Bioabsorbable implants are very frequently used to treat rotator cuff and shoulder labrum injuries. Many researchers have observed small areas of osteolysis after treating pathological conditions of the shoulder using bioabsorbable anchors. Biological and mechanical theories have been put forward to account for the osteolysis caused by these materials. The case of a patient who was simultaneously treated for a rotator cuff lesion using the double-row technique and a Bankart lesion using bioabsorbable PLLA anchors and Fiber Wire®, and developed extensive osteolysis of the anatomical neck of the humerus, is described. Given that an anchor was used in the glenoid, and this did not present osteolysis, the hypothesis that mechanical factors are important in the etiology of this complication is raised.

Arthroscopic stabilization for first-time versus recurrent shoulder instability

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to systematically review the evidence on the outcomes of arthroscopic repair for anterior shoulder instability in first-time dislocators when compared with patients with recurrent instability.

METHODS

We designed a systematic review with a specific methodology to investigate the outcomes of surgery for those with only a first-time dislocation versus those who underwent surgery after multiple instability events. We performed a literature search from January 1966 to December 2008 using Medline, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials. Key words included the following: first time, primary shoulder, or recurrent shoulder instability, shoulder dislocation, Bankart repair, arthroscopic Bankart repair, and labral repair. The inclusion criteria were cohort studies (Level I to II) that evaluated the outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic stabilization after the first dislocation or multiple recurrent episodes. Studies that lacked a comparison group or were retrospective (Level III studies or higher) were excluded.

RESULTS

There were 15 studies that met the inclusion criteria and were included in the final analysis: 5 in the first-time dislocation group and 10 in the recurrent instability group. Study design, patient demographics, mean number of dislocations, surgical technique, and rehabilitation protocol, as well as subjective and objective outcome measures, were recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no differences in recurrence or complication rate among patients undergoing surgery after the primary dislocation when compared with those undergoing surgery after multiple recurrent episodes. Clinical outcome measures significantly improved within all independent studies from preoperatively to postoperatively. However, because of variation in the outcome measurement tools used, no direct comparison between the study groups could be performed. Additional randomized controlled studies are needed to compare the functional outcome, quality of life, and ability to return to preinjury activity level among patients undergoing early versus delayed repair for anterior shoulder instability.

Surgical interventions for anterior shoulder instability in adults

BACKGROUND

The shoulder is the most common joint to develop recurrent instability. Repair of labral tears of the joint and reconstruction of damaged capsule and torn ligaments either by open or arthroscopic methods remain the cornerstone of current management.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of various surgical interventions performed to treat recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder in adults.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Bone, Joint and Muscle Trauma Group Specialised Register (December 2007), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2008, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1950 to March 2008), EMBASE and other databases. We searched conference proceedings and the reference lists of papers.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing different surgical interventions for treating anterior shoulder instability in adults.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The authors independently selected trials, assessed methodological quality and extracted data. Only limited pooling was done.

MAIN RESULTS

Included are three randomised controlled trials involving 184 people (predominantly active young men) with unidirectional anterior shoulder instability generally following a traumatic event. All three trials compared arthroscopic versus open surgery, generally involving the repair of Bankart lesions. The three trials were inadequately reported but appeared well-conducted with minimum follow-ups of two years.Pooled results showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups in recurrent instability or re-injury (7/92 versus 5/85, risk ratio (RR) 0.89, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 8.72; random-effects model), in subsequent instability-related surgery (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.05 to 8.97; random-effects model) or surgery for all reasons (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.04 to 7.18; random-effects model). For other outcomes, including shoulder function, there were either no statistically significant differences between the two groups or the differences were clinically insignificant where statistically significant differences occurred.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence from randomised trials comparing arthroscopic with open surgery for treating anterior shoulder instability. Further research is needed on this subject and for other surgical interventions. Sufficiently powered, good quality, well reported randomised controlled trials with validated outcome measures and long-term follow up are required.

A 7-year prospective, randomized, clinical, and radiographic study after arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction using 2 different types of absorbable tack

BACKGROUND

Recent studies have shown that techniques for arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction using suture anchors or tacks can equal the results after an open procedure in the treatment of posttraumatic, recurrent, unidirectional shoulder instability. Which kind of technique and which implants to be used still need further study.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic results after arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction using 2 different types of absorbable implants.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A randomized series of 40 patients who had recurrent shoulder instability underwent reconstruction involving either polygluconate-B polymer or self-reinforced poly-L-lactic acid polymer tack implants. The patients underwent radiographic and clinical assessments preoperatively and at 7 years. Blood levels of C-reactive protein were analyzed preoperatively and postoperatively.

RESULTS

The radiographic visibility of the drill holes was significantly (P = .0001) greater in the poly-L-lactic acid polymer group than in the polygluconate-B polymer group. The failure rate in terms of stability was 5 of 36 (14%) after 7 years and, as previously reported by Magnusson et al, 2 of 40 (5%) after 2 years. Analyses preoperatively and postoperatively of C-reactive protein revealed no significant difference between the groups. No significant differences were found between the groups in terms of strength in abduction, range of motion, and Rowe or Constant scores.

CONCLUSION

Seven years after Bankart repair using either implant, the overall clinical results were satisfactory. The visibility of the drill holes was significantly greater after using poly-L-lactic acid polymer implants.

Fuctional outcome after open and arthroscopic bankart repair for traumatic shoulder instability

Purpose

Both open and arthroscopic Bankart repair are established procedures in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability. While the open procedure is still considered as the "golden standard" functional outcome is supposed to be better in the arthroscopic procedure. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the functional outcome between open and arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Materials and methods

In 199 patients a Bankart procedure with suture anchors was performed, either arthroscopically in presence of an detached, but not elongated capsulolabral complex (40) or open (159). After a median time of 31 months (12 to 67 months) 174 patients were contacted and agreed to follow-up, 135 after open and 39 after arthroscopic Bankart procedure.

Results

Re-dislocations occurred in 8% after open and 15% after arthroscopic Bankart procedure. After open surgery 4 of the 11 re-dislocations occurred after a new adequate trauma and 1 of the 6 re-dislocations after arthroscopic surgery. Re-dislocations after arthroscopic procedure occured earlier than after open Bankart repair. An external rotation lag of 20° or more was observed more often (16%) after open than after arthroscopic surgery (3%). The Rowe score demonstrated "good" or "excellent" functional results in 87% after open and in 80% patients after arthroscopic treatment.

Conclusion

In this retrospective investigation the open Bankart procedure demonstrated good functional results. The arthroscopic treatment without capsular shift resulted in a better range of motion, but showed a tendency towards more frequently and earlier recurrence of instability. Sensitive patient selection for arthroscopic Bankart repair is recommended especially in patients with more than five dislocations.

Perianchor radiolucency after knotless anchor repair for shoulder instability: correlation with clinical results of 69 cases

BACKGROUND

Although there would seem to be a logical relationship between radiolucency around the suture anchor and clinical result in Bankart repair, the correlation has not been demonstrated so far.

HYPOTHESIS

Knotless suture anchor is a viable alternative for arthroscopic Bankart repair, but postoperative radiologic findings of radiolucency around anchors are correlated with poor clinical results.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Sixty-nine consecutive patients with Bankart lesions were treated with arthroscopic reconstruction using knotless metal suture anchors. The mean follow-up was 40 months. Clinical and radiologic analysis was performed retrospectively. A new concept of perianchor radiolucency was introduced and, according to this radiologic finding, patients were divided into 2 subgroups: the perianchor radiolucency group and those who did not reveal perianchor radiolucency. The perianchor radiolucency group was further subdivided by shape and location. "Root type" was defined as a radiolucent halo at the root of the anchor, and perianchor radiolucency without any root halo was named "branch type." Location of perianchor radiolucency was described as above or below the equator of the glenoid.

RESULTS

After operation, the mean Rowe score increased to 93.8 from 43.1, and computed tomography arthrogram showed a 97% healing rate. Reoperations were performed due to 1 case of redislocation and 2 cases of anchor arthropathy. All these reoperated cases revealed perianchor radiolucency before reoperation. Other than reoperated cases, 2 patients showed apprehension at final evaluation. The perianchor radiolucency group had a significantly lower Rowe scores than the group that showed no perianchor radiolucency. Some of the patients in the perianchor radiolucency group had peculiar radiologic findings frequently associated with complications. The radiologic findings that consisted of root-type perianchor radiolucency located below the equator of the glenoid was termed the "ominous sign." Osteophytes of the humeral head together with the ominous sign is considered a warning sign of forthcoming progression of anchor arthropathy, and the authors suggest early surgical intervention with these findings.

CONCLUSION

After Bankart repair using knotless suture anchor, the ominous sign might be an important warning sign for possible forthcoming complications including redislocation, anchor arthropathy, and residual instability.

A long-term clinical follow-up study after arthroscopic intra-articular Bankart repair using absorbable tacks

The aim of the study was to perform an independent long-term evaluation after arthroscopic Bankart repair using absorbable tacks. We hypothesise that arthroscopic Bankart repair using absorbable tacks will result in stable shoulders. Eighty-one consecutive patients (84 shoulders) with symptomatic, recurrent, anterior, post-traumatic shoulder instability were included in the study. All the patients had a Bankart lesion. The age of the patients was 28 (15-62) years. The number of dislocations prior to surgery was five (sublux-50). The operation was performed 28 (3-360) months after the index injury by one of three surgeons with a special interest in shoulder surgery using an intra-articular arthroscopic Bankart procedure involving absorbable Suretac fixators. Seventy-six/84 (90%) of the shoulders (50 male, 23 female patients) were re-examined by two independent observers, after a follow-up period of 98 (46-129) months. In the long-term, the failure rate in terms of stability was 8/76 (11%) dislocations and a further 6/76 (8%) had experienced or had clinical signs of subluxation. The Rowe score was 91 (38-98) points at follow-up and the Constant score was 90 (56-100) points. The Constant score for the contralateral shoulder was 93 (69-100) points (P < 0.001). In the long-term, the arthroscopic Bankart procedure using Suretac fixators resulted in stable, well-functioning shoulders in the majority of patients. Eighteen per cent of the patients had experienced signs of instability during the follow-up period in terms of dislocations or subluxations.

Open anterior repair without routine capsulorraphy for traumatic anterior shoulder instability in a community setting

Anterior shoulder instability repairs often are performed but rarely reported in community practices. This study assessed outcomes after open anterior repairs without routine capsulorraphy by a community surgeon. Repairs were performed in 64 consecutive shoulders; patient self-assessment questionnaires were mailed to all patients after a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Eighty-three percent reported excellent or good modified Rowe scores at mean follow-up of 5 years. Patients who reported 100% elevation had better outcomes than those who did not report 100% elevation, whereas patients who reported 100% external or internal rotation had comparable outcomes to patients who did not report 100% rotation. Open anterior repair without routine capsulorraphy yielded good outcomes in this community setting.

Is arthroscopic surgery for stabilisation of chronic shoulder instability as effective as open surgery? A systematic review and meta-analysis of 62 studies including 3044 arthroscopic operations

A systematic search of the literature published between January 1985 and February 2006 identified 62 studies which reported the results of arthroscopic procedures for chronic anterior shoulder instability or comparisons between arthroscopic and open surgery. These studies were classified by surgical technique and research methodology, and when appropriate, were included in a meta-analysis. The failure rate of arthroscopic shoulder stabilisation using staples or transglenoid suture techniques appeared to be significantly higher than that of either open surgery or arthroscopic stabilisation using suture anchors or bio-absorbable tacks. Arthroscopic anterior stabilisation using the most effective techniques has a similar rate of failure to open stabilisation after two years.

Muscle strength after anterior shoulder stabilization: arthroscopic versus open Bankart repair

BACKGROUND

A number of reports have been made on the muscle strength at the last follow-up after arthroscopic or open Bankart repairs. Few have analyzed the change over time in muscle strength and compared the changes between different operative methods.

HYPOTHESIS

Muscle strength recovers faster after arthroscopic Bankart repair than after open Bankart repair, and the final muscle strength is not different between the 2 procedures.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

Sixty patients with anterior shoulder instability and an isolated Bankart lesion were enrolled for this study. Thirty patients underwent open Bankart repair (open group), and 30 patients went through arthroscopic Bankart repair (arthroscopic group).

RESULTS

The open group demonstrated markedly weaker muscle strength during forward elevation than did the arthroscopic group up to 3 months after surgery, but the difference narrowed to about 5% at 6 months (P = .074). At 6 months after surgery, the muscle strength of the open group measured 85.8% +/- 11.5% in forward elevation, 89.5% +/- 10.3% in external rotation, and 89.3% +/- 13.3% in internal rotation. The corresponding figures of the arthroscopic group were 90.6% +/- 8.6%, 92.1% +/- 9.1%, and 92.1% +/- 11.7%. As for external and internal rotations, the open group demonstrated markedly weaker muscle strength 6 weeks after surgery, but the differences were reduced to about 6% and 4%, respectively, at 3 months (P = .092 and .163, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference in final muscle strength 12 months after the operation between the 2 groups (P = .503, .468, and .659, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Muscle strength recovered faster with an arthroscopic procedure than with an open procedure during the early postoperative periods, and strength was restored to the level of the unaffected side at 6 months postoperatively. In the group with open Bankart repairs, the muscle strength during forward elevation recovered slower than did external and internal rotation muscle strengths.

A biomechanical study of bankart lesion fixation - biodegradable ArthroRivet tack vs. suture repair

Bioabsorbable fixation is commonly used in soft tissue procedures performed in the shoulder. ArthroRivettrade mark tacks (referred to as rivets here), made from a copolymer of 82% poly-L-lactic acid and 18% polyglycolic acid, were developed for the Bankart procedure. Although a previous in vivo study demonstrated favorable comparison of the fixation strength and absorption characteristics of this device with that of polyglyconate bioabsorbable tacks, there have been no published biomechanical studies of this rivet in the shoulder. Fourteen shoulders were harvested from fresh-frozen cadavers of average age 74 years (46-89). Biomechanical testing was performed by measuring the energy, or work, required to anteriorly displace the humeral head 6 mm from the glenoid. Each shoulder was tested intact, vented, and before and after repair of a simulated Bankart lesion at 0, 45, and 90 degrees of abduction with and without maximal external rotation. Overall, the average work required ranged from 54.7 N-mm to 178.27 N-mm. Although the biomechanical performance of the rivet, based on resistance to anterior displacement of the humeral head, was indistinguishable from that of the suture repair, the statistical power of the test was low due to the large variance in the cadaver specimens. The results, in general, correlated well with those of previously published studies, suggesting the suitability of the bioabsorbable rivet for use in Bankart repair.

The value of ultrasonography in the preoperative diagnostic evaluation of patients with recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation: a prospective study of 44 patients

The purpose of this study was to investigate the value of ultrasonography in the pre-operative assessment of patients with recurrent post-traumatic, anterior shoulder instability. Forty-four consecutive patients, 44 men and 12 women, with unilateral, post-traumatic, recurrent instability of the shoulder were included in the study. One experienced radiologist examined all patients, using a 5.0 or 7.5 MHz linear-array transducer, with the arm in different positions, one of which was used to provoke apprehension of the shoulder. Special attention was paid to the evaluation of the joint capsule, the anterior labrum, especially in terms of the presence of a Bankart lesion. All patients were subsequently treated surgically. After a diagnostic arthroscopy either an open or arthroscopic stabilisation of the shoulder was performed. Ultrasonography disclosed an unstable anterior labrum (equivalent to a Bankart lesion) in 36 shoulders; the lesion was verified in all 36 shoulders during arthroscopy. In three shoulders, arthroscopy disclosed an injured labrum, which had healed in an anterio-medial position on the scapular neck. In these three shoulders, ultrasonography failed to show any lesion. In five shoulders no Bankart lesion was found at arthroscopy. All these patients had increased shoulder laxity, and ultrasonography did not show any Bankart lesion. Furthermore a judgement of the joint capsule was not possible either. A bony Bankart lesion was found in four shoulders, using both arthroscopy and ultrasonography. The sensitivity of the ultrasonographic evaluation was 92%, and the specificity 100%. The positive predictive value was 100%, and the negative predictive value 63%. Ultrasonography showed a high correlation with the arthroscopic findings, with a high sensitivity and specificity. Therefore, we conclude that US can give important pre-operative information in patients with recurrent, unilateral, post-traumatic, anterior shoulder instability.

Oldie but goldie: Bristow-Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability

PURPOSE

To analyse the functional and radiological outcomes of the Bristow-Latarjet procedure in patients with recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability.

METHODS

Records of 29 patients were reviewed retrospectively. Date of first dislocation, injury mechanism, and number of recurring dislocations before and after surgery were recorded. The overall function and stability of the shoulder was evaluated.

RESULTS

24 (83%) of the glenohumeral instabilities were caused by trauma. The mean number of recurring dislocations was 8 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0-18); one patient had had 40 recurrences. No dislocation ensued postoperatively. The overall functional outcome was good, with a mean Rowe score of 90 points (95% CI, 78-100). Scores of 17 (59%) of the patients were excellent, 7 (24%) were good, 3 (10%) were fair, and 2 (7%) were poor.

CONCLUSION

The Bristow-Latarjet procedure is a good surgical treatment for recurrent anterior-inferior instability of the glenohumeral joint.

Arthroscopic compared with open repairs for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature

BACKGROUND

Both arthroscopic and open surgical repairs are utilized for the management of anterior glenohumeral instability. To determine the evidence supporting the relative effectiveness of these two approaches, we conducted a rigorous and comprehensive analysis of all reports comparing arthroscopic and open repairs.

METHODS

A systematic analysis of eighteen published or presented studies was performed to determine if there were significant differences between the two approaches with regard to recurrence (recurrent dislocation, subluxation, and/or apprehension and/or a reoperation for instability), return to work and/or sports, and Rowe scores. We also performed subgroup analysis to determine if the quality of the study or the arthroscopic technique influenced the results.

RESULTS

We identified four randomized controlled trials, ten controlled clinical trials, and four other comparative studies. Results were influenced both by the quality of the study and by the arthroscopic technique. Meta-analysis revealed that, compared with open methods, arthroscopic repairs were associated with significantly higher risks of recurrent instability (p < 0.00001, relative risk = 2.37, 95% confidence interval = 1.66 to 3.38), recurrent dislocation (p < 0.0001, relative risk = 2.74, 95% confidence interval = 1.75 to 4.28), and a reoperation (p = 0.002, relative risk = 2.32, 95% confidence interval = 1.35 to 3.99). When considered alone, arthroscopic suture anchor techniques were associated with significantly higher risks of recurrent instability (p = 0.01, relative risk = 2.25, 95% confidence interval = 1.21 to 4.17) and recurrent dislocation (p = 0.004, relative risk = 2.57, 95% confidence interval = 1.35 to 4.92) than were open methods. Arthroscopic approaches were also less effective than open methods with regard to enabling patients to return to work and/or sports (p = 0.03, relative risk = 0.87, 95% confidence interval = 0.77 to 0.99). On the other hand, analysis of the randomized clinical trials indicated that arthroscopic repairs were associated with higher Rowe scores (p = 0.002, standardized mean difference = 0.43, 95% confidence interval = 0.16 to 0.70) than were open methods. Similarly, analysis of the arthroscopic suture anchor techniques alone showed the Rowe scores to be higher (p = 0.04, standardized mean difference = 0.29, 95% confidence interval = 0.01 to 0.56) than those associated with open methods.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence indicates that arthroscopic approaches are not as effective as open approaches in preventing recurrent instability or enabling patients to return to work. Arthroscopic approaches resulted in better function as reflected by the Rowe scores in the randomized clinical trials. The study design and the arthroscopic technique had substantial effects on the results of the analysis.

Effectiveness of arthroscopic versus open surgical stabilisation for the management of traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability

BACKGROUND

Anterior instability is a frequent complication following a traumatic glenohumeral dislocation. Frequently the underlying pathology associated with recurrent instability is a Bankart lesion. Surgical correction of Bankart lesions and other associated pathology is the key to successful treatment. Open surgical glenohumeral stabilisation has been advocated as the gold standard because of consistently low postoperative recurrent instability rates. However, arthroscopic glenohumeral stabilisation could challenge open surgical repair as the gold standard treatment for traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability.

OBJECTIVES

Primary evidence that compared the effectiveness of arthroscopic versus open surgical glenohumeral stabilisation was systematically collated regarding best-practice management for adults with traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability.

SEARCH STRATEGY

A systematic search was performed using 14 databases: MEDLINE, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health (CINAHL), Allied and Complementary Medicine Database (AMED), ISI Web of Science, Expanded Academic ASAP, Proquest Medical Library, Evidence Based Medicine Reviews, Physiotherapy Evidence Database, TRIP Database, PubMed, ISI Current Contents Connect, Proquest Digital Dissertations, Open Archives Initiative Search Engine, Australian Digital Thesis Program. Studies published between January 1984 and December 2004 were included in this review. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Eligible studies were those that compared the effectiveness of arthroscopic versus open surgical stabilisation for the management of traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability, which had more than 2 years of follow up and used recurrent instability and a functional shoulder questionnaire as primary outcomes. Studies that used non-anatomical open repair techniques, patient groups that were specifically 40 years or older, or had multidirectional instability or other concomitant shoulder pathology were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two independent reviewers assessed the eligibility of each study for inclusion into the review, the study design used and its methodological quality. Where any disagreement occurred, consensus was reached by discussion with an independent researcher. Studies were assessed for homogeneity by considering populations, interventions and outcomes. Where heterogeneity was present, synthesis was undertaken in a narrative format; otherwise a meta-analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included in the review. Two were randomised controlled trials. Evidence comparing arthroscopic and open surgical glenohumeral stabilisation was of poor to fair methodological quality. Hence, the results of primary studies should be interpreted with caution. Observed clinical heterogeneity in populations and outcomes was highlighted and should be considered when interpreting the meta-analysis. Authors also used variable definitions of recurrent instability and a variety of outcome measures, which made it difficult to synthesise results. When comparable data were pooled, there were no significant differences (P > 0.05) between the arthroscopic and open groups with respect to recurrent instability rates, Rowe score, glenohumeral external rotation range and complication rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Statistically, it appears that both surgical techniques are equally effective in managing traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability. In light of the methodological quality of the included studies, it is not possible to validate arthoscopic stabilisation to match open surgical stabilisation as the gold standard treatment. Further research using multicentred randomised controlled trials with sufficient power and instability-specific questionnaires with sound psychometric properties is recommended to build on current evidence. The choice of treatment should be based on multiple factors between the clinician and the patient.

Absorbable implants for open shoulder stabilization. A 7-8-year clinical and radiographic follow-up

Eighteen consecutive patients who had recurrent, unidirectional, post-traumatic shoulder instability were included. All these patients underwent surgery using an open Bankart technique involving absorbable suture anchors. The median age at the index operation was 27 (16-50) years. One subluxation and two re-dislocations occurred during the follow-up period of 90 (80-95) months. At the 90-month control, the Rowe and Constant scores were 94 (63-100) points and 88.5 (65-100) points, respectively. The strength measurements on the index side in 90 degrees abduction revealed 8.1 (3.7-17.2) kg compared with 7.6 (2.7-17.6) kg on the contra lateral side (n.s.). The external rotation in abduction was 80 (60-95) degrees compared with 100 (70-120) degrees for the contra lateral side (p = 0.0015). Signs of minor or moderate degeneration were found in five of 18 patients (28%) on the preoperative radiographs. There was a significant continuous increase in degenerative changes during the follow-up period as seen on the seven, 33 and 90-month radiographs (p = 0.01, 0.03 and 0.01, respectively). On the 90-month radiographs, 12 of 18 patients (67%) had minor, moderate or severe degenerative changes (p = 0.0004 preoperative vs. 90 months). On the 7-month radiographs, two of 18 patients (11%) had invisible or hardly visible drill holes in conjunction with the absorbable implants. On the 90-month radiographs, 12 of 18 patients (67%) had invisible or hardly visible drill holes (p = 0.003 7 months vs. 90 months). In the long term, the method resulted in stable, well-functioning shoulders in 15 of 18 patients (83%). The stabilisation was not, however, able to prevent further increases in radiographic degenerative changes during the 7-8-year follow-up. The drill holes used for the absorbable suture anchors appeared to heal in the majority of patients during the follow-up period.

A prospective, randomized, clinical and radiographic study after arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction using 2 different types of absorbable tacks

PURPOSE

The aim of the study was to compare the clinical and radiographic results after arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction using 2 different types of absorbable implant.

TYPE OF STUDY

Randomized controlled trial.

METHODS

A randomized series of 40 patients who had recurrent, unidirectional, post-traumatic shoulder instability were included in the study. All patients underwent an arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction involving either polygluconate co-polymer (PGACP group, n = 20) or self-reinforced poly-L-lactic acid polymer (PLLA group, n = 20) tack implants. The patients underwent clinical and radiographic assessments preoperatively and at 2 years. Additional radiographic assessments were performed at 6 months.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, the study groups were comparable in terms of demographics as well as clinical parameters. One patient in each group had a redislocation (5%) during the follow-up period of 2 years. No subluxations were registered. No statistically significant differences were found between the study groups in terms of strength in abduction, range of motion, and Rowe or Constant scores. There was a significant increase in degenerative changes during the follow-up period in both study groups (P = .004). However, no significant differences in degenerative changes were registered between the study groups either preoperatively or at the 2-year follow-up. There were no significant differences in the radiographic visibility of the drill holes used for the absorbable implants between the study groups at the 6-month assessment. However, at the 2-year assessment, the radiographic visibility of the drill holes was significantly greater (P = .004) in the patients in the PLLA group than those in the PGACP group. At the 2-year assessment, no correlation was found between the appearance of the drill holes and the degenerative findings (PGACP group, rho = 0.44; PLLA group, rho = 0.42).

CONCLUSIONS

Two years after arthroscopic Bankart reconstruction using either PGA polymer or PLA polymer implants, the overall clinical results were comparable. Radiographic assessments revealed that the degenerative changes increased in both study groups during the follow-up period. Furthermore, the visibility of the drill holes on the 2-year radiographs was greater after using PLLA implants than after using PGACP implants.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Suture anchors and tacks for shoulder surgery, part II: the prevention and treatment of complications

The use of suture anchors and tacks around the shoulder requires a thorough knowledge of the proper use of the devices and how to insert them. Although typically not technically demanding, suture anchors and tacks can present unique and frustrating challenges to the patient and the surgeon. These challenges can occur whether the procedure is performed via an open or arthroscopic approach, but knowledge of the potential challenges may optimize the surgical result and prevent complications. Complications can be categorized as technique-related or device-related issues (mechanical or biologic failure). Technique-related complications include problems with the delivery systems, anchor malpositioning, and suture management issues, such as knots not sliding. Device-related complications include implant fracture, migration secondary to poor fixation, synovitis from implant degradation, and osteolysis. This review describes the prevention of these and other complications, addresses the indications or need for intervention, and suggests potential solutions when intervention is indicated.

Arthroscopic treatment of anterior shoulder instability using knotless suture anchors

PURPOSE

In this study, we evaluated the results of arthroscopic stabilization of the shoulder using knotless anchors and the lesions associated with anterior-inferior labrum avulsion.

TYPE OF STUDY

Retrospective clinical study.

METHODS

Twenty consecutive patients affected with anterior unidirectional post-traumatic shoulder instability were treated with arthroscopic reconstruction using knotless anchors. During the surgical procedure, associated lesions such as superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) (15%) and rotator interval (15%) were repaired. The patients were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 43 months.

RESULTS

Eighty percent of patients resumed sports activity without any limitation and 90% of patients were satisfied with the results of surgery. One patient (5%) had a recurrent dislocation; this patient resumed a contact sport activity despite medical advice. One patient (5%) related signs of shoulder insecurity at the extreme degree of abduction and external rotation; this patient had resumed sports activity with a moderate limitation and was the only patient who was not completely satisfied with the results of surgery. No significant difference was observed between the operated and the contralateral shoulder according to the Rowe and Constant scores. The mean loss of external rotation was 3 degrees . We did not have any cases of anchor loosening, nor did we find signs of shoulder degenerative osteoarthritis on the radiographs.

CONCLUSIONS

The knotless anchor seems to be a viable alternative for arthroscopic labrum repair, allowing a good capsular shift. Arthroscopic management of shoulder instability allows us to diagnose and treat associated lesions, thus improving the success rate of this type of surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, case series.

Arthroscopic versus open repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability: a meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to critically evaluate the literature to determine whether open or arthroscopic surgical repair for traumatic recurrent anterior shoulder instability results in a better outcome.

TYPE OF STUDY

Meta-analysis.

METHODS

The search involved clinical studies in all languages in the MEDLINE database from 1966 to October 31, 2003. The following key words were used: (1) anterior shoulder instability, (2) Bankart lesion, (3) traumatic recurrent anterior shoulder instability, and (4) arthroscopic and open Bankart repair. All abstracts were reviewed and articles were included if there was a direct clinical comparison between arthroscopic and open repair for traumatic recurrent anterior shoulder instability. These articles were manually cross-referenced for additional abstracts. The final group of articles was independently critically appraised and the following outcomes were extracted: recurrent instability, return to activity, reoperation rate, and cause of recurrence.

RESULTS

The search terms resulted in 677, 183, 68, and 51 hits respectively. From these, 18 articles were determined to be eligible for full review including 2 foreign-language articles. Cross-referencing identified 2 unpublished studies. Eleven studies were included in the final analysis: 1 randomized trial, 2 pseudo-experimental designs, 4 prospective cohorts, 3 retrospective studies, and 1 case control study. Pooled Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio for recurrent instability and return to activity were 2.04 ( P = .003; 95% confidence interval, 1.27, 3.29) and 2.85 ( P = .004; 95% confidence interval, 1.40, 5.78), respectively, in favor of the open repair.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this meta-analysis, open repair has a more favorable outcome with respect to recurrence and return to activity.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Systematic Review of Level III (and II/I) Studies.

Open Bankart repair versus arthroscopic repair with transglenoid sutures or bioabsorbable tacks for Recurrent Anterior instability of the shoulder: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

In published comparative studies, it remains unknown if arthroscopic techniques for performing Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability equal the success of open repair.

HYPOTHESIS

The current literature supports a lower rate of recurrent instability after open Bankart repair compared to arthroscopic repair with bioabsorbable tacks or transglenoid sutures.

STUDY DESIGN

Meta-analysis.

METHODS

A Medline search identified all randomized controlled trials or cohort studies that directly compared open repair to arthroscopic techniques of Bankart repair for traumatic, unilateral, recurrent anterior instability. Data collected from each study included patient demographics, surgical technique, rehabilitation, outcome, and complications.

RESULTS

Six studies met all inclusion criteria. There were 172 patients in the arthroscopic group (90 patients with transglenoid sutures, 77 patients with arthroscopic tacks, and 5 patients with suture anchors) and 156 patients in the open group. The groups were similar in demographic characteristics. When comparing the arthroscopic to the open group, there was a significantly higher rate of recurrent dislocation (12.6% vs 3.4%; P = .01) and total recurrence (recurrent dislocation or subluxation) (20.3% vs 10.3%; P = .01). In addition, there was a higher proportion of patients with an excellent or good postoperative Rowe score in the open group (88%) than in the arthroscopic group (71%) (P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic Bankart repair using transglenoid sutures or bioabsorbable tacks results in a higher rate of recurrence of instability compared to open techniques. Studies comparing open repair to newer arthroscopic techniques using suture anchor fixation and capsular plication are necessary.

Arthroscopic versus open treatment of Bankart lesion of the shoulder: a prospective randomized study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the results of arthroscopic and open repair of isolated Bankart lesions of the shoulder using metallic suture anchors.

TYPE OF STUDY

Prospective randomized clinical study.

METHODS

Sixty patients with traumatic anterior shoulder instability underwent a surgical repair of an isolated Bankart lesion. The patients were divided into 2 groups of 30 patients each. In group 1, an arthroscopic repair was performed, and in group 2, an open procedure was performed. The groups were homogeneous for gender, age, dominance, number of dislocations, time elapsed between first dislocation and surgery, and pathologic findings. In all cases of both groups, the lesion was repaired using metallic suture anchors carrying nonabsorbable braided sutures. Postoperative rehabilitation was the same for the 2 groups. Two years' follow-up evaluation included Constant and Rowe shoulder scores. Statistical analysis of data was performed using an unpaired t test (significance for P <.05).

RESULTS

No recurrence of dislocation of the involved shoulder has been reported in either group. Follow-up Constant and Rowe scores of the 2 groups were not significantly different. The only significant difference seen between the 2 groups was for range of motion evaluation with the Constant score. The mean value for group 1 (39.6 +/- 0.8) was significantly greater (P =.017) than that for group 2 (37.8 +/- 2.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic repair with suture anchors is an effective surgical technique for the treatment of an isolated Bankart lesion. Open repair does not offer a significantly better 2-year result in terms of stability, and furthermore, can negatively affect the recovery of full range of motion of the shoulder.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level I.

Revisiting the open Bankart experience: a four- to nine-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

The open Bankart technique for posttraumatic recurrent anterior instability has become the procedure of choice for patients who do not respond to nonoperative treatment.

HYPOTHESIS

The open Bankart procedure renders stable and well-functioning shoulders in the long term in a large proportion of patients.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective follow-up study with independent reexaminers.

METHODS

Fifty-four patients (54 shoulders) with symptomatic, posttraumatic, recurrent anterior shoulder instability underwent an open Bankart reconstruction procedure with suture anchors. All of the patients had a Bankart lesion. Forty-seven patients (87%) were reexamined by independent observers at a mean follow-up period of 69 months (range, 48 to 114).

RESULTS

The recurrence rate, including both dislocations and subluxations, was 17% (8 of 47). The median Rowe score was 90 points (range, 24 to 100) at the follow-up, and the median Constant score was 88.5 points (range, 41 to 100). External rotation in abduction was a median of 90 degrees (range, 25 degrees to 125 degrees ) in the involved shoulders, as compared with 97.5 degrees (80 degrees to 125 degrees ) in the noninjured shoulders (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that, in the long term, the open Bankart procedure resulted in an unexpectedly high number of patients with failure in terms of stability. These results emphasize the importance of performing long-term follow-up studies after surgical reconstruction for unidirectional, posttraumatic, anterior shoulder instability using any type of technique.

Comparison of open and arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent shoulder dislocation in patients with a Bankart lesion

We performed a prospective study of 117 patients (119 shoulders) with symptomatic, recurrent anterior posttraumatic shoulder instability to compare open versus arthroscopic reconstruction. Arthroscopic reconstructions (N = 66) were performed using bioabsorbable tacks (Suretac fixators), whereas open reconstructions (N = 53) were performed with suture anchors. All of the patients had a Bankart lesion. Independent observers examined 108 of the 119 shoulders (91%) at a median follow-up period of 28 months (range, 24 to 63) for the arthroscopic group and 36 months (range, 24 to 63) for the open group. The recurrence rate, including both dislocations and subluxations, was 9 of 60 (15%) in the arthroscopic group, compared with 5 of 48 (10%) in the open group. At follow-up, the Rowe score was 93 points (range, 39 to 100) and the Constant score was 91 points (range, 56 to 100) in the arthroscopic group, compared with 89 points (range, 53 to 100 and 57 to 100 for the Rowe and Constant scores, respectively) for both scores in the open group. The only significant difference was in external rotation in abduction, which was 90 degrees (range, 50 degrees to 135 degrees) in the arthroscopic group and 80 degrees (range, 25 degrees to 115 degrees) in the open group. Both methods produced stable and well-functioning shoulders in the majority of patients.

Principles of development and use of absorbable internal fixation

Absorbable internal fixation implants, by virtue of their temporary in situ residence and variable load sharing with the healing tissues, have the potential to yield a clinical outcome that approaches the native state. Despite the growing availability and acceptance of absorbable fixation, however, many surgeons continue to rely upon metal fixation for their patients, due, in part, to unfamiliarity with the technology. Although many of the principles of metallic internal fixation also apply to absorbable internal fixation, significant differences exist as well. This paper presents basic background in absorbable technology and proposes a set of principles that may help govern the development and use of absorbable fixation devices in clinical practice.