Rotator interval closure after arthroscopic capsulolabral repair: a technical variation

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

PURPOSE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Controversies In The Surgical Management Of Shoulder Instability: Associated Soft Tissue Procedures

Background:

The glenohumeral joint is a ball-and-socket joint that is inherently unstable and thus, susceptible to dislocation. The traditional and most common anatomic finding is the Bankart lesion (anterior-inferior capsule labral complex avulsion), but there is a wide variety of anatomic alterations that can cause shoulder instability or may be present as a concomitant injury or in combination, including bone loss (glenoid or humeral head), complex capsule-labral tears, rotator cuff tears, Kim´s lesions (injuries to the posterior-inferior labrum) and rotator interval pathology.

Methods:

A review of articles related to shoulder anatomy and soft tissue procedures that are performed during shoulder instability arthroscopic management was conducted by querying the Pubmed database and conclusions and controversies regarding this injury were exposed.

Results:

Due to the complex anatomy of the shoulder and the large range of movement of this joint, a wide variety of anatomic injuries and conditions can lead to shoulder instability, specially present in young population. Recognizing and treating all of them including Bankart repair, capsule-labral plicatures, SLAP repair, circumferential approach to pan-labral lesions, rotator interval closure, rotator cuff injuries and HAGL lesion repair is crucial to achieve the goal of a stable, full range of movement and not painful joint.

Conclusion:

Physicians must be familiarized with all the lesions involved in shoulder instability, and should be able to recognize and subsequently treat them to achieve the goal of a stable non-painful shoulder. Unrecognized or not treated lesions may result in recurrence of instability episodes and pain while overuse of some of the techniques previously described can lead to stiffness, thus the importance of an accurate diagnosis and treatment when facing a shoulder instability.

Arthroscopic Stabilization After a First-Time Dislocation: Collision Versus Contact Athletes

BACKGROUND

There is no universally accepted definition of "contact" or "collision" sports in the literature. The few available studies evaluating contact and collision sports consider them to be synonymous. However, athletes in collision sports purposely hit or collide with each other or with inanimate objects with greater force and frequency than in contact sports, which could jeopardize functional outcomes.

PURPOSE

To compare the functional outcomes, return to sports, and recurrences in a series of contact and collision athletes with a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation treated using arthroscopic stabilization with suture anchors.

STUDY DESIGN

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

A total of 56 athletes were enrolled in this study, including 22 contact athletes and 34 collision athletes. All athletes underwent arthroscopic shoulder stabilization using suture anchors. Range of motion, the Rowe score, a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS) were used to assess functional outcomes. Return to sports and recurrences were also evaluated.

RESULTS

The mean age at the time of surgery was 22.2 years, and the mean follow-up was 62.4 months (range, 36-94 months). No significant difference in shoulder motion was found between preoperative and postoperative results or between the contact and collision groups. The Rowe, VAS, and ASOSS scores showed statistical improvement in both groups after surgery (P = .001). Patients in the contact group returned to sports significantly faster than those in the collision group (5.2 vs 6.9 months, respectively; P = .01). In all, 43 athletes (76.8%) returned to near-preinjury sports activity levels (≥90% recovery) after surgery: 86.4% of patients in the contact group and 70.6% in the collision group (P = .04). The total recurrence rate was 8.9%. There were 5 recurrences (14.7%) in the collision group and no recurrences in the contact group (P < .01).

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic stabilization for anterior instability of the shoulder is a reliable procedure with respect to shoulder function, range of motion, and postoperative return to sports in contact and collision athletes. Compared with the contact group (0%), the collision group yielded a higher failure rate (14.7%). Moreover, patients in the contact group returned significantly faster (5.2 vs 6.9 months, respectively) and to and more returned to preinjury or near-preinjury activity levels (86.4% vs 70.6% of patients, respectively) than patients in the collision group.

The Rotator Interval of the Shoulder: Implications in the Treatment of Shoulder Instability

Biomechanical studies have shown that repair or plication of rotator interval (RI) ligamentous and capsular structures decreases glenohumeral joint laxity in various directions. Clinical outcomes studies have reported successful outcomes after repair or plication of these structures in patients undergoing shoulder stabilization procedures. Recent studies describing arthroscopic techniques to address these structures have intensified the debate over the potential benefit of these procedures as well as highlighted the differences between open and arthroscopic RI procedures. The purposes of this study were to review the structures of the RI and their contribution to shoulder instability, to discuss the biomechanical and clinical effects of repair or plication of rotator interval structures, and to describe the various surgical techniques used for these procedures and outcomes.

Identification and treatment of existing copathology in anterior shoulder instability repair

Recurrent anterior instability is a common finding after traumatic glenohumeral dislocation in the young, athletic patient population. A variety of concomitant pathologies may be present in addition to the classic Bankart lesion, including glenoid bone loss; humeral head bone loss; rotator interval pathology; complex/large capsular injuries including humeral avulsions of the glenohumeral ligaments (HAGL lesions), SLAP tears, near circumferential labral tears, and anterior labral periosteal sleeve avulsions (ALPSA lesions); and rotator cuff tears. Normal anatomic variations masquerading as pathology also may be present. Recognition and treatment of these associated pathologies are necessary to improve function and symptoms of pain and to confer anterior shoulder stability. This review will focus on the history, physical examination findings, imaging findings, and recommended treatment options for common sources of copathology in anterior shoulder instability repair.

Arthroscopic inferior capsular shift: long-term follow-up

BACKGROUND

Neer and Foster's open inferior capsular shift to treat acquired cases of anteroinferior shoulder instability due to an overstretched and redundant capsule is described with good results. Recently, new arthroscopic techniques were described to manage this problem.

PURPOSE

To assess the results of a new arthroscopic reinforced inferior capsular shift technique based on Neer and Foster's open inferior capsular shift.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

This new technique of arthroscopic inferior capsular shift was used to treat 108 patients with anteroinferior shoulder instability due to capsular redundancy as confirmed clinically and during arthroscopy. It reduces the size of the redundant capsular pouch and reinforces the thinned-out capsule. Intraoperatively, patients with associated labral tears (n = 25) and patients with open rotator intervals (n = 8) were excluded, and only 75 patients with pure capsular redundancy were included in this study.

RESULTS

Patients were followed for a minimum of 7 years. All 75 patients had patulous and redundant capsules. Three patients (4.0%) had a redislocation after a significant trauma. The range of motion preoperatively was 168.1° ± 7.5° in forward elevation, 64.7° ± 7.9° in external rotation, and T5.0 ± T0.8 in internal rotation. Postoperatively, it was 167.2° ± 5.8° in forward elevation, 59.95° ± 4.9° in external rotation, and T7.1 ± T1.0 in internal rotation. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) (70.76 to 97.53; P < .001), Constant (90.02 to 99.24; P < .001), and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) (21.97 to 33.84; P < .001) scores demonstrated significant improvement postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

This novel technique of arthroscopic capsular shift addresses the problem of capsular redundancy present in many cases of anteroinferior shoulder instability. It tries to achieve a capsular shift based on the principles of Neer. The long-term results are very good.

Arthroscopic rotator interval closure in shoulder instability repair: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) is a standard treatment for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Young age, hyperlaxity, loss of bone stock and multidirectional or voluntary type of instability are all associated with failure of this procedure. Rotator interval laxity is associated with shoulder instability, whereas rotator interval closure increases humeral head stability and reduces shoulder range of motion.

METHODS

The records of patients with recurrent anterior shoulder dislocations who underwent ABR with or without arthroscopic rotator interval closure (ARIC) in our department between 1999 and 2007 were reviewed. Rates of recurrent dislocation or symptomatic subluxation as well as functional outcome were evaluated using Walch-Dupley score.

RESULTS

Three (8.1%) of the 37 ABR+ARIC patients (age 19-44 years, 32 males) had re-dislocated their shoulder at 42±16 months following the procedure, all of which had systemic joint hyperlaxity. Six (13%) of the 46 ABR patients (age 19-39 years, 42 males) had re-dislocated their shoulder at 13±14 months, three of which had systemic joint hyperlaxity and dislocated their shoulder within 1 year following the operation. Systemic joint hyperlaxity (28% of ABR and 41% of ABR+ARIC patients) was significantly associated with recurrent dislocation and poor functional outcome. ABR+ARIC patients had slightly more limited range of motion with similar good and excellent functional results (75%) at final follow up time.

CONCLUSIONS

Systemic joint hyperlaxity is a risk factor for failure of ABR. When ARIC is performed in combination with ABR, it may have an additive effect on shoulder stability.

Rotator interval dimensions in different shoulder arthroscopy positions: a cadaveric study

The rotator interval was defined as a triangular structure, where the base of the triangle was the coracoid base, the upper border was the anterior margin of the supraspinatus, and the lower border was the superior margin of the subscapularis muscle-tendon unit. We evaluated the rotator interval dimensions in 15 shoulders from 10 lightly embalmed adult cadavers in 3 shoulder arthroscopy positions: 0 degrees of abduction and 30 degrees of flexion (beach chair [BC]), 45 degrees of abduction and 30 degrees of flexion (lateral decubitus 1), and 70 degrees of abduction and 30 degrees of flexion (lateral decubitus 2). In each shoulder position, measurements were made in neutral rotation (NR), 45 degrees of external rotation (ER), and 45 degrees of internal rotation (IR). The coracoid base lengthened with IR in all positions and shortened in ER in the lateral decubitus position but not in the BC position. Abduction significantly lengthened the coracoid base, which was shortest in the BC position with ER (24 +/- 4 mm) and longest in the lateral decubitus 2 position with IR (33 +/- 5 mm). The coracoid base, where sutures are placed during plication of the interval, was observed to lengthen and, therefore, loosen with IR and abduction. To prevent postoperative ER restriction, plication should be made in ER or neutral rotation when operating in the BC position and the degree of abduction should be decreased and the shoulder held in ER when operating in the lateral decubitus position.