Anterior glenohumeral instability treated with arthroscopic Bankart operation - a retrospective 5-year follow-up study

BACKGROUND

This retrospective study investigated 5-year results of primary arthroscopic operation for anterior glenohumeral instability (AI) with special interest in patients aged<25 years and gender.

HYPOTHESIS

Recurrence of AI is higher in male patients aged<25 years than older patients or females.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Primary arthroscopic Bankart repair was performed between January 2009 and December 2015 on 156 shoulders [154 patients, 104/156 (67%) males]. The mean follow-up was 5.6 (SD 2.1, range 0.4-8.9) years. Outcome measures, including re-dislocation, fear of dislocation, Western Ontario instability index, Subjective shoulder value and pain Numerical rating scale scores, the number of revision surgeries and satisfaction with the result of surgical treatment, were assessed for 130 shoulders [82/130 (63%) males]. AI recurrence was defined as a dislocation or a fear of such.

RESULTS

The Kaplan-Meier analysis estimates for the cumulative survival of stable shoulders were 28% at 8.8 years for patients aged<25 years (SE 0.4, CI 95% 5.5-7.2) and 53% at 8.9 years for patients aged ≥25 years (SE 0.2, CI 95% 7.2-8.0; p=0.005). The Kaplan-Meier estimates for the cumulative survival of stable shoulders were 50% at 8.9 years for males (SE 0.3, CI 95% 6.8-7.8) and 37% at 8.6 years for females (SE 0.3, CI 95% 6.5-7.7; p=0.8). Mean time to revision was 2.4 (SD 1.7, range 0.4-5.3) years.

DISCUSSION

Recurrence of AI was higher in the patients aged<25 years (p=0.005), but gender was not a risk factor. Re-operation rate due to recurrent AI was 10% in this 5-year follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III; case-control study.

Previous arthroscopic Bankart repair is an independent risk factor for an inferior outcome after Latarjet procedure

BACKGROUND

There is limited evidence that the Latarjet procedure has a worse outcome as a revision operation, after a failed stabilization surgery, compared with when it is the primary procedure for posttraumatic anteroinferior instability of the shoulder joint.

PURPOSE

To compare the results from Latarjet as a primary operation vs. revision surgery after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair for posttraumatic anteroinferior shoulder instability. In addition, to assess the effect of preoperative bony pathology on outcome.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Ninety-nine patients who underwent the Latarjet procedure (47 primary, 52 revision after failed Bankart repair) were analyzed after an average of 3.8 (SD 2.3, range 1-11) years of follow-up. All patients underwent either computed tomography or magnetic resonance imaging preoperatively. Glenoid and humeral bone defects were measured to assess whether the Hill-Sachs lesion was on- or off-track. Clinical outcome measures included the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), subjective shoulder value (SSV), and recurrence of instability (dislocation, subluxation, or any perception of instability).

RESULTS

There were no cases of recurrent dislocation in either group. Four patients in the primary surgery group and 13 in the revision group had at least one subluxation or perception of instability after the Latarjet procedure. Patients with a previous arthroscopic Bankart repair had worse outcomes than those undergoing primary Latarjet when assessed by the WOSI: 76 (SD 22) vs. 85 (SD 15), difference in means -9 (95% CI -17 to -1, p=0.02); SSV: 80 (SD 18) vs. 88 (SD 13), difference in means -8 (95% CI -15 to -2, p=0.01); and the recurrence percentage (25% vs. 9%, p=0.03). A multivariate linear regression model adjusted for the length of follow-up, glenoid bone defect size, Hill-Sachs lesion size, and the frequency of preoperative bipolar bone defects (on/off track Hill-Sachs lesions) further increased the difference in WOSI to -12 (95% CI -21 to -4, p=0.005).

DISCUSSION

A previous failed arthroscopic Bankart repair was a significant independent risk factor for inferior outcome. Preoperative bony pathology did not explain the worse outcome from the revision vs. primary Latarjet procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV, cohort observational study.

Long-term results of arthroscopic Bankart repair: Minimum 10 years of follow-up

PURPOSE

This study investigated the long-term results of arthroscopic Bankart repair in terms of rates and timelines of recurrence of instability, with special interest in young adult patients aged ≤20 years.

METHODS

Between 2000 and 2005, 186 shoulders [182 patients, 50 women, median age 26 (range 15-58) years] were operated on at a university hospital using arthroscopic Bankart repair because of instability after traumatic anteroinferior shoulder dislocation. Medical records were retrospectively reviewed and patients were assessed using postal questionnaires or telephone interview after a minimum of 10 years of follow-up [median 12.2 (range 10-16) years]. The primary outcome measure was recurrence of instability (assessed from 167 shoulders), other outcome measures included Oxford instability score (OIS), subjective shoulder value (SSV), and Western Ontario instability index (WOSI) (assessed from 157 shoulders).

RESULTS

At the end of follow-up, 50/167 shoulders (30%) had recurrence of instability and 30/167 (18%) were subjected to reoperation due to instability symptoms. Twenty-six (52%) failures occurred within ≤2 years, 11 (22%) within 2-5 years, and 13 (26%) >5 years after surgery. Failure rate was 19/35 (54%) for patients aged ≤20 years and 31/132 (24%) for patients aged >20 years; reoperation rates were 11/35 (31%) and 19/132 (14%), respectively. Mean OIS was 20 (SD 9, range 12-50), SSV 83% (SD 21, range 10-100), and WOSI score 80 (SD 22, range 33-100).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one-third of patients had recurrence of instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair after a minimum of 10-year follow-up. Patients aged ≤20 years did poorly with more than half of the patients having recurrence; alternative stabilization techniques should probably be considered for these patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Arthroscopic Findings in Anterior Shoulder Instability

Background:

In the last years, basic research and arthroscopic surgery, have improved our understanding of shoulder anatomy and pathology. It is a fact that arthroscopic treatment of shoulder instability has evolved considerably over the past decades. The aim of this paper is to present the variety of pathologies that should be identified and treated during shoulder arthroscopy when dealing with anterior shoulder instability cases.

Methods:

A review of the current literature regarding arthroscopic shoulder anatomy, anatomic variants, and arthroscopic findings in anterior shoulder instability, is presented. In addition, correlation of arthroscopic findings with physical examination and advanced imaging (CT and MRI) in order to improve our understanding in anterior shoulder instability pathology is discussed.

Results:

Shoulder instability represents a broad spectrum of disease and a thorough understanding of the pathoanatomy is the key for a successful treatment of the unstable shoulder. Patients can have a variety of pathologies concomitant with a traditional Bankart lesion, such as injuries of the glenoid (bony Bankart), injuries of the glenoid labrum, superiorly (SLAP) or anteroinferiorly (e.g. anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion, and Perthes), capsular lesions (humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament), and accompanying osseous-cartilage lesions (Hill-Sachs, glenolabral articular disruption). Shoulder arthroscopy allows for a detailed visualization and a dynamic examination of all anatomic structures, identification of pathologic findings, and treatment of all concomitant lesions.

Conclusion:

Surgeons must be well prepared and understanding the normal anatomy of the glenohumeral joint, including its anatomic variants to seek for the possible pathologic lesions in anterior shoulder instability during shoulder arthroscopy. Patient selection criteria, improved surgical techniques, and implants available have contributed to the enhancement of clinical and functional outcomes to the point that arthroscopic treatment is considered nowadays the standard of care.