Immobilization in External Rotation and Abduction Versus Arthroscopic Stabilization After First-Time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial

The History and Evolution of the Open Labral Repair with Capsular Shift for Shoulder Instability

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to describe the evolution of the open labral repair with capsular shift, including the current role of this procedure in the treatment of shoulder instability.

RECENT FINDINGS

Currently, a subset of patients - high-level collision/contact sport athletes, patients with significant inferior or multi-directional instability, and individuals with failed arthroscopic Bankart repair without bone loss - may experience benefit from undergoing open Bankart repair with capsular shift. Surgeons performing open stabilization can benefit from instrumentation and anchors developed to assist with arthroscopic techniques. Understanding the history and evolution behind the procedure not only allows the surgeon to appreciate principles behind an arthroscopic approach, but also permits the utilization of an open approach when required by patient pathology and risk factors.

Immobilization in External Rotation Versus Arthroscopic Stabilization After Primary Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Systematic Review of Level 1 and 2 Studies

BACKGROUND

Arthroscopic stabilization has been established as a superior treatment option for primary glenohumeral instability when compared with immobilization in internal rotation. However, immobilization in external rotation (ER) has recently gained interest as a viable nonoperative treatment option for patients with shoulder instability.

PURPOSE

To compare the rates of recurrent instability and subsequent surgery in patients undergoing treatment for primary anterior shoulder dislocation with arthroscopic stabilization versus immobilization in ER.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 2.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify studies that'evaluated patients being treated for primary anterior glenohumeral dislocation with either arthroscopic stabilization or immobilization in ER. The search phrase used various combinations of the keywords/phrases "primary closed reduction,""anterior shoulder dislocation,""traumatic,""primary,""treatment,""management,""immobilization,""external rotation,""surgical,""operative,""nonoperative," and "conservative." Inclusion criteria included patients undergoing treatment for primary anterior glenohumeral joint dislocation with either immobilization in ER or arthroscopic stabilization. Rates of recurrent instability, subsequent stabilization surgery, return to sports, positive postintervention apprehension tests, and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

The 30 studies that met inclusion criteria included 760 patients undergoing arthroscopic stabilization (mean age, 23.1 years; mean follow-up time, 55.1 months) and 409 patients undergoing immobilization in ER (mean age, 29.8 years; mean follow-up time, 28.8 months). Overall, 8.8% of operative patients experienced recurrent instability at latest follow-up compared with 21.3% of patients who had undergone ER immobilization (P < .0001). Similarly, 5.7% of operative patients had undergone a subsequent stabilization procedure at latest follow-up compared with 11.3% of patients who had undergone ER immobilization (P = .0015). A higher rate of return to sports was found in the operative group (P < .05), but no other differences were found between groups.

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing arthroscopic treatment for primary anterior glenohumeral dislocation with arthroscopic stabilization can be expected to experience significantly lower rates of recurrent instability and subsequent stabilization procedures compared with patients undergoing ER immobilization.

Arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage results in lower rates of recurrent instability with similar range of motion compared to isolated arthroscopic Bankart for anterior glenohumeral instability: A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The addition of the remplissage procedure to an arthroscopic Bankart procedure has been shown to improve clinical outcomes, yet at the expense of potentially decreasing shoulder range of motion. The purpose of this study was to assess recurrent instability, range of motion, functional outcomes and rates of return to sport outcomes in patients undergoing an isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair compared to those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair in addition to the remplissage procedure.

METHODS

According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a search was conducted using three databases (MEDLINE/OVID, EMBASE and PubMed). Retrieved studies were screened based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria for comparative studies. Data were extracted and meta-analysis performed using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies (13 level III studies, 2 level II studies and 1 level I) were included with a total of 507 and 704 patients in the Bankart plus remplissage and isolated Bankart repair groups, respectively. No studies reported glenoid bone loss of >20% with the least percentage of glenoid bone loss reported among studies being <1%. There was a significantly increased rate of recurrent dislocations (odds ratio [OR] = 4.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.380-7.48, p < 0.00001) and revision procedures (OR = 3.36, 95% CI: 1.52-7.41, p = 0.003) in the isolated Bankart repair group compared to the Bankart plus remplissage group. Additionally, there were no significant differences between groups in terms of external rotation at side (n.s.), in abduction (n.s.) or at forward flexion (n.s.) at final follow-up. Furthermore, return to preinjury level of sport favoured the Bankart plus remplissage group (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.35-0.85, p = 0.007).

CONCLUSION

Patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart plus remplissage for anterior shoulder instability have lower rates of recurrent instability, higher rates of return to sport, and no significant difference in range of motion at final follow-up when compared to an isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair. Further large, prospective studies are needed to further determine which patients and degree of bone loss would benefit most from augmentation with the remplissage procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.

Surgical Intervention Following a First Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Dislocation Is Worthy of Consideration

Up to 60% of patients experience recurrence after a first traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation (FTASD), which is often defined as having experienced either dislocation or subluxation. Thus surgical intervention after FTASD is worthy of consideration and is guided by the number of patients who need to receive surgical intervention to prevent 1 redislocation (i.e., number needed to treat), (subjective) health benefit, complication risk, and costs. Operative intervention through arthroscopic stabilization can be successful in reducing recurrence risk in FTASD, as has been shown in multiple randomized controlled trials. Nevertheless, there is a large "gray area" for the indication of arthroscopic stabilization, and it is therefore heavily debated which patients should receive operative treatment. Previous trials showed widely varying redislocation rates in both the intervention and control group, meta-analysis shows 2% to 19% after operative and 20% to 75% after nonoperative treatment, and redislocation rates may not correlate with patient-reported outcomes. The literature is quite heterogeneous, and a major confounder is time to follow-up. Furthermore, there is insufficient standardization of reporting of outcomes and no consensus on definition of risk factors. As a result, surgery is a reasonable intervention for FTASD patients, but in which patients it best prevents redislocation requires additional refinement.

A comprehensive comparison and evaluation of surgical techniques for anterior shoulder instability: a Bayesian network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Anterior shoulder instability is a common clinical problem; however, conflicting evidence exists regarding optimal treatment algorithms. We perform a comparative analysis of stabilization techniques used for recurrent anterior shoulder instability to identify the one associated with the lowest rate of recurrent instability. We additionally explore how glenoid bone loss and osseus lesions affect recurrence rates.

METHODS

PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched for clinical studies comparing surgical techniques for anterior shoulder instability. Two team members independently assessed all potential studies for eligibility and extracted data. Each included study underwent a risk of bias assessment using the Cochrane risk of bias summary tool. The primary outcome of interest was the rate of recurrent instability, which underwent a Bayesian network meta-analysis. Additional analyses were performed relating to the degree of glenoid bone loss and the presence of osseous lesions.

RESULTS

Of 2699 studies screened, 52 studies with 4209 patients were included. Patients who underwent open Latarjet demonstrated the overall lowest rate of recurrent instability [log odds ratio (LOR) 1.93], whereas patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair demonstrated the highest (LOR 2.87). When glenoid bone loss was 10% to 20%, open Latarjet had significantly lower recurrent instability (P = .0016) compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair. When glenoid bone loss increased from 0%-10% to 10%-20%, arthroscopic Bankart repair had a significantly increased rate of recurrence (P = .021). In the presence of an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion, both open Latarjet (P = .01) and arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage (P = .029) had significantly reduced recurrence rates compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair. Finally, regardless of procedure, the presence of a Hill-Sachs or bony Bankart lesion was associated with an increased risk of recurrent instability (r = 0.44, P = .0003, and r = 0.40, P = .006, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The open Latarjet has the overall lowest recurrent instability and significantly lower compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair in the setting of increasing glenoid bone loss. Bone loss between 0% and 10% results in similar outcomes across all procedures.

Global variations in treatment and outcomes reported for anterior shoulder instability: a systematic review of the literature

Background

Anterior shoulder instability is a common problem around the world, with a high risk for recurrence following the index dislocation. Surgical stabilization is commonly indicated for persistent instability, particularly in patients at high risk for recurrence, to minimize the risk of further labral injury and glenoid bone loss. However, there is little known about global geographic differences in the surgical management of anterior shoulder instability. As such, the purpose of this study was to evaluate and systematically review regional differences in the surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability, particularly the indications for and outcomes from bony stabilization procedures compared to soft tissue procedures.

Methods

A systematic review, in accordance with the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, was performed. Inclusion criteria consisted of level I and II evidence studies evaluating indications, techniques, and outcomes following operative management of anterior shoulder instability published from January 2000 to September 2021. Studies meeting inclusion criteria were grouped into four global regions (Asia, Europe, North America, South America) based on primary study location. Patient demographics, procedural details, patient reported outcomes, and complications (recurrence and reoperation rates) were compared between regions.

Results

Sixty (n = 60) studies (5480 patients) were identified. Eighty-six percent of all patients were male, with a mean age of 26.7 years. There was no difference in mean patient age, though patients undergoing bony stabilization procedures were older than those undergoing soft-tissue stabilization procedures (P = .0002) in all regions. The proportion of bony versus soft-tissue procedure groups did not differ significantly among regions. The indications for bony stabilization procedures varied significantly. Mean final follow-up was 3.5 years. Recurrent instability was 5.0% and did not vary across regions. However, recurrent instability occurred more frequently following soft-tissue compared to bony stabilization procedures (P = .017). South American studies utilized fewer anchors during soft tissue stabilization (P < .0001) and reported a higher reoperation rate compared to other regions (P = .009).

Conclusion

There is global variation in the reporting of outcomes following surgery for anterior shoulder instability. The proportion of bony and soft-tissue procedures is similar, irrespective of geographic region. Recurrent instability does not vary by region but occurs more frequently following soft-tissue compared to bony stabilization procedures. There are a number of potential medical and nonmedical factors that may affect global variation in the surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair versus conservative treatment for first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Shoulder is vulnerable to dislocation owing to its anatomical structure and the increasing popularity of contact sports in young population. The management of first-time anterior shoulder dislocation in this group is still controversial and the prognosis are varied. This review aimed to compare the results of arthroscopic Bankart repair and conservative management for first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in young active patients.

METHODS

Databases were searched till November 2021, and comparative studies between arthroscopic Bankart repair and conservative management for first-time traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation in young population were selected. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed according to the Cochrane Back Review Group 12-item scale. Outcome measures included recurrence of instability, return to play, subsequent instability surgery, and shoulder functional scores.

RESULTS

The search returned 12 eligible trials with 786 participants. All the trials were of prospective design. After arthroscopic Bankart repair, patients experienced significantly less re-dislocation (7.5% vs. 53.0%, p < 0.00001, I² = 0%), subluxation (3.1% vs. 24.2%, p < 0.0001, I² = 0%), positive apprehension test (7.3% vs. 25.8%, p = 0.002, I² = 11%), and subsequent surgical treatment for instability (5.6% vs. 37.8%, p < 0.00001, I² = 0%) when compared with those underwent conservative management. And more patients returned to play (83.5% vs. 66.0%, p = 0.03, I² = 81%) after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Outcomes regarding the functional scores did not reach a significant difference between the two cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Arthroscopic Bankart repair showed superiority over conservative management in terms of recurrence, return to play, and subsequent instability surgery during the follow-up in young active patients that encountered first episode of dislocation. As long-term prognosis is comparable, an immediate surgical stabilization might not be suitable for everyone.

[Treatment strategies for traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation]

Anterior glenohumeral instability is the most frequent type of shoulder instability. This is often associated with labral and osseous lesions leading to recurrent instability. A detailed medical history, a physical examination and targeted diagnostic imaging are necessary to assess possible pathological soft tissue alterations as well as bony lesions of the humeral head and the glenoid bone. Early surgical treatment has been shown to reduce the risk of recurrence, especially in young active athletes, and can avoid secondary damage. Shoulder dislocations in older patients also require a detailed assessment and selection of treatment as persisting pain and limitation of movement can occur due to rotator cuff lesions and nerve injuries. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the currently available evidence and results regarding diagnostic considerations and conservative vs. surgical treatment and time to return to sport after treatment of a primary anterior shoulder dislocation.

Arthroscopic Repair Versus Conservative Treatment for First-time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation

To systematically compare the clinical efficacy of conservative treatment and arthroscopic one-stage repair for patients with first-time anterior dislocation of the shoulder. A retrieval and systematic review of randomized controlled studies of primary anterior shoulder dislocation with conservative versus arthroscopic repair was conducted and further pooled analysis was performed to compare the overall difference in clinical outcomes, including redislocation and revision surgery rates, shoulder function scores and related complications. Preliminary meta-analysis showed that the risk of anterior shoulder redislocation was 4.73-fold higher in patients treated conservatively than those undergoing arthroscopic repair (RR:4.73 [2.95-7.58], p<0.000; I²=0%, p=0.920),and that the revision surgery rate was 5.91 times higher in the conservative group than in the arthroscopic repair group (RR:5.91 [2.82-12.39], p<0.000; I²⁼0%, p=0.560).Early arthroscopic repair can significantly reduce the redislocation and revision surgery rates and also improve the shoulder joint function score, without serious complications. However, it is necessary to recognize the subset of patients with a higher risk of redislocation in young patients through a high quality, blinded, prospective cohort study when early arthroscopic repair intervention in this subset of high-risk patients will be of significant clinical value.

A 2-Year Follow-up May Not be Enough to Accurately Evaluate Recurrences After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Long-term Assessment of 272 Patients With a Mean Follow-up of 10.5 Years

BACKGROUND

There is a great discrepancy between the rates of recurrent instability reported after arthroscopic Bankart repair in relation to the follow-up time.

PURPOSE

To analyze the rate of recurrences after arthroscopic Bankart repair in the long term, emphasizing whether a minimum follow-up of 2 years is adequate to assess this outcome.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

Between January 2008 and April 2013, a total of 356 athletes underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior glenohumeral instability at our institution. Return to sports, the Rowe score, the Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), and the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS) were used to assess functional outcomes. We analyzed the proportion of recurrences before and after 4 years of follow-up. Additionally, we performed a Kaplan-Meier analysis to evaluate recurrence-free time in patients with a recurrence.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up was 10.5 ± 1.6 years, and the mean age was 20.8 ± 3.9 years. In total, 90% of patients were able to return to sports; of these, 91% returned to their preinjury level of play. The Rowe, SSV, and ASOSS scores showed a statistical improvement after surgery (P < .01). The proportion of patients with a recurrence during the follow-up period was 25% (95% CI, 20%-31%; n = 70), and the mean time until a recurrence was 3.8 ± 2.6 years. Only 39% of the recurrences (95% CI, 30%-48%) occurred in the first 2 years after surgery, while 61% (95% CI, 50%-73%) occurred in the first 4 years after surgery.

CONCLUSION

In our study, the effectiveness of Bankart repair to stabilize the shoulder decreased significantly over time. Indeed, less than half of the recurrences occurred after 2 years of follow-up. Therefore, we propose that the recommended minimum follow-up should be 4 years; otherwise, it is very likely that the actual rate of recurrences will be significantly underestimated.

Bankart Repair With or Without Concomitant Remplissage Results in Similar Shoulder Motion and Postoperative Outcomes in the Treatment of Shoulder Instability

Purpose

To compare the results of patients who underwent Bankart repair with or without concomitant remplissage for treatment of shoulder instability.

Methods

All patients who underwent shoulder stabilization for shoulder instability from 2014 to 2019 were evaluated. Patients who underwent remplissage were matched to those patients who received no remplissage based on sex, age, body mass index, and date of surgery. Glenoid bone loss and presence of an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion were quantified by 2 independent investigators. Postoperative complications, recurrent instability, revision, shoulder range of motion (ROM), return to sport (RTS), and patient-reported outcome measures (Oxford Shoulder Instability, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores) were compared between groups.

Results

Overall, 31 patients who underwent remplissage were identified and matched to 31 patients who received no remplissage at a mean follow-up of 2.8 ± 1.8 years. Glenoid bone loss was similar between groups (11% vs 11%, P = .956); however, engaging Hill-Sachs lesions were more prevalent in the patients who underwent remplissage than the patients who received no remplissage (84% vs 3%, P < .001). There were no significant differences in rates of redislocation (remplissage: 12.9% vs no remplissage: 9.7%), subjective instability (45.2% vs 25.8%), reoperation (12.9% vs 0%), or revision (12.9% vs 0%) between groups (all P > .05). Also, there were no differences in RTS rates, shoulder range of motion, or patient-reported outcome measures (all P > .05).

Conclusions

If a patient is indicated for Bankart repair with concomitant remplissage, surgeons may expect shoulder motion and postoperative outcomes similar to those of patients without engaging Hill-Sachs lesions who undergo Bankart repair without concomitant remplissage.

Level of Evidence

Therapeutic case series, level IV.

Increased rates of subjective shoulder instability after Bankart repair with remplissage compared to Latarjet surgery

HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND

Controversy exists as to the ideal management of young active patients with subcritical glenoid bone loss and an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, and the Latarjet and arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage are effective surgical options. The purpose of this study was to compare rates of recurrent instability and reoperation, as well as patient-reported outcome measures, between Latarjet and arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage surgery patients. The authors hypothesized that there would be no difference in rates of recurrent instability, reoperation, and postoperative outcomes between patients who underwent Latarjet surgery and patients who underwent Bankart repair with concomitant remplissage postoperatively.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent primary shoulder stabilization for shoulder instability from 2014 to 2019 were screened. Latarjet and Bankart repair with remplissage patients were included if arthroscopic surgery was performed in response to anterior shoulder instability. Recurrent instability, revision, shoulder range of motion, return to sport (RTS), and patient-reported outcome measures (Oxford Shoulder Instability, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form scores) were compared between groups.

RESULTS

Overall, 43 Latarjet patients (age: 29.8 ± 12.1 years, 36 males 7 females) and 28 Bankart repair with remplissage patients (age: 28.2 ± 8.8 years, 25 males 3 females) were included with a mean follow-up of 3.3 ± 1.9 years. Patients who underwent Latarjet surgery had larger amounts of bone loss (19% vs. 11%, P < .001), a lower rate of off-track Hill-Sachs lesions (47% vs. 82%, P < .001), and more frequently had a history of chronic shoulder dislocations (88% vs. 43%, P < .001) compared to Bankart repair with remplissage patients. Latarjet patients less frequently reported feeling subjective shoulder instability after surgery (21% vs. 50%, P = .022), which was defined as feeling apprehension or experiencing a shoulder subluxation or dislocation event. There were no differences in rates of postoperative dislocation, revision, reoperation, or RTS, as well as patient-reported outcome scores, between groups (all P > .05).

CONCLUSION

Despite differences in osseous defects, Latarjet and Bankart repair with remplissage patients had similar rates of clinical, patient-reported, and RTS outcomes at a mean of 3.3 years postoperatively. Latarjet surgery patients may be less likely to experience subjective shoulder instability postoperatively than patients who undergo Bankart repair with concomitant remplissage.

Case report of old anterior dislocation of the shoulder joint and review of the literature

Background

Dislocation of the shoulder joint is the most common type of joint dislocation. It is rare to be in a persistent dislocation that has not been reset. Successful arthroscopic treatment of the obsolete shoulder is relatively uncommon.

Case report

We report a rare case of persistent anterior dislocation of the old shoulder joint in a 30-year-old female patient. The patient underwent an emergency shoulder dislocation at a local hospital after a traumatic injury and re-dislocated persistently after surgery. 26 days later, she was admitted to our department for treatment, mainly because of joint deformity and limitation of motion. We adopted arthroscopic release and repositioning surgery. The patient was followed up for 1 year after surgery. Functional recovery was satisfactory.

Conclusion

The state of obsolete shoulder dislocation rarely occurs after shoulder dislocation and the prognosis of the patient is good after complete arthroscopic release and repositioning. It provides a reference for clinical arthroscopic treatment of old shoulder dislocations.

Short- and long-term outcomes in Bankart repair vs. conservative treatment for first-time anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

First-time anterior shoulder dislocations are associated with a high rate of residual instability. Therefore, many surgeons support initial Bankart repair surgery over conservative management to address this issue. However, the optimal treatment remains controversial because of uncertainty regarding long-term surgical outcomes. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the short- and long-term rates of residual instability following Bankart repair or conservative management after a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation.

METHODS

PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, The Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CINAHL, and ScienceDirect databases were accessed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing Bankart repair to conservative management. RoB (Risk of Bias) 2 was used to check study quality. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) guidelines were followed in assessing primary outcomes. The inverse-variance method for continuous variables and the Mantel-Haenszel method for dichotomous variables was used.

RESULTS

A total of 348 patients from 6 RCTs published across 8 articles, with a mean age of 23.7 years, were included. Bias was graded low in 3 studies, some concerns in 3 studies, and high in 2 studies. In the short term (2-3 years), surgery lowered recurrent instability (risk ratio [RR] 0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.08, 0.27; I² = 0%; P < .0001). Similar findings were seen in the long term (5-12 years) (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.14, 0.39; I² = 0%; P < .0001). No difference was observed in return to sport (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.91, 1.52; I² = 78%; P = .21). Initial surgery lowered subsequent stabilization surgery in the short (RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.09, 0.43; I² = 0%; P < .0001) and long term (RR 0.17, 95% CI 0.07, 0.39; I² = 25%; P < .0001). Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) scores did not differ in the short term (MD, 2.54, 95% CI -0.51, 5.59; I² = 48%; P = .1) but were higher in the surgical group at long-term follow-up. Patient satisfaction was also higher with surgery (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.4, 2.2; I² = 88%; P < .0001). Certainty of evidence was low for only 1 long-term outcome measure.

CONCLUSION

Bankart repair surgery for first-time anterior shoulder dislocation results in a large reduction in the risk of recurrent shoulder instability and subsequent stabilization surgery in both short- (2-3 years) and long-term (5-12 years) follow-up intervals. Additionally, slight improvements in overall patient satisfaction and WOSI score can be seen at long-term follow-up. However, surgical intervention failed to significantly improve the rate of return to sport when compared with conservative management.

Effect of Preoperative MRI Coracoid Dimensions on Postoperative Outcomes of Latarjet Treatment for Anterior Shoulder Instability

Background:

Preoperative coracoid dimensions may affect the size of the bone graft transferred to the glenoid rim and thus the postoperative outcomes of Latarjet coracoid transfer.

Purpose:

To determine the effect of coracoid length and width as measured on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on outcomes after Latarjet treatment of anterior shoulder instability.

Study Design:

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods:

Included were patients who underwent primary Latarjet surgery between 2009 and 2019 and had preoperative MRI scans and minimum 2-year postoperative outcomes. Longitudinal coracoid length was measured on axial MRI sequences as the distance from the coracoclavicular ligament insertion to the distal tip. Comparisons were made between shorter and longer coracoids and between narrower and wider coracoids. The outcomes of interest were recurrent instability, reoperation, complications, return to sport (RTS), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. Independent-samples t test, Mann-Whitney test, chi-square test, and Fisher exact test were used to compare outcomes between groups, and univariate correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate the relationships between demographics and coracoid dimensions.

Results:

Overall, 56 patients were included (mean age, 28.4 years). The mean ± SD coracoid length was 21.6 ± 2.4 mm and width 10.0 ± 1.0 mm. Relative to patients with a longer coracoid (≥22 mm; n = 26), patients with a shorter coracoid (<22 mm; n = 30) had similar rates of recurrent instability (shorter vs longer; 6.7% vs 3.8%), complications (10.0% vs 15.4%), reoperation (3.3% vs 7.7%), and RTS (76.5% vs 58.8%) and similar postoperative ASES scores (85.0 vs 81.6) ( P ≥ .05 for all). Likewise, relative to patients with a wider coracoid (≥10 mm; n = 27), patients with a narrower coracoid (<10 mm; n = 29) had similar prevalences of recurrent instability (narrower vs wider; 6.9% vs 3.7%), complications (17.2% vs 7.4%), reoperation (3.5% vs 7.4%), and RTS (66.7% vs 68.4%) and similar postoperative ASES scores (87.1 vs 80.0) ( P ≥ .05 for all).

Conclusion:

Patients undergoing Latarjet coracoid transfer had similar postoperative outcomes regardless of preoperative coracoid dimensions. These findings should be confirmed in a larger cohort before further clinical recommendations are made.

The Fragility Index of Statistically Significant Findings From Randomized Controlled Trials Comparing the Management Strategies of Anterior Shoulder Instability

BACKGROUND

Debate centering on the management of anterior shoulder instability (ASI) in recent years has led to many randomized controlled trials (RCTs) being published on the topic. The fragility index (FI) has subsequently emerged as a novel method of assessing significant findings reported in RCTs, particularly those with small sample sizes.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the FI of statistically significant findings in RCTs that reported the outcomes of management strategies of patients with ASI.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

Using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines, 2 independent reviewers performed a systematic review of RCTs focusing on the outcomes of management strategies of patients with ASI. There were 3 main categories of RCTs included: (1) nonoperative management in internal rotation (IR) versus external rotation (ER), (2) nonoperative management versus a surgical intervention, and (3) surgical management with arthroscopic Bankart repair versus open Bankart repair. The Fisher exact test was utilized to calculate the FI for the reversal of statistical significance in all statistically significant dichotomous outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 21 RCTs were included, including 1589 shoulders (mean age, 29.4 years) with a mean follow-up of 26.8 months. There were 10 RCTs (831 shoulders) that reported outcomes after the nonoperative management of ASI in IR versus ER, with a mean FI of 6.8. There were 5 RCTs (324 shoulders) that reported outcomes comparing the nonoperative and operative management of ASI, with a mean FI of 3.5. There were 6 RCTs (434 shoulders) that reported outcomes after the operative management of ASI with either arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Bankart repair, with a mean FI of 9.6.

CONCLUSION

The overall FI of RCTs reporting the outcomes of management strategies for patients with ASI was high, suggesting a moderate fragility of statistically significant outcomes including recurrence, revision stabilization, and return to play.

Long-term effect of immobilization in external rotation after first-time shoulder dislocation: an average 18-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Immobilization in external rotation (ER) after a first-time shoulder dislocation was introduced to reduce the risk of recurrence compared with immobilization in internal rotation (IR), but its efficacy remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine the long-term effect of immobilization in ER after a first-time shoulder dislocation.

METHODS

Between October 2000 and March 2004, 198 patients with a first-time anterior dislocation of the shoulder (average age 37) were randomly assigned to immobilization in ER (ER group = 104 shoulders) or IR (IR group = 94 shoulders) for 3 weeks. At an average 2-year follow-up, 159 patients (80.3%) were available for evaluation. In the current study, these 159 patients were further followed up and interviewed by telephone. The following items were evaluated: recurrent instability, apprehensive feeling, surgical intervention, limitation in the range of motion, return to sports, and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score.

RESULTS

The average follow-up period was 18.2 years (range, 16-20 years). Fifty-six patients were available for follow-up with the follow-up rate of 35%. The number of recurrent patients was 6 of 27 (22%) in the ER group and 6 of 29 (21%) in the IR group (P = .889). The number of surgically stabilized patients was 3 of 27 (11%) in the ER group and 10 of 29 (34%) in the IR group (P = .038). In total, the recurrence rate was 33% (9 of 27) in the ER group and 55% (16 of 29) in the IR group (P = .100). Adding the surgical cases and those with the SANE score ≤70% as failure cases, the failure rate in the ER group (26%) was significantly lower than that in the IR group (52%) (P = .048). Among those who survived without surgical intervention, there were no significant differences in apprehensive feeling, return to sports, limited range of motion, and the SANE score between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Immobilization in ER reduced the risk of surgical intervention compared with IR in the long term.

Shoulder Stabilization Versus Immobilization for First-Time Anterior Shoulder Dislocation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Level 1 Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Multiple studies have compared redislocation rates after stabilization and immobilization for patients experiencing a traumatic, first-time anterior shoulder dislocation (ASD).

PURPOSE

To systematically review the literature to compare rates of recurrent instability and subsequent instability surgery in patients undergoing treatment for a first-time ASD with surgical stabilization versus shoulder immobilization.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 1.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed by searching PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase to identify level 1 randomized studies that compared outcomes of surgical stabilization versus immobilization for treatment of primary ASD. The following search phrase was used: (glenohumeral OR anterior shoulder) AND (conservative OR nonoperative OR nonsurgical OR physiotherapy) AND (Bankart OR repair OR stabilization OR surgical OR surgery OR arthroscopic OR arthroscopy) AND (instability OR dislocation). Patients with soft tissue disruption alone as well as those with additional minor bony lesions (Hill-Sachs, Bankart) were included. Recurrent instability and subsequent instability surgery rates, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), and range of motion were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 5 studies met inclusion criteria, including 126 patients undergoing surgical stabilization (mean age, 23.6 years; range, 15.0-39.0 years) and 133 patients undergoing treatment with sling immobilization only (mean age, 23.1 years; range, 15.0-31.0 years). Mean follow-up was 59.7 months. Overall, 6.3% of operative patients experienced recurrent instability at latest follow-up compared with 46.6% of nonoperative patients (P < .00001). Similarly, 4.0% of operative patients underwent a subsequent instability surgery compared with 30.8% of nonoperative patients (P < .00001). These same trends were demonstrated when data were isolated to nonoperative patients immobilized in internal rotation. When comparing the operative and nonoperative groups at latest follow-up, 1 study found significantly improved WOSI scores among operative patients (P = .035) and 1 study found significantly improved abducted external rotation in nonoperative patients (P = .02).

CONCLUSION

Patients, particularly active men in their 20s and 30s, undergoing treatment for a first-time ASD with a surgical stabilization procedure can be expected to experience significantly lower rates of recurrent instability and a significantly decreased need for a future stabilization procedure when compared with patients treated nonoperatively.