Anterior Glenohumeral Instability Research Articles

Functional Outcome of Arthroscopic Bankart Repair with Knotless Suture Anchor: A Retrospective Observational Study

Background: The soft tissue in the shoulder plays a significant role in anterior shoulder instability, leading to humeral head displacement from the glenoid fossa. Arthroscopic Bankart repair is a widely accepted method to restore the labrum to the joint rim. This study aims to evaluate the clinical outcomes of Bankart repair by knotless suture anchors at medium-term follow-up, assess the functional outcomes of the knotless suture anchor method for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability, and conduct clinical assessment using the Rowe score at 6-week, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month intervals in patients. Methods: In this retrospective study, patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair using a 2.8 mm knotless suture anchor (MINI-VIM PK® ) were enrolled. They were assessed for shoulder stability, range of motion (ROM), and functional outcomes using the Rowe scale at the baseline, 6-week, 3-month, 6-month, and 12-month follow-up intervals as part of the planned early efficacy measures. All the statistical analyses were performed using SPSS software. Results: The mean age of the subjects was 28.10 ± 6.14. In this trial, 51 patients (69.86%) were diagnosed with recurrent shoulder dislocation on the left side, and 22 patients (30.14%) on the right side. The Rowe score demonstrated a significant improvement (P < 0.0001), increasing from 44.73 ± 1.64 to 95.62 ± 18.33 at the 12-month follow-up period. This indicated better clinical outcomes and reduced recurrence of instability with the use of knotless suture anchors. Conclusion: The use of knotless suture anchors demonstrated reduced recurrence rates, improved post-operative shoulder motion, and increased stability without adding complexity to the procedure.

MANAGEMENT OF THE FAILED LATARJET PROCEDURE

AimTo analyze the causes of failure after a Latarjet procedure and to evaluate the results of revision surgery. MethodsSingle-cohort, retrospective, observational study. Fifteen patients, 13 males, mean age at revision failed Latarjet 38.9 years (range, 20-57), with anterior glenohumeral instability who underwent a revision surgery for a failed Latarjet procedure were reviewed. Failure was defined as subluxation or dislocation. Demographic features, the reason for failure, type of lesions observed, and postoperative clinical and functional status were recorded. Functional status was assessed with the Rowe score. Subjective clinical evaluation was performed using the WOSI Index and subjective shoulder value (SSV). ResultsRecurrence occurred in the first year following the Latarjet procedure in 11 (73.3%) patients. The causes of failure were graft avulsion in 3 cases, fracture in 1, coracoid misposition in 2 cases, graft non-union in 1, advanced osteolysis in 4 cases and persistence of an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion in one. In 3 cases no identifiable cause of failure, but patients generalized severe hyperlaxity was found. Regarding revision surgery after the Latarjet procedure, 8 patients underwent an arthroscopic Eden-Hybinette procedure and in 3 patients the graft was repositioned. In the remaining 4 patients an extraarticular capsular reinforcement was performed. Regarding the latter, one patient suffered new dislocations and required an additional revision surgery consisting of an Eden-Hybinette procedure. All patients remained stable after the revision surgery at the latest follow-up, except two who reported subluxations after an arthroscopic Eden-Hybinette and an extraarticular capsular reinforcement, but no additional surgical procedure was required. Functional status after revision surgery was satisfactory, with a Rowe mean score noted at 78 (10-100), WOSI score at 829 (225-1425) and a subjective shoulder value scale at 67 points (40-90). ConclusionThe causes of failure after a Latarjet procedure were poor bone graft due to mispositioning, avulsion, fracture or resorption, generalized hyperlaxity, and incomplete restoration of the glenoid track. Our study demonstrates that when the cause of failure is identified and addressed, stability is restored, and clinical and functional scores improved.

Arthroscopic suture bridge fixation for acute bony Bankart with anterior glenohumeral instability: a case report and narrative review.

Anterior shoulder dislocations can result in acute glenoid rim fractures that compromise the bony stability of the glenohumeral joint. Adequate fixation of these fractures is required to restore stability, decrease shoulder pain, and facilitate return to activity. The double-row suture bridge is a relatively novel fixation technique, first described in 2009, that accomplishes internal fixation with sufficient stability using an all-arthroscopic technique to restore the glenoid footprint. A 40-year-old female with recurrent anterior shoulder instability in the setting of seizure disorder was found to have a bony Bankart lesion of 25% to 30% with a concomitant superior labral tear. The patient was treated with a double-row bony Bankart bridge and labral repair. At six months follow-up, she has progressed to a full recovery with no recurrence. A search was conducted in May 2023 in PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL with the search terms bony Bankart, bone Bankart, osseous Bankart, acute, bridge, suture bridge, double row. Double-row suture bridge repairs result in improvement in shoulder function as determined by ASES (93.5), QuickDASH (4.5), SANE (95.9), and SF-12 (55.6). The overall recurrence rate of anterior instability after a bony Bankart bridge repair is 8%. When examining the return to prior level of function, 81.4% of patients were able to do so with only 7.9% of patients reporting significant modifications to their activity level. In mid-term results, double row suture bridge demonstrates similar outcomes to other all-arthroscopic fixation methods of bony Bankart injuries. Importantly, bony Bankart bridge remains a viable option for critical glenoid lesions over the 20% cutoff used in other all arthroscopic techniques. Biomechanically, the double-row suture bridge offers distinct benefits over its single-row counterpart including increased compression, reduced displacement, and reduced step-off. Although there is limited data, the studies discussed and the demonstrative case show the potential benefit of all-arthroscopic double-row suture bridge fixation including increased compression, decreased displacement, and a lower complication rate in patients with large bony Bankart lesions traditionally requiring bony augmentation. However, more robust studies are necessary to determine the long-term success of the double-row suture bridge.

To Remplissage or Not to Remplissage Part 1: Prognostic Factors Influencing Recurrent Shoulder Instability in High-Risk Individuals with On-Track Shoulders Undergoing Primary Arthroscopic Anterior Stabilization

Objectives: Recent studies have shown that a subset of on-track Hill-Sachs lesions (HSL), defined as near-track lesions, may have a high risk of failure after primary arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) alone. The aim of this study was to evaluate rates of recurrent shoulder instability among patients with on-track HSL who underwent primary ABR with and without remplissage in the setting of numerous risk factors highlighted in recent literature. We hypothesized that primary ABR with remplissage (ABR+R) would lower postoperative rates of recurrent shoulder instability, particularly for “high-risk” patients defined as “near-track” lesions, hyperlaxity, younger age, contact athletes, and >1 preoperative instability episodes. Methods: Prospectively collected data was retrospectively reviewed for consecutive patients aged 14-40 years who underwent either ABR or ABR+R between 2013 and 2021 for anterior glenohumeral instability. Glenoid bone loss, Hills-Sachs Interval (HSI), glenoid track (GT), and distance-to-dislocation (DTD) values (DTD = GT-HSI) were determined via preoperative magnetic resonance imaging. Additionally, “near-track” lesions are a subset of on-track lesions with a DTD from 0 – 10mm. Capsuloligamentous laxity (i.e., hyperlaxity) was defined as external rotation greater than 85 degrees and/or grade 2+ posterior and inferior load-and-shift on examination under anesthesia. Recurrent shoulder instability was defined as recurrent dislocation and/or subjective subluxation postoperatively. Patients were excluded if the indexed surgery was a revision procedure, < 2-year follow-up, or glenoid bone loss (GBL) >20%. Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis was used to determine predictors of recurrent shoulder instability and reoperation. Results: One-hundred-and-fifty-five patients were included for analysis (ABR: 116 | ABR+R: 39) with an average age of 21.6 ± 6.2 years and an average follow-up of 5.1 ± 2.0 years (range: 2.0 – 8.7 yrs). Overall, 30 patients (19%) experienced recurrent shoulder instability postoperatively (4.3 per 100 person-years), and 20 (13%) underwent secondary surgery (2.9 per 100 person-years) for revision stabilization. Among the 116 patients who underwent primary ABR only, 27 (23.3%) experienced recurrent shoulder instability, compared with only three of the 39 ABR+R patients (7.7%). Risk factors assessed included: age, gender, sport, number of preoperative instability episodes, shoulder laxity, GBL, and DTD. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that younger age (p=0.003), increased shoulder laxity (p=0.010), 2+ episodes of preoperative instability episodes (p=0.009), and a lower DTD (p=0.046) were independent risk factors for recurrent shoulder instability postoperatively. However, contact athlete status was not identified as a significant predictor of recurrent shoulder instability. According to multivariate results, patients who underwent primary ABR only were roughly 9-times more likely to experience recurrent shoulder instability (HR: 8.7, p=0.002) and 7-times more likely to undergo reoperation (HR:6.8, p=0.019) than those who underwent primary ABR+R. When considering patients with three or more risk factors (i.e., “near-track” lesions, hyperlaxity, age < 25, or 2+ preoperative instability episodes), 9 of 12 ABR patients (75%) and 2 of 16 ABR+R (13%) experienced recurrent shoulder instability (p = 0.001), Table 1. Survival rates for ABR only versus ABR+R for patients with three or more risk factors are plotted in Figure 1 using Kaplan-Meier survival plots. Conclusions: Arthroscopic primary Bankart repair with remplissage may be an effective approach for decreasing the likelihood of recurrent shoulder instability and the need for secondary surgery among patients with on-track HSL. This surgical approach is especially beneficial for patients with lower DTD, increased shoulder laxity, younger age, or 2+ preoperative instability episodes in a dose-dependent manner. Those with higher risks of recurrence may benefit significantly more with the addition of a remplissage than those with fewer risk factors.

To Remplissage or not to Remplissage Part 2: Recurrent Instability After Primary Stabilization Surgery (RIPSS) Risk Tool Assesses Preoperative Failure Rates in On-track Shoulders Undergoing Primary Arthroscopic Anterior Stabilization with or without Remplissage Augmentation

Objectives: Given the high rates of recurrent instability following the initial arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR), it is crucial to provide recommendations for appropriate surgical interventions for patients at a higher risk of experiencing recurring instability. In Part 1 of the study, it was discovered that on-track Hill-Sachs lesions (HSL) with specific prognostic factors (i.e., younger age, increased shoulder laxity, lower DTD, and 2+ preoperative instability events) were associated with a greater risk of failure. Therefore, the objective of Part 2 was to develop a risk assessment tool that takes into account significant prognostic factors for recurrent shoulder instability following primary ABR and evaluate the role of remplissage augmentation given a patient’s risk profile. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed prospectively collected data of consecutive patients aged 14-40 who underwent either ABR (arthroscopic Bankart repair) or ABR+R (ABR with remplissage) procedures between 2013 and 2021 for anterior glenohumeral instability. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging was used to determine the values of glenoid bone loss, Hills-Sachs Interval (HSI), glenoid track (GT), and distance-to-dislocation (DTD). On-track lesions have a distance-to-dislocation (DTD) value greater than zero. In addition, within the category of on-track lesions, there is a subset known as “near-track” lesions, with a DTD ranging from 0 to 10 mm. Capsuloligamentous laxity scores were categorized according to hyperlaxity status, defined as external rotation greater than 85 degrees and/or grade 2+ posterior and inferior load-and-shift on examination under anesthesia. Recurrent shoulder instability was defined as recurrent dislocation and/or subjective subluxation postoperatively. Patients were excluded if the indexed surgery was a revision procedure, < 2-year follow-up, or glenoid bone loss (GBL) >20%. A final multivariate survival analysis was constructed using categorical prognostic factors (i.e., patient age, “near-track” status, hyperlaxity, and 2+ preoperative instability episodes) identified in Part 1, while adjusting for GBL. Although contact athlete status was not identified as a significant predictor of recurrent shoulder instability in Part 1, the final model stratified by contact athlete status given its established importance in prior literature. Multivariate hazard ratio estimates were utilized to create a risk assessment tool and correlated with patient-specific risk estimates via post-estimation analysis. Results: One-hundred-and-fifty-five patients were included for analysis (ABR: 116 | ABR+R: 39) with an average age of 21.6 ± 6.2 years and an average follow-up of 5.1 ± 2.0 years (range: 2.0 – 8.7 yrs). Patients with near-track lesions had a three-fold higher risk of recurrent instability (Hazard Ratio [HR]: 2.5, p = 0.03) compared to on-track HSL with DTD > 10mm. Individuals with evidence of hyperlaxity exhibited a five-fold increased risk (HR: 5.4, p=0.03) relative to patients without hyperlaxity. Younger patient groups had twice the risk of recurrent shoulder instability (HR: 2.2, p=0.003) compared to older adjacent groups. Patients with two or more preoperative recurrent instability episodes faced a four-times greater risk (HR: 4.2, p=0.004) for recurrent shoulder instability compared to patients who experienced a single instability event preoperatively. Lastly, patients who underwent primary ABR only had almost 10-times greater risk of recurrent shoulder instability (HR: 9.5, p=0.002) than those who underwent primary ABR+R. The Recurrent Instability after Primary Shoulder Stabilization (RIPSS) risk assessment score considers patient age, near-track status, hyperlaxity, preoperative instability episodes, and surgical technique (ABR vs. ABR+R) as important prognostic indicators, Table 2. The RIPSS score was created with risk stratifying subgroups: Low-risk (0 – 2), Moderate-risk (3 – 6), High-risk (7 – 9), and Extreme-risk (10+). Figure 1 illustrates a strong correlation between patient RIPSS scores with patient-specific hazard ratio estimates derived from the multivariate Cox regression modeling computed in “To Remplissage or not to Remplissage Part 1”. According to RIPSS score subgroups, recurrent shoulder instability rates range from 4.3% among low-risk groups to 54.6% among extreme-risk groups, Figure 1. Conclusions: Patients with a low-risk RIPSS score without ABR+R may not benefit from remplissage augmentation. Their risk for recurrent instability would remain low despite the addition of remplissage. However, patients with a high- or extreme-risk RIPSS score prior to considering ARB+R would likely benefit from remplissage supplementation. The RIPSS score may be an effective risk assessment tool that may help identify patients who may benefit from a primary Bankart repair with remplissage augmentation. The risk assessment tool developed may optimize surgical treatment and allow physicians to determine patient risk scores with and without remplissage augmentation.

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: Asystematic review and meta-analysis.

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 outcomesand 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. According to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a search was conducted using threedatabases (MEDLINE/OVID, EMBASEand 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. A total of 16 studies (13 level III studies, 2 level II studiesand 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 amongstudies 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). 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 III.

Patients Have a 15% Redislocation Rate After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair With a Knotless Technique

PurposeThe aim of this study was to evaluate the redislocation rate after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) with a standardized knotless anchor technique in a consecutive series of patients with anterior glenohumeral instability. MethodsInclusion criteria were patients who underwent ABR by a single surgeon between January 2008 and December 2018 with a minimum follow up of 2 years. We collected data through phone interviews, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) and review of patient records. The primary outcome was redislocation and secondary outcomes were recurrent subluxations, reoperation, postoperative complications, patient satisfaction and functional outcomes. We also performed survival analysis and risk factor analysis. ResultsOut of 88 patients (91 shoulders) that underwent ABR during the inclusion period, 70 patients (73 shoulders) were included (follow-up rate 80%). The mean follow-up was 7.5 years (range 2 to 12 years). Redislocation occurred in 15% (95% CI 7.8%-25.4%) of patients at a mean of 41 months after surgery (range 6 to 115 months). The reoperation rate for recurrent redislocation was 4.1%. Overall, 90.4% reported being currently satisfied with their shoulder and the mean WOSI score at follow-up was 73.8% (range 8.3-99.9%). Patients with redislocation were younger at primary operation than patients with no redislocation (mean 21 years vs. 28 years; P=0.023) and adjusted Hazard Ratio (HR) for age was 0.86 (95% CI 0.74-0.99; P=0.033). It was more common to have less than 3 anchors in patients with redislocation (P=0.024), but adjusted HR was 4.42 (95% CI 0.93-21.02; P=0.061). ConclusionsThe redislocation rate after ABR with a standardized knotless anchor technique in a consecutive series of patients with anterior glenohumeral instability was found to be 15% after a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean 7.5)

Shoulder Stabilization Technique Using the Medial Glenohumeral Ligament in Patients With the Buford Complex

The Buford complex is an anatomic variation defined as the association of a cordlike middle glenohumeral ligament (MGHL) and an absent anterosuperior labrum. It can be challenging to properly identify on preoperative imaging and remains mostly an arthroscopic finding. It may, however, lead to problematic situations when encountered during an arthroscopic soft-tissue stabilization procedure, as the treatment of choice in such cases is a bone block. Moreover, reattaching the MGHL to the anterior border of the glenoid rim has traditionally not been recommended because it theoretically leads to severe restriction in external rotation. This technical note describes arthroscopic stabilization for anterior traumatic glenohumeral instability associated with the Buford complex. The cordlike MGHL is used to reconstruct a neo-labrum, associated with an anteroinferior glenohumeral ligament plication. Glenohumeral stabilization using the cordlike MGHL of the Buford complex may be an efficient alternative to a bone block procedure.

Arthroscopic remplissage: history, indications, and clinical outcomes

Several surgical procedures have been proposed to address anterior glenohumeral instability, which is one of the most common complaints in the general population. The remplissage, first described in early 2000s, is a procedure performed simultaneously with the arthroscopic Bankart repair to correct large, engaging Hill-Sachs lesions (HSLs). This procedure stabilizes the joint by tenodesing the infraspinatus tendon into the HSL to fill and disengage the defect. This procedure gained popularity because it has relatively low risk and is able to improve shoulder stability while being less invasive than other bone-blocking procedures. The remplissage has become a valuable add-on technique that can substantially improve outcomes in unstable patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. Nevertheless, several studies in the literature have raised concerns regarding its efficacy in critically unstable patients and the potential range of motion limitations that can arise postoperatively. Additional comparative studies and trials should be conducted to appropriately establish the role of remplissage in treating anterior instability, especially in patients with critical bone loss.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair with peeling osteotomy of the anterior glenoid rim preserves glenoid morphology.

A decrease in the glenoid size after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) was common in shoulders without osseous fragments compared with those with osseous fragments. For cases of chronic recurrent traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability without osseous fragments, we have performed ABR with peeling osteotomy of the anterior glenoid rim (ABRPO) to make an intentional osseous Bankart lesion. The aim of this study was to compare the glenoid morphology after ABRPO with it after simple ABR. The medical records of patients who underwent arthroscopic stabilization for chronic recurrent traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability were retrospectively reviewed. Patients with an osseous fragment, with revision surgery and without complete data were excluded. Patients were assigned to 1 of 2 groups: Group A, ABR without peeling osteotomy procedure or Group B, with ABRPO procedure. Computed tomography was performed preoperatively and 1year after surgery. The size of the glenoid bone loss was investigated by the assumed circle method. The following formula was used to calculate the decreased size of the glenoid: (Δ) = (postoperative size of the glenoid bone loss) - (preoperative size of the glenoid bone loss). The size of the glenoid 1year after surgery was assessed to determine if it had decreased (Δ>0%) or not decreased (Δ≤0%) relative to the preoperative size. This study evaluated 39 shoulders divided into 2 groups: 27 shoulders in Group A and 12 shoulders in Group B. In Group A, postoperative glenoid bone loss was significantly greater than preoperative glenoid bone loss (7.8±6.2 vs. 5.5±5.3, respectively, P=.02). In Group B, postoperative glenoid bone loss was significantly lower than preoperative glenoid bone loss (5.6±5.4 vs. 8.7±4.0, respectively, P=.02). The P value for the interaction of group (A or B) × time (preoperative or postoperative) was 0.001. The decreased size of the glenoid was significantly larger in Group A than in Group B (2.1±4.2 vs. -3.1±4.5, respectively, P=.001). The rate of shoulders in which the size of the glenoid decreased 1year after surgery relative to the preoperative size was significantly higher in Group A than in Group B (63% [17/27] vs. 25% [3/2], respectively, P=.04). The study showed that ABRPO preserved the glenoid size better than simple ABR without a peeling osteotomy procedure.

Association of Instability History and Off-Track Hill-Sachs Lesions in Anterior Shoulder Instability.

The glenoid track concept is now widely accepted, and its evaluation is considered essential for making decisions about surgery. To define preoperative descriptive data and clinical and functional features in patients with anterior glenohumeral instability according to glenoid track status and to analyze the influence of off-track Hill-Sachs (HS) lesions on preoperative shoulder function. Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography scans were used to measure the glenoid track. Descriptive data and preoperative objective and subjective clinical and functional features were compared between patients with on-track HS lesions versus off-track HS lesions. Multivariate regression analysis was conducted to identify potential risk factors for off-track HS lesion development. A total of 235 patients (201 men, 34 women; mean age, 29.6 ± 8.6 years) were included- 134 shoulders (57%) with on-track HS lesions and 101 shoulders (43%) with off-track HS lesions. Age <20 years at first dislocation, number of dislocations, and ≥2 years between first dislocation and surgery were significantly different between the study groups (P = .005, P = .0001, and P = .01, respectively). Regarding these characteristics, the odds ratios for the risk of developing an off-track lesion were 2.67 (95% CI, 1.2-5.99)-1.2 times higher for each additional instability episode (95% CI, 1.025-1.14) and 2.42 times higher (95% CI, 1.176-4.608) for patients whose first dislocation was ≥2 years before surgery, respectively. Patients with off-track HS lesions had a significantly greater degree of instability (P = .04), worse Rowe scores (48.8 ± 15.3 vs 54.8 ± 28.3 for on-track HS lesions; P = .04), and lower Western Ontario Shoulder Instability scores (975 ± 454 vs 1179 ± 428 for on-track HS lesions; P = .01). Characteristics related to a history of instability (age <20 years at first instability episode, larger number of dislocations, ≥2 years between first dislocation and surgery) were found to be risk factors for the development of an off-track HS lesion in this study. Off-track lesions led to a higher degree of instability and worse objective and subjective preoperative shoulder function versus on-track HS lesions.

Factors Associated With Humeral Avulsion of Glenohumeral Ligament Lesions in Patients With Anterior Shoulder Instability: An Analysis of the MOON Shoulder Instability Cohort.

Humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament (HAGL) lesions are an uncommon cause of anterior glenohumeral instability and may occur in isolation or combination with other pathologies. As HAGL lesions are difficult to detect via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and arthroscopy, they can remain unrecognized and result in continued glenohumeral instability. To compare patients with anterior shoulder instability from a large multicenter cohort with and without a diagnosis of a HAGL lesion and identify preoperative physical examination findings, patient-reported outcomes, imaging findings, and surgical management trends associated with HAGL lesions. Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. Patients with anterior glenohumeral instability who underwent surgical management between 2012 and 2020 at 11 orthopaedic centers were enrolled. Patients with HAGL lesions identified intraoperatively were compared with patients without HAGL lesions. Preoperative characteristics, physical examinations, imaging findings, intraoperative findings, and surgical procedures were collected. The Student t test, Kruskal-Wallis H test, Fisher exact test, and chi-square test were used to compare groups. A total of 21 HAGL lesions were identified in 915 (2.3%) patients; approximately one-third (28.6%) of all lesions were visualized intraoperatively but not identified on preoperative MRI. Baseline characteristics did not differ between study cohorts. Compared with non-HAGL patients, HAGL patients were less likely to have a Hill-Sachs lesion (54.7% vs 28.6%; P = .03) or an anterior labral tear (87.2% vs 66.7%; P = .01) on preoperative MRI and demonstrated increased external rotation when their affected arm was positioned at 90° of abduction (85° vs 90°; P = .03). Additionally, HAGL lesions were independently associated with an increased risk of undergoing an open stabilization surgery (odds ratio, 74.6 [95% CI, 25.2-221.1]; P < .001). Approximately one-third of HAGL lesions were missed on preoperative MRI. HAGL patients were less likely to exhibit preoperative imaging findings associated with anterior shoulder instability, such as Hill-Sachs lesions or anterior labral pathology. These patients underwent open procedures more frequently than patients without HAGL lesions.

Utility of Talus Osteochondral Allograft Augmentation for Varying Hill-Sachs Lesion Sizes: A Cadaveric Study.

Humeral head reconstruction with fresh osteochondral allografts (OCA) serves as a potential treatment option for anatomic reconstruction. More specifically, talus OCA is a promising graft source because of its high congruency with a dense cartilaginous surface. To analyze the surface geometry of the talus OCA plug augmentation for the management of shoulder instability with varying sizes of Hill-Sachs lesions (HSLs). Controlled laboratory study. Seven fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were tested in this study. The humeral heads were analyzed using actual patients' computed tomography scans. Surface laser scan analysis was performed on 7 testing states: (1) native state; (2) small HSL; (3) talus OCA augmentation for small HSL; (4) medium HSL; (5) talus OCA augmentation for medium HSL; (6) large HSL; and (7) talus OCA augmentation for large HSL. OCA plugs were harvested from the talus allograft and placed in the most medial and superior aspect of each HSL lesion. Surface congruency was calculated as the mean absolute error and the root mean squared error in the distance. A 1-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was performed to evaluate the effects of the difference in the HSL size and associated talus OCA plugs on surface congruency and the HSL surface area. The surface area analysis of the humeral head with the large (1469 ± 75 mm2), medium (1391 ± 81 mm2), and small (1230 ± 54 mm2) HSLs exhibited significantly higher surface areas than the native state (1007 ± 88 mm2; P < .001 for all sizes). The native state exhibited significantly lower surface areas as compared with after talus OCA augmentation for large HSLs (1235 ± 63 mm2; P < .001) but not for small or medium HSLs. Talus OCA augmentation yielded improved surface areas and congruency after treatment in small, medium, and large HSLs (P < .001). Talus OCA plug augmentation restored surface area and congruency across all tested HSLs, and the surface area was best improved with the most common HSLs-small and medium. Talus OCA plugs may provide a viable option for restoring congruity of the shoulder in patients with recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability and an HSL.

Review of Burkhart and DeBeer's (2000) article on traumatic glenohumeral bone defects and their relationship to failure of arthroscopic Bankart repair: Where have we taken the concept of glenoid bone loss in 2023?

This classic discusses the original publication by Burkhart and DeBeer “Traumatic Glenohumeral Bone Defects and Their Relationship to Failure of Arthroscopic Bankart Repair” published in 2000 in Arthroscopy. At that time, the authors sought to understand the reasons behind the failure of arthroscopic soft tissue repair. Based on their findings, the authors introduced the concept of the inverted pear glenoid and engaging Hill-Sachs lesion which is now part of the orthopedic lexicon. The importance of bony pathologic changes in anterior glenohumeral instability has become so apparent, that it now forms the basis of clinical understanding and underpins treatment algorithms. Since this publication over 20 years ago, the idea of glenohumeral bone loss has been extensively explored and refined. There is no doubt of the importance of structural bone loss yet there is still uncertainty as to the best management of those with subcritical bone loss. The purpose of revisiting this classic article is to look at where we are in understanding recurrent instability and bony deficiency while appreciating how far we have come.This review begins with a detailed summary of the classic article along with a historic perspective. Next, we look at the current evidence as it pertains to the classic article and how modern technology and innovation has advanced our ability to assess and quantify glenohumeral bone loss. We finish with expert commentary on the topic from two current surgeons with a research interest in shoulder instability to offer an insight into how modern surgeons view and address this issue. One of the original authors also reflects on the topic. The findings of this classic study changed the way we think about shoulder instability and opened the doors to an exciting body of research that is still growing today. Future research offers an opportunity for high quality evidence to guide management in the group of patients with subcritical bone loss and we eagerly await the results.

Recurrent Instability After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Patients With Hyperlaxity and Near-Track Lesions.

Recurrent anterior shoulder instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair presents a challenging clinical problem, with the primary stabilization procedure often portending the best chance for clinical success. To determine if capsuloligamentous laxity affects failure (recurrent dislocation, subluxation, and/or perceived instability symptoms) after arthroscopic Bankart repair in patients with near-track lesions (ie, those with smaller distance to dislocation [DTD]). Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. The authors retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients who underwent primary arthroscopic Bankart repair for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability at a single institution between 2007 and 2019 and who had at least 2 years of follow-up data. Patients with glenoid bone loss >20%, off-track lesions, concomitant remplissage, or rotator cuff tear were excluded. Capsuloligamentous laxity, or hyperlaxity, was defined as external rotation >85° with the arm at the side and/or grade ≥2 in at least 2 planes with the shoulder at 90° of abduction. Near-track lesions were defined as those with a DTD <10 mm. Included were 173 patients (mean age, 20.5 years; mean DTD, 16.2 mm), of whom 16.8% sustained a recurrent dislocation and 6.4% had recurrent subluxations (defined as any subjective complaint of recurrent instability without frank dislocation), for an overall recurrent instability rate of 23.1%. The rate of revision stabilization was 15.6%. The mean time to follow-up was 7.4 years. Independent predictors of recurrent instability were younger age (P = .001), smaller DTD (P = .021), >1 preoperative instability episode (P < .001), and the presence of hyperlaxity during examination under anesthesia (P = .013). Among patients with near-track lesions, those with hyperlaxity had a recurrent instability rate almost double that of patients without hyperlaxity (odds ratio, 34.1; P = .04). The increased rate of failure and recurrent dislocation in the near-track hyperlaxity cohort remained elevated, even in patients with no bone loss. Capsuloligamentous shoulder laxity was a significant independent risk factor for failure after primary arthroscopic Bankart repair without remplissage and was more predictive of failure in patients with versus without near-track lesions.

Surgical considerations for glenoid bone loss in anterior glenohumeral instability: a narrative review.

Treatment algorithms may consider many factors like glenoid and humeral bone loss, or scores such as the instability severity index score (ISIS). As most studies only evaluate a part of these factors, there is still no evidence-based consensus estalished. Our study aims to summarize the surgical options for treatment of glenoid bone loss (GBL) in anterior shoulder instability. Based on the current available literature, surgical options including Bankart repair and glenoid bone augmentation should be considered while taking into consideration the degree of bone loss which has been divided into < 10%, 10-20% and > 20%. There are many new techniques evolving including arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction with bone blocks. Future long-term outcome studies and randomized controlled trials comparing established techniques will be needed for new evidence-based treatment algorithms.

Modified Arthroscopic Bristow Procedure: Screw Fixation Without Subscapularis Split

In the presence of bone loss, the Bristow or Latarjet procedure is used to alleviate anterior glenohumeral instability. The techniques have gradually improved under arthroscopy. However, such an arthroscopic procedure has a steep learning curve, lengthy operation time, and considerable risk of complications, inhibiting its rapid development. The current method of modified arthroscopic Bristow procedure with screw fixation without subscapularis split reduces surgical time, reduces the risk of nerve damage consequences, and is simple to apply.

Surgical Technique for the Latarjet Procedure Using Non-Cannulated Screws

Background: The Latarjet procedure is effective for patients with anterior glenohumeral instability with substantial glenoid bone loss due to its triple blocking effect. Indications: Indications include high-risk patients with recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability with any glenoid bone loss or low-risk patients with 15% to 30% glenoid bone loss. Technique Description: An incision is made lateral to the coracoid and the deltopectoral interval is established. The pectoralis minor is released medially off the coracoid and the coracoacromial (CA) ligament is released close to the acromion. The coracoid is cut with a right-angle saw and the inferior coracoid is decorticated with a burr. Two holes are pre-drilled in the coracoid. The subscapularis is split between the upper two-thirds and lower one-third with the arm in external rotation. The capsule is split vertically at the joint line and the humeral head is retracted. The anterior glenoid is decorticated with a burr, and a hole is drilled inferiorly. The depth is measured and added to the depth of the inferior bone block hole. A fully threaded 3.5-mm solid stainless steel screw is placed in the inferior hole. Care is taken to ensure that the lateral border of the bone block is flush with the articular margin. This is repeated for the superior hole. A 1.8-mm knotless suture anchor is placed between the screws. The repair stitch is passed through the capsule and loaded onto the anchor and tensioned. The CA ligament is laid over the capsule and repaired. The subscapularis split is repaired side to side and the wound is closed in layers. Results: High return-to-sport rates, including at the same level of play, have been observed among young competitive athletes with significant glenoid bone loss who underwent a Latarjet, with similarly favorable results in older patients. Ninety-day complication rates have been reported around 9%, 5% of which constituted graft or hardware failures. Discussion/Conclusion: The Latarjet procedure is an effective option for indicated patients with anterior glenohumeral instability and may be enhanced with solid screws, proper anatomic technique, and capsulolabral repair augmentation. Patient Consent Disclosure Statement: The author(s) attests that consent has been obtained from any patient(s) appearing in this publication. If the individual may be identifiable, the author(s) has included a statement of release or other written form of approval from the patient(s) with this submission for publication.

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. Adetailed 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 adetailed 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 aprimary anterior shoulder dislocation.

Dynamic Anterior Stabilization of the Shoulder: Onlay Biceps Transfer to the Anterior Glenoid Using the Double Double-Pulley Technique

The treatment of anterior glenohumeral instability includes several surgical options, ranging from soft tissue to bony procedures—open or arthroscopic. In arthroscopic dynamic anterior stabilization (DAS) of the shoulder, the long head of the biceps is transferred to the anterior glenoid through a subscapularis tendon split. The biceps may be fixed either in an inlay or in an onlay position. Inlay DAS theoretically increases anterior glenohumeral stability through 3 different effects: the hammock effect, sling effect, and the tensioning effect. Onlay DAS may additionally increase stability through a labroplasty effect, produced by the onlay positioning of the biceps on the anterior glenoid rim. The current technical note presents tips and tricks, and pearls and pitfalls, to reproducibly perform onlay DAS using all-suture anchors and the double double-pulley technique.