Clinical Outcomes and Recurrence Rates After Arthroscopic Stabilization Procedures in Young Patients With a Glenoid Bone Erosion: A Comparative Study Between Glenoid Erosion More and Less Than 20

Anatomic risk factors for arthroscopic Bankart repair failure: A case-control study comparing failure and non-failure groups in an Asian population

Introduction

Post-arthroscopic Bankart repair failure/re-dislocation rates are influenced by several risk factors, including anatomic defects. There is limited evidence on the role of anatomic defects, especially for Hill-Sachs size in on-track lesions. This study aimed to assess glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs lesion and labral tear size and evaluate their contribution to post-operative instability after a primary repair.

Material and methods

Across 169 patients with on-track Bankart lesions who underwent primary arthroscopic Bankart repair from 2010 to 2015, this study matched 14 failure with 14 non-failure cases based on age/gender. Patient demographics, pre-operative radiological parameters (including size of glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs lesion) and labral tear size were compared between the failure and non-failure groups.

Result

All patients were male with a mean age of 21.01 ± 4.97. Significantly greater glenoid bone loss (p = 0.024) and labral tear size (p = 0.039) were found in the failure group. However, there was no significant difference in mean volume of Hill-Sachs lesion between the two groups (p = 0.739).

Conclusion

Extensive glenoid bone loss and labral tears are risk factors for post-arthroscopic Bankart failure. However, the size of Hill-Sachs lesion is not a risk factor for failure, in a specific group of on-track Hill-Sachs lesions.

Level of evidence

Retrospective Study, Level IV.

Arthroscopic double-row bridge fixation provided satisfactory shoulder functional restoration with high union rate for acute anterior glenoid fracture

PURPOSE

To introduce a novel surgical technique for arthroscopic reduction and double-row bridge fixation using trans-subscapularis tendon portal for anterior glenoid fracture and to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 22 patients who underwent arthroscopic reduction and double-row bridge fixation for an acute anterior glenoid fracture were retrospectively evaluated. Arthroscopic surgery was performed using four portals including a trans-subscapularis tendon portal. All patients underwent 3D-CT preoperatively and one day and one year postoperatively to evaluate the fracture fragment size, reduction status, and presence of fracture union. To evaluate the degree of fragment displacement, articular step-off and medial fracture gap were measured using 3D-CT. Clinical outcomes were assessed based on the ASES and Constant scores. Postoperative glenohumeral joint arthritis was evaluated using plain radiographs with the Samilson and Prieto classification.

RESULTS

The average preoperative fracture fragment size was 25.9 ± 5.6%. Articular step-off (preoperative: 6.0 ± 3.3 mm, postoperative one day: 1.1 ± 1.6 mm, P < 0.001) and medial fracture gap (preoperative: 5.2 ± 2.6 mm, postoperative one day: 1.9 ± 2.3 mm, P < 0.001) were improved after surgery. On the postoperative one year 3D-CT, 20 patients achieved complete fracture union, and two patients showed partial union. Postoperative glenohumeral joint arthritis was observed in four patients. At the last visit, the ASES score was 91.8 ± 7.0 and the Constant score was 91.6 ± 7.0.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic reduction and double-row bridge fixation using a trans-subscapularis tendon portal for acute anterior glenoid fracture achieved satisfactory clinical outcomes and anatomical reduction as demonstrated by a low degree of articular step-off and medial fracture gap.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

[Shoulder instability: review of current concepts of diagnosis and treatment]

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review of modern literature data on the modern approaches in diagnosis and treatment of shoulder instability.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Searching for literature data was performed using the Pubmed and Google Scholar databases.

RESULTS

The authors analyzed the results of conservative treatment of patients with shoulder instability and emphasized higher risk of instability recurrence, degeneration of anatomical structures and functional impairment in these patients. Surgery is advisable to restore shoulder stability and normalize its function. Several methods for stabilizing the shoulder have been proposed.

The approaches to diagnosis and treatment of shoulder instability have been updated.

CONCLUSION

Successful treatment of shoulder instability is based on qualitative and complete assessment of soft tissues and bone structures. An individual approach considering bone tissue deficiency and individual needs of the patient is required.

High Variability of the Definition of Recurrent Glenohumeral Instability: An Analysis of the Current Literature by a Systematic Review

Purpose

To determine the definitions for recurrence used in the literature, assess the consensus in using these definitions, and determine the impact of these definitions on recurrence rates.

Methods

A literature search was performed in PubMed and EMBASE including studies from 2000 to 2020 reporting on recurrence rates after anterior arthroscopic shoulder instability surgery. Dislocation, apprehension, subluxation and recurrence rates were compared.

Results

Ninety-one studies were included. In 68% of the eligible studies, recurrence rates are not well defined. Thirty (33%) studies did not report on dislocations, 45 (49%) did not report on subluxations, and 58 (64%) did not report on apprehension. Seventeen different definitions for recurrence of instability, 4 definitions of dislocations, and 8 definitions of subluxation were used.

Conclusion

Recurrence rates are poorly specified and likely underreported in the literature, hampering comparison with results of other studies. This highlights the need for a consensus on definition of recurrence across shoulder instability studies. We recommend not using the definition recurrence of instability anymore. We endorse defining dislocations as a radiographically confirmed dislocation or a dislocation that is manually reduced, subluxations as the feeling of a dislocation that can be (spontaneously) reduced without the need for a radiographically confirmed dislocation, and a positive apprehension sign as fear of imminent dislocation when placing the arm in abduction and external rotation during physical examination. Reporting on the events resulting in a dislocation or subluxation aids in making an estimation of the severity of instability.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, systematic review.

Effects of Glenoid and Humeral Bone Defects on Recurrent Anterior Instability of the Shoulder

For proper treatment of recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder with a bone defect, the defect size should be assessed preoperatively with three-dimensional computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging. In general, the risk of postoperative recurrence of instability is estimated on the basis of preoperative imaging of bipolar bone defects: more than 20%–25% glenoid bone loss and off-track Hill-Sachs lesions have been considered risk factors for recurrence. In patients with a glenoid bone defect more than 20%–25%, a bone graft procedure, such as the Latarjet procedure, is preferred regardless of the glenoid track concept, because compared with arthroscopic stabilization procedure, it provides greater postoperative stability. For patients with a borderline glenoid bone defect (around 20%), surgeons should discuss surgical options with the patients, considering their demand and physical activity level. In addition, the surgeon should take care to prevent postoperative instability and long-term complications. Arthroscopic soft-tissue reconstruction including labral repair and capsular plication combined with the additional remplissage procedure is an anatomical procedure and could be considered as one of the primary treatment methods for patients with glenoid bone defects around 20%. Therefore, treatment strategies for recurrent anterior shoulder instability combined with bone defects should be determined more flexibly on the basis of the patient's individual condition.

Preoperative Diagnostic Rates and Clinical Outcomes After Arthroscopic Stabilization Procedures for Panlabral Tear of the Glenohumeral Joint

PURPOSE

To evaluate preoperative diagnostic rates for panlabral tear using imaging studies or physical examinations and to evaluate clinical outcomes after arthroscopic stabilization procedures with 2 different patient surgical positions.

METHODS

Patients who underwent arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent anterior shoulder instability with panlabral tear and were followed up for at least 2 years were included. A panlabral tear was defined as labral tear involving at least 270° of the glenoid surface on arthroscopic examination. All patients underwent preoperative magnetic resonance (MR) imaging or MR arthrography and physical examinations including anterior apprehension, posterior jerk, and compressive rotation tests. The clinical outcomes were assessed by the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Rowe, and visual analog scale for pain scores, and recurrence rate. According to patient position during surgery, patients were divided into group I (beach chair position) and group II (lateral decubitus position).

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients (24 in group I and 24 in group II) were enrolled. Preoperative MR imaging or MR arthrography detected only 18.8% of panlabral tears. No patient had positive findings on all 3 physical examination tests for panlabral tear. Clinical outcomes were significantly improved after operation (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score: 58.4 ± 6.2 preoperatively, 85.2 ± 6.4 at the final, P < .001; Rowe score: 49.0 ± 12.2 preoperatively, 86.8 ± 9.1 at the final, P < .001) and postoperative recurrence was occurred in 1patient (2%). No differences were found in clinical outcomes and recurrence rate (4% vs 0%) according to patient positioning, despite the larger number of suture anchors used in group II (6.2 ± 1.5 in group I, 7.6 ± 1.1 in group II, P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

It remained difficult to preoperatively diagnose panlabral tear using standard physical examinations and imaging studies. Nevertheless, arthroscopic stabilization procedures for patients with panlabral tear provided satisfactory clinical outcomes with a low recurrence rate. Patient position during surgery did not alter clinical outcomes and recurrence rate, despite the use of different numbers of suture anchors.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, Retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

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

BACKGROUND

After arthroscopic stabilization procedures for recurrent anterior shoulder instability, patients are not always satisfied with their shoulder, even when the operation successfully restored stability. The aim of this study was to evaluate the factors associated with subjective patient dissatisfaction after arthroscopic stabilization procedures for recurrent anterior shoulder instability and to compare these factors with those associated with objective surgical failure.

METHODS

A total of 195 patients who underwent an arthroscopic stabilization procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability were included in this study. At the 2-year postoperative visit, subjective patient dissatisfaction was assessed with a 15-point scale. Objective surgical failure was defined as postoperative dislocation or subluxation events requiring revision surgery. Several factors, including age at the first dislocation, age at the time of the operation, presence of an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, width of the Hill-Sachs lesion, size of the glenoid bone defect, and number of instability events, were recorded. Multivariable linear regression analysis and multivariable logistic regression analysis were performed using a backward stepwise procedure as the variable selection method.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients (7.7%) had recurrent instability requiring revision surgery. In the group of 180 patients without surgical failure, the width of the Hill-Sachs lesion (regression coefficient: 0.052, p = 0.011) and number of instability events (regression coefficient: 0.103, p = 0.029) were positively correlated with subjective patient dissatisfaction, whereas concomitant repair of a SLAP (superior labrum anterior-posterior) lesion showed negative correlation (regression coefficient: -0.926, p = 0.004). In the total cohort of patients, objective surgical failure was correlated with the age at the time of the operation (odds ratio [OR]: 0.851, p = 0.042), size of the glenoid bone defect (OR: 1.172, p < 0.001), and number of instability events (OR: 1.147, p = 0.048). Other variables, including an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion or a concomitant remplissage procedure, were not correlated with subjective patient dissatisfaction or objective surgical failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Factors related to subjective patient dissatisfaction differed from those related to objective surgical failure. For a better understanding of the clinical outcomes after surgery, surgeons should assess the factors that correlate with subjective patient dissatisfaction and objective surgical failure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Editorial Commentary: Arthroscopic Latarjet: Is It Ready for Prime Time?

Latarjet coracoid transfer has traditionally been performed utilizing an open approach in patients with recurrent instability and significant glenoid bone (i.e. >20%). Recent literature has examined clinical outcomes after arthroscopic Latarjet using suture button fixation, demonstrating low recurrence and complication rates when performed by an experienced senior surgeon. Despite demonstrating specific technical and outcome advantages, the arthroscopic approach has previously been shown to be limited by a steep learning curve and complications rates unaffected by surgical experience. These limitations should be addressed prior to widespread adoption.

Editorial Commentary: Using Bankart "Plus" Techniques to Tackle Anterior Shoulder Instability With Bone Loss: Can Newer Arthroscopic Adjuncts Provide Long-Term Stability?

The debate between arthroscopic Bankart repair versus the Latarjet technique for patients with anterior shoulder instability largely hinges on the argument between redislocation rate versus complication rate. This difference becomes more apparent when considering patients with bone loss. We believe that Bankart "plus" techniques, including arthroscopic anatomic bone grafting, create a stable shoulder with a low instability recurrence rate, while maintaining a complication rate comparable to the Bankart repair.