Anterior shoulder instability arthroscopic treatment outcomes measures: the WOSI correlates with the Walch-Duplay score

Screw Fixation for the Latarjet Procedure May Reduce Risk of Recurrent Instability but Increases Reoperation Rate Compared to Suture-Button Fixation: A Systematic Review

PURPOSE

To perform a systematic review to compare clinical outcomes, complications, and reoperation rates of patients undergoing the Latarjet procedure with screw vs suture-button fixation.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify clinical studies directly comparing screw vs suture-button fixation for the Latarjet procedure. The search terms used were shoulder screw suture button. Patients were evaluated based on reoperation rate, complication rate, recurrent instability, radiologic outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes. Graft and screw position were assessed via computed tomography.

RESULTS

Seven studies (1 Level II, 6 Level III) met inclusion criteria, with 845 patients undergoing the Latarjet procedure with screw fixation (screw group) and 279 patients with suture-button fixation (suture-button group). Mean patient age ranged from 21.2 to 29.6 years. Mean follow-up time ranged from 6.0 to 40.8 months. The recurrent instability rate ranged from 0% to 2.5% in the screw group and 0% to 8.3% in the suture-button group. The reoperation rate ranged from 0% to 7.7% in the screw group compared to 0% to 1.9% in the suture-button group. One study reported significantly lower visual analog scale pain scores in the suture-button group compared with the screw group (1.5 vs 1.2, P = .003). No other studies reported significant differences in any patient-reported outcomes. There was no significant difference in horizontal or vertical graft position, graft union rate, or complication rate between groups in any study.

CONCLUSIONS

The Latarjet procedure with screw fixation may result in a lower risk of recurrent instability compared to suture-button fixation, although screw fixation may also have a higher reoperation rate due to hardware-related complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Infraspinatus function impairment after arthroscopic Bankart repair with Hill Sachs remplissage. Isokinetic, functional, and radiographic analysis

PURPOSE

Arthroscopic Bankart repair with Hill Sachs remplissage (BHSR) is an option for anterior shoulder instability with humeral defect. Our hypothesis was that infraspinatus capsulo-tenodesis is an effective solution, with good clinical results and no consequences on shoulder strength and ranges of motion.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective case-control study involving 22 patients operated with arthroscopic BHSR. We compared isokinetic evaluation of both shoulders using a dynanometer in concentric, eccentric force and endurance. Ranges of motion were measured using a goniometer and compared to the contralateral unaffected side. Functional assessment included Constant, Rowe, Walch and Duplay and WOSI scores. Healing and fatty degeneration were analyzed with magnetic resonance imaging.

RESULTS

At mean 37.2 months follow-up, 21 patients (95.4%) were satisfied or very satisfied with the intervention. Range of motion in external rotation of the affected side decreased by 10.8° in adduction and 6° at 90° of abduction (p<0.05). Deficit in external rotation strength of the affected side greater than 15% was found in all isokinetic tests (p<0.05). Walch and Duplay, Rowe, WOSI and adjusted Constant average scores were respectively 71.05±14.1 (40-90), 67.63±19.7 (15-100), 34.6%±19.9 (8.43-76.23) and 69.8±13.57 (36.7-101). Postoperative MRI showed good capsulo-tenodesis healing without infraspinatus muscle fatty degeneration.

CONCLUSION

Arthroscopic BHSR provides satisfactory functional outcomes but significant infraspinatus functional impairments in both strength and ranges of motion in external rotation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; case-control study.

Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability Treated Using the Arthroscopic Bankart-Latarjet Technique: Experience of a Peripheral Hospital

The arthroscopic Bankart-Latarjet procedure is used in the surgical management of anterior shoulder instability. This technique is mainly performed in referral centers due to its high technicity. This study aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes in a peripheral hospital center. This is a retrospective study of patients treated for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The clinical scores (Walch-Duplay, Rowe, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI)) were assessed preoperatively and at 12 months after surgery. The consolidation and the position of the bone block were evaluated at 6 months using a CT scan. Between 2016 and 2020, 40 patients had been operated on (mean age: 28.5 ± 7.9 years). During a mean follow-up of 29.5 ± 11.6 months, we noted only one complication, a case of fracture of the callus of a consolidated bone block. No recurrence of instability was recorded. The Walch-Duplay score increased from 17.8 to 94.6, the Rowe score from 24.9 to 96.8, and the WOSI score decreased from 52.1% to 6.9%. The bone block was consolidated in 35 patients (87.5%), and a flush position with the anterior edge of the glenoid was noted for all patients. At one year, 67.0% of the patients practicing sport had returned to sports. The arthroscopic Bankart-Latarjet technique was a reliable procedure in the hands of an experienced shoulder surgeon, even in a peripheral hospital center.

Open Versus Arthroscopic Latarjet for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

The open Latarjet (OL) procedure and arthroscopic Latarjet (AL) procedure are able to treat recurrent anterior shoulder instability (RASI) with high success rates.

Purpose

To evaluate the clinical efficacy and postoperative revisions and complications between the OL and AL procedures in the treatment of RASI.

Study Design

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched to retrieve and include cohort studies comparing the OL and AL procedures for RASI. Clinical outcomes were compared, and results were reported as odds ratios (ORs) or mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs.

Results

Eleven clinical trials with 1217 patients were included. There were no differences between the procedures in pain score, Rowe score, Walch-Duplay score, external rotation, persistent apprehension, instability, recurrence, revisions attributed to recurrent instability, overall complications, wound infection, hematoma, graft complications, screw-related complications, or osteoarthritis. When compared with the OL procedure, the AL procedure had a significantly lower nonunion rate (OR, 9.92; 95% CI, 1.71 to 57.71; P = .01); however, the AL procedure had a longer operation time (MD, -24.49; 95% CI, -48.44 to -0.54; P = .05), lower Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score (MD, 97.27; 95% CI, 21.91 to 172.63; P = .01), higher revision rate (OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.16 to 0.95; P = .04), and greater screw deviation (MD, -6.41; 95% CI, -10.25 to -2.57; P = .001).

Conclusion

For most outcome measures, no difference was seen between the OL and AL procedures. The AL procedure had a lower Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score and a higher revision rate and appeared to have a significant learning curve. However, the AL procedure resulted in a lower nonunion rate.

A new self-assessment tool following shoulder stabilization surgery, the auto-Walch and auto-Rowe questionnaires

PURPOSE

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS) are increasingly used for patient evaluation, as well as for scientific research. Few are used for practical purposes in the clinical setting, and few are reliable enough to allow proper feedback to physicians. Two of the most commonly used assessment tools in shoulder instability are the Walch-Duplay and the Rowe scores. The aim of this study was to evaluate the validity of self-administered versions of the Walch-Duplay and Rowe scores following shoulder stabilization procedure.

METHODS

Between the months of May and December 2021, all patients who were followed in one of six institutions for shoulder instability were included. Patients were required to anonymously fill a self-administered version of Walch-Duplay and Rowe score. The classic scores were measured by the surgeon. Correlations between self-assessment and physician-assessment were then recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 106 patients were evaluated during the study period. Using the Spearman coefficient for correlation, a strong correlation (r > 0.5) was found between the results of the self-administered questionnaire and the surgeon-measured score. The difference between surgeon- and patient-administered questionnaires was non-significant.

CONCLUSION

The self-administered version of the Walch-Duplay and Rowe questionnaires can reliably be used in the clinical setting for post-operative follow-up of patients undergoing shoulder stabilization procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Glenoid bone augmentation: a contemporary and comprehensive systematic review of open procedures

Introduction

There is a trend towards arthroscopically treating shoulder instability with glenoid deficiency. Despite this, there remains the option for treatment through an open technique. Multiple bone augmentation options are available for recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

Objective

To provide a systematic review of recent studies for recurrent anterior shoulder instability necessitating glenoid bone augmentation specifically through open procedures using coracoid bone or free bone blocks [iliac crest bone autograft/allograft or distal tibia allograft (DTA)].

Methods

PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for studies reporting open glenoid bone augmentation procedures with iliac crest, tibia, or coracoid bones within 10 years. Extracted data included study/patient characteristics, techniques, prior surgeries, prior dislocations, radiographic findings, range of motion (ROM), recurrent instability, patient-reported outcomes, and complications.

Results

92 met inclusion criteria (5693 total patients). Six were studies of iliac crest bone, four of DTA, and 84 using the coracoid bone. 29 studies measured postoperative arthritis showing no development or mild arthritis. 26 studies reported postoperative graft position. 62 studies reported ROM noting decline in internal/external rotation. 87 studies measured postoperative instability with low rates. Rowe Scores with noted improvement across 31/59 (52.5%) studies were seen. Common post operative complications included infection, hematoma, graft fracture, nerve injury, pain, and screw-related irritation.

Conclusion

Despite a trend towards arthroscopic management of recurrent anterior shoulder instability with glenoid deficiency, open procedures continue to provide satisfactory outcomes. Additionally, studies have demonstrated safe and efficacious use of free bone block graft options in the primary and revision setting.

Posterior glenoid bone block transfer for posterior shoulder instability: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature and evaluate patient-reported outcomes and complication/revision rates of bone block augmentation in the treatment of posterior shoulder instability (PSI).

METHODS

PubMed was searched according to PRIMSA guidelines to find clinical studies evaluating patient-reported outcomes, revision, and complication rates in posterior bone block for PSI. A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library was performed based on the PRISMA guidelines. Clinical studies reporting on the complications following posterior bone block were included.

RESULTS

Overall, 11 studies (level of evidence [LOE] III: 2, LOE IV: 9) met inclusion criteria, with 225 shoulders. Recurrent instability after the posterior bone block was found to be 9.8%. The overall complication rate was 13.8%, with 0.89% having graft complications, 11.1% having hardware complications, 0.4% having wound complications, 0.4% having nerve complications, and 0.89% having other complications. Residual pain was found in 11.6% of shoulders operated on. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated most commonly by Rowe (81.4%), Constant (84.6%), and Walch-Duplay scores (81.6%).

CONCLUSION

There is a moderate rate of recurrence following posterior bone block for PSI. However, the patient-reported outcomes are high despite there being commonly reported persistent shoulder pain postoperatively.

Early Follow-Up of Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure with Screw or Suture-Button Fixation for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability

Objective

To evaluate the early clinical and radiographic results of arthroscopic Latarjet procedure using screw or suture‐button fixation in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation.

Methods

Twelve patients who underwent arthroscopic Latarjet procedure between January 2015 and December 2018 at our institution were retrospectively studied. Data of the patients' history, including age, gender, side of affected arm, body mass index (BMI), and the number of dislocations since fist dislocation were collected. Preoperative and postoperative clinical follow‐up data were evaluated using Walch–Duplay score, American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) score, and modified Rowe score. Active external rotation and active internal rotation at 90° of abduction as well as active elevation were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively. The position and healing condition of the transferred coracoid bony graft were also assessed using computed tomography (CT) and Mimics 19.0 software.

Results

Mean follow‐up was 24.9 months (range, 13 to 53 months) of all patients. At final follow‐up, the average ASES score (preoperative vs postoperative values) had improved from 68.9 ± 7.9 to 91.1 ± 6.1 in screw fixation group and 68.9 ± 8.9 to 87.5 ± 6.7 in suture‐button fixation group; the average Rowe score (preoperative vs postoperative values) had improved from 25.0 ± 8.4 to 92.5 ± 4.2 in screw fixation group and 21.7 ± 13.7 to 93.3 ± 4.1 in suture‐button fixation group; the average of Walch–Duplay score (preoperative vs postoperative values) had improved from 12.5 ± 15.1 to 91.7 ± 4.1 in screw fixation group and 18.3 ± 20.7 to 88.3 ± 7.5 in button fixation group. The forward flexion was 175.0° ± 8.4° preoperatively and 178.3° ± 4.1° postoperatively in screw fixation group while 174.8° ± 10.2° preoperatively and 175.0° ± 5.5° postoperatively in suture‐button fixation group. The active external rotation was 77.5° ± 5.2° preoperatively and 71.7° ± 4.1° postoperatively in screw fixation group while 72.5° ± 6.9° preoperatively and 68.3° ± 7.5° postoperatively in suture‐button fixation group. The average of active internal rotation was 66.7° ± 6.1° preoperatively and 67.5° ± 6.1° postoperatively in screw fixation group while 68.3° ± 11.3° preoperatively and 66.7° ± 7.5° postoperatively in suture‐button fixation group. In postoperative CT scan, 91.7% grafts midline center were located at or under the equator in the en face view; 75% of the bone blocks were flush to the glenoid face in the axial view, with only two grafts exhibiting slight medial placement in screw fixation group (33.3%) and one graft exhibiting slight lateral placement in suture‐button fixation group (16.7%). All grafts achieved bone union. Graft absorption mostly occurred outside of the “best‐fit” circle. The average bony absorption rates of the coracoid grafts were 25.2% and 10.18% in screw fixation group and suture‐button fixation group, respectively, at 6 months postoperative follow‐up.

Conclusion

Both suture‐button fixation and screw fixation techniques in arthroscopic Latarjet procedure revealed excellent clinical outcomes with low complication rates in the early follow‐up. The suture‐button fixation exhibited a flexible fixation pattern that allowed for self‐correction to some extent, even slight lateralization could finally remodel over time.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair: A matched cohort comparison of the modified Mason Allen method and the simple stitch method

Introduction

Arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) has become a standard treatment for recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation in cases with minimal bone loss. Using the standard Bankart repair technique, the failure rate has been reported to be approximately between 4 and 35%. In addition to the original injury, multiple pathologies can occur after a dislocation including a Bankart lesion, capsular redundancy and bone defects. In cases with no significant bone loss, soft tissue plays a major role in stabilizing the shoulder joint. We hypothesized that effective repair of soft tissue with good inferior capsular shifting and proper capsulolabral restoration can create a proper level of soft tissue tension so the horizontal mattress suture method should improve outcomes.

Materials and methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted by reviewing the records of patients with recurrent anterior instability who underwent ABR at a single institution between January 2009 and December 2017. Demographic information, preoperative radiographic data including glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs width, glenoid track and other surgical details were retrieved from the medical records. The patients identified were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 had one modified Mason Allen stitch plus simple stitches, while Group 2 had only simple stitches. Data obtained from the patient included failure rate, patient satisfaction, the ROWE score and Walch-Duplay score at a minimum of 2 years after surgery. Risk factors for failure were also identified.

Results

Group 1 included 50 patients (mean age 27.2 ± 9.4 years) who underwent modified Mason Allen stitch ABR (median follow-up, 59.2 months; range, 26.2-128.6 months). Group 2 included 30 patients (mean age 26.9 ± 8.5 years) who underwent simple stitch repair ABR (median follow-up, 68.0 months; range, 24.0-127.9 months). All patients met the inclusion criteria. Evaluation at the final follow-up compared Group 1 and Group 2: ROWE score (86.8 vs 76.3, P = 0.001), Walch-Duplay score (87.2 vs 82.0, P = 0.035), respectively. Failure rates were 6% in group 1 compared to 10% in group 2 (P = 0.511).

Conclusions

The modified Mason Allen stitch technique and the simple stitches technique ABR both result in excellent patient satisfaction at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Both techniques successfully restore shoulder stability, but the modified Mason Allen stitch technique results in better functional outcomes.

Study design

Cohort study; level of evidence, 3.

Translation and validation of a Hebrew version of the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index

BACKGROUND

The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability index (WOSI) is a questionnaire designed to measure health-related quality of life in patients with shoulder instability. The aim of the current study was to translate the WOSI into Hebrew and assess its psychometric properties.

METHODS

The WOSI was translated into Hebrew according to World Health Organization guidelines. Twenty-five patients completed the WOSI and the Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) questionnaire 2 weeks and 2 months after surgical shoulder stabilization. Internal consistency (Cronbach's α), criterion validity (Pearson's correlation coefficient with DASH), responsiveness, and floor and ceiling effects were assessed.

RESULTS

Cronbach's α was 0.88-0.95 for total WOSI (range 0.68-0.95 for different sections). Strong correlation with DASH score (r = 0.76-0.84) indicated good criterion validity. Changes between baseline and follow-up for WOSI and DASH scores were moderately correlated (r = 0.68), suggesting moderate responsiveness. Some items demonstrated floor and ceiling effects, especially at baseline, but no floor or ceiling effects were observed for total WOSI or for the WOSI sections.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of the current study demonstrate that the Hebrew version of the WOSI is a valid instrument that can be used to assess disability in patients with shoulder instability. Additional studies are warranted to assess its psychometric properties among various subpopulations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was pre-registered at the ClinicalTrials.gov website, registration number NCT02978365 .

Outcomes of capsulolabral reconstruction for posterior shoulder instability

BACKGROUND

Surgical treatment of isolated posterior shoulder instability-a rare and often misdiagnosed condition-is controversial because of poor outcomes. Failure of physical therapy in symptomatic young athletes requires capsulolabral reconstruction or bone block procedures. The goal of this study was to report the outcomes of patients who have undergone surgical capsulolabral reconstruction and to look for risk factors that contribute to failure of this procedure.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

We analyzed the outcomes of 101 patients who underwent capsulolabral reconstruction: 83 included retrospectively, 18 included prospectively. The procedures were performed alone or in combination with capsular shift, labral repair, closure of the rotator interval and notch remplissage. The primary endpoint was failure of the procedure, defined as recurrence of the instability and/or pain. We also determined the outcomes based on specific (Walch-Duplay, modified Rowe) and non-specific (Constant, resumption of activities) scores of shoulder instability.

RESULTS

The results were satisfactory despite a high failure rate: 35% in the retrospective cohort with 4.8±2.6 years' follow-up and 22% in the prospective cohort with 1.1±0.3 years' follow-up. The various outcome scores improved significantly. Ninety-two percent of patients returned to work and 80% of athletes returned to their pre-injury level of sports. Eighty-five percent of patients were satisfied or very satisfied after the surgery. No risk factors for failure were identified; however, failures were more common in older patients, those who underwent an isolated procedure and those who had unclassified clinical forms.

CONCLUSION

Treatment of posterior shoulder instability by capsulolabral reconstruction leads to good clinical outcomes; however, the recurrence rate is high.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

4 - retrospective study.

Translation and validation of the French version of the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI): WOSI-Fr

INTRODUCTION

The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) is a specific self-administered questionnaire measuring the functional impact on patients with chronic glenohumeral instability. In its English version, it is valid, reliable, and sensitive to change. The objective of the present study was to provide a linguistic and cross-cultural adaptation of the original version of the WOSI to French and to assess the metrologic properties of this version in patients with chronic shoulder instability.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The WOSI was translated and adapted both linguistically and culturally to French (WOSI-Fr) according to current guidelines. The metrologic properties of the WOSI-Fr were analyzed in the following groups - unoperated patients with chronic shoulder instability (UOG), operated patients with chronic shoulder instability (OG), patients with instability (TotG=UOG+OG), and control patients (ContG) - through analysis of the construct validity by comparing the WOSI-Fr with the Rowe, Walch-Duplay, QuickDASH, and VAS pain scores, and through analysis of reliability through the reproducibility of internal consistency.

RESULTS

The WOSI-Fr version was established and then accepted by an expert group (n=7). There was a statistically significant correlation between the WOSI and the different pain and function scores for TotG, OG, and UOG (except with the VAS pain score and the QuickDASH for UOG). Reproducibility (n=27) was good: the ICC value for the total score was 0.88 (95% CI, 0.47-0.98), varying from 0.80 to 0.94 according to the four domains of the WOSI-Fr, and from 0.70 to 0.94 for the different items separately. For TotG, Cronbach's alpha was 0.953, the SEM and the MDC were 120.2 (5.7%) and 333 (15.9%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The French version of the WOSI (WOSI-Fr) is available, adapted linguistically and culturally, valid, and reliable. We recommend using it in following up patients with shoulder instability.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prospective, level 2.

Arthroscopic Bankart shoulder stabilization in athletes: return to sports and functional outcomes

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to evaluate return to sports after arthroscopic Bankart stabilization.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study including all athletes aged <50 years who underwent arthroscopic stabilization in 2010 and 2011 (m, 36; f, 10; mean age 28.9 ± 8.1 years; follow-up 24.4 ± 7.7 months). Sixteen patients were practicing competitive sports and 30 recreational sports. Level and delay of return to sports, sports classification according to Allain, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) score, patient satisfaction, apprehension level and avoidance behaviour were noted.

RESULTS

95.7 % returned to the same level after an average of 9.8 ± 5.4 months. Sports level was unchanged or better in 82.6 %, lower in 8.7, and 4.5 % changed sport because of their shoulder. Patients with more than 10 dislocations returned to sports and to their preoperative level later than patients with <10. Male athletes returned to preoperative sports levels faster than female athletes (p < 0.001). The WOSI score and also its item "sports" were worse in those who had not returned (p = 0.0002 and 0.006, respectively). Satisfaction correlated with the WOSI score (p = 0.0004) while 93.3 % were satisfied/very satisfied. The decrease in the apprehension level was significant (p < 0.00001). 36.9 % still experienced avoidance behaviour.

CONCLUSIONS

Most athletes resumed their main sport often at the same level, but the threshold of 10 dislocations should be considered a risk factor for longer return to sports at any level. The WOSI score is a valuable outcome score after Bankart stabilization. Postoperative avoidance should be distinguished from apprehension.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Anterior shoulder stabilization by Bristow-Latarjet procedure in athletes: return-to-sport and functional outcomes at minimum 2-year follow-up

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess return-to-sport outcomes following the Latarjet-Bristow procedure.

METHODS

This retrospective study included all athletes <50 years old, who underwent a Latarjet-Bristow procedure for anterior shoulder instability in 2009-2012. Main criteria assessments were the number of athletes returning to any sport and the number returning to the same sport at their preinjury level. The main follow-up was 46.8 ± 9.7 months.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients were analyzed, 46 men/1 women, mean age 27.9 ± 7.9 years. Eighteen patients practiced competitive sports and 29 recreational sports. None of them were professional athletes. One hundred percent returned to sports after a mean 6.3 ± 4.3 months. Thirty/47 (63.8 %) patients returned to the same sport at the same level at least and 10/47 (21.3 %) patients changed sport because of their shoulder. Compared to patients who returned to the same sport at the same level, patients who changed sports or returned to a lower level had practiced overhead or forced overhead sports [OR = 4.7 (1.3-16.9), p = 0.02] before surgery, experienced avoidance behavior at the final follow-up (p = 0.002), apprehension (p = 0.00001) and had a worse Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score and sub-items (p = 0.003) except for daily activities (p = 0.21). At the final follow-up, 45/47 (95.7 %) patients were still practicing a sport.

CONCLUSION

All the patients returned to sports, most to their preinjury sport at the same level. Patients who practiced an overhead sport were more likely to play at a lower level or to change sport postoperatively.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, retrospective study-Case series with no comparison group.

Upper limb kinematics after arthroscopic and open shoulder stabilization

BACKGROUND

Shoulder joint stability mediated by proprioception is often quantified by arm repositioning tests (i.e., static end-position accuracy), overlooking ongoing movement quality. This study assessed movement quality by adopting smoothness-related kinematic descriptors. We compared performance of healthy controls with that of patients in arthroscopic shoulder stabilization and open shoulder stabilization groups. We hypothesized that arm kinematics after arthroscopic intervention would more closely resemble healthy movements compared with patients after open shoulder stabilization surgery.

METHODS

Healthy controls (N = 14) were compared with patients after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization (N = 10) and open shoulder stabilization (N = 12). Right-hand dominant subjects (the affected side in patients) performed 135 unconstrained 3-dimensional pointing movements toward visual targets (seen through pinhole goggles; i.e., no arm vision). Arm kinematic data were recorded and offline analyzed to obtain hand tangential velocity profiles further used to compute the acceleration-to-movement time ratio, peak-to-mean velocity ratio, and number of velocity peaks ("symmetry," "proportion," and "fragmentation" features, respectively). Parametric and nonparametric statistics were used for comparisons (P ≤ .05).

RESULTS

Control and arthroscopic shoulder stabilization groups presented similar acceleration-to-movement time ratio and peak-to-mean velocity ratio. Both groups differed from the open shoulder stabilization group (P = .001). Distributions of velocity peaks for control and arthroscopic shoulder stabilization groups were similar, whereas open shoulder stabilization and control subjects differed significantly (P = .028).

CONCLUSIONS

Movement quality mediated by proprioception in arthroscopic shoulder stabilization patients matches that of healthy controls, whereas performance in open shoulder stabilization patients seems inferior compared with that in healthy controls, as assessed by smoothness-related measures (less symmetrical, more fragmented movements).

Validity, reliability and responsiveness of the French language translation of the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI)

BACKGROUND

The WOSI (Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index) is a self-administered quality of life questionnaire designed to be used as a primary outcome measure in clinical trials on shoulder instability, as well as to measure the effect of an intervention on any particular patient. It is validated and is reliable and sensitive. As it is designed to measure subjective outcome, it is important that translation should be methodologically rigorous, as it is subject to both linguistic and cultural interpretation.

OBJECTIVE

To produce a French language version of the WOSI that is culturally adapted to both European and North American French-speaking populations.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A validated protocol was used to create a French language WOSI questionnaire (WOSI-Fr) that would be culturally acceptable for both European and North American French-speaking populations. Reliability and responsiveness analyses were carried out, and the WOSI-Fr was compared to the F-QuickDASH-D/S (Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand-French translation), and Walch-Duplay scores.

RESULTS

A French language version of the WOSI (WOSI-Fr) was accepted by a multinational committee. The WOSI-Fr was then validated using a total of 144 native French-speaking subjects from Canada and Switzerland. Comparison of results on two WOSI-Fr questionnaires completed at a mean interval of 16 days showed that the WOSI-Fr had strong reliability, with a Pearson and interclass correlation of r=0.85 (P=0.01) and ICC=0.84 [95% CI=0.78-0.88]. Responsiveness, at a mean 378.9 days after surgical intervention, showed strong correlation with that of the F-QuickDASH-D/S, with r=0.67 (P<0.01). Moreover, a standardized response means analysis to calculate effect size for both the WOSI-Fr and the F-QuickDASH-D/S showed that the WOSI-Fr had a significantly greater ability to detect change (SRM 1.55 versus 0.87 for the WOSI-Fr and F-QuickDASH-D/S respectively, P<0.01). The WOSI-Fr showed fair correlation with the Walch-Duplay.

DISCUSSION

A French-language translation of the WOSI questionnaire was created and validated for use in both Canadian and Swiss French-speaking populations. This questionnaire will facilitate outcome assessment in French-speaking settings, collaboration in multinational studies and comparison between studies performed in different countries.

TYPE OF STUDY

Multicenter cohort study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

II.

Long-term outcomes after Bankart shoulder stabilization

PURPOSE

The purposes of this study were (1) to analyze long-term outcomes in patients who have undergone open or arthroscopic Bankart repair and (2) to evaluate study methodologic quality through validated tools.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of Level I to IV Evidence using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Clinical outcome studies after open or arthroscopic Bankart repair with a minimum of 5 years' follow-up were analyzed. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were extracted and reported. Study methodologic quality was evaluated with Modified Coleman Methodology Scores and Quality Appraisal Tool scores.

RESULTS

We analyzed 26 studies (1,781 patients). All but 2 studies were Level III or IV Evidence with low Modified Coleman Methodology Scores and Quality Appraisal Tool scores. Patients analyzed were young (mean age, 28 years) male patients (81%) with unilateral dominant shoulder (61%), post-traumatic recurrent (mean of 11 dislocations before surgery) anterior shoulder instability without significant glenoid bone loss. The mean length of clinical follow-up was 11 years. There was no significant difference in recurrence of instability with arthroscopic (11%) versus open (8%) techniques (P = .06). There was no significant difference in instability recurrence with arthroscopic suture anchor versus open Bankart repair (8.5% v 8%, P = .82). There was a significant difference in rate of return to sport between open (89%) and arthroscopic (74%) techniques (P < .01), whereas no significant difference was observed between arthroscopic suture anchor (87%) and open repair (89%) (P = .43). There was no significant difference in the rate of postoperative osteoarthritis between arthroscopic suture anchor and open Bankart repair (26% and 33%, respectively; P = .059). There was no significant difference in Rowe or Constant scores between groups (P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability using arthroscopic suture anchor and open Bankart techniques yields similar long-term clinical outcomes, with no significant difference in the rate of recurrent instability, clinical outcome scores, or rate of return to sport. No significant difference was shown in the incidence of postoperative osteoarthritis with open versus arthroscopic suture anchor repair. Study methodologic quality was poor, with most studies having Level III or IV Evidence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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