Repair integrity and functional outcomes of arthroscopic repair in chronic anterior shoulder instability: single-loaded versus double-loaded single-row repair.

Abstract

This study compared the clinical outcome and repair integrity of single-loaded and double-loaded single-row arthroscopic repair of chronic anterior shoulder instability. Fifty consecutive chronic anterior shoulder instability cases treated by arthroscopic labral repair were included. A single-loaded single-row technique was used in the first 25 consecutive shoulders, and a double-loaded single-row technique was used in the next 25 consecutive shoulders. The number of suture anchors was 4 in the shoulders that underwent single-loaded repair and 3 in the shoulders that underwent double-loaded repair. 42 shoulders (84.0%) followed up clinical outcomes were evaluated a minimum 2years (mean 28.5months; range 24-46) postoperatively. The postoperative labral repair integrity was evaluated by MDCT-arthrogram at a minimum 6months postoperatively. At the final follow-up, the average UCLA, ASES, Constant, Rowe score, VAS pain score, and VAS for instability scores improved significantly, to 33.05, 92.33, 89.05, 94.86, 0.90 and 0.52, respectively, in the single-loaded group and to 32.19, 90.10, 89.05, 94.52, 0.90, and 0.86, respectively, in the double-loaded group. The clinical scores improved in both groups postoperatively (all P < 0.05); however, there was no significant difference between the two groups at final follow-up (P = 0.414, 0.508, 1.000, 0.917, 1.000, and 0.470, respectively). The re-tear rate was 2 (9.5%) in the shoulders that underwent single-loaded repair and 3 (14.3%) in the shoulders that underwent double-loaded repair; this difference was statistically not significant (P = 0.634). The double-loaded single-row technique resulted in comparable clinical outcomes, and re-tear rate compared with the single-loaded single-row technique in chronic anterior shoulder instability at short-term follow-up. Number of used suture anchor in double-loaded single-row technique was fewer than that of single-loaded single-row technique. Comparative retrospective study, level III.