Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Research Articles

Revision Arthroscopic Labral Repair Using All-Suture Anchors in Patients With Subcritical Glenoid Bone Loss After Failed Bankart Repair: Clinical Outcomes at 2-Year Follow-up.

All-suture anchors have been used for primary arthroscopic Bankart repair because of their ability to minimize initial bone loss. To evaluate the clinical efficacy of using all-suture anchors in revision arthroscopic labral repair after failed Bankart repair. Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Enrolled in this study were 28 patients who underwent revision arthroscopic labral repair with all-suture anchors after a failed primary arthroscopic Bankart repair. Revision surgery was determined for patients who had a frank redislocation history with subcritical glenoid bone loss (<15%), nonengaged Hill-Sachs lesion, or off-track lesion. Minimum 2-year postoperative outcomes were evaluated using shoulder range of motion (ROM), the Rowe score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, apprehension, and the redislocation rate. Postoperative shoulder anteroposterior radiographs were assessed to evaluate arthritic changes in the glenohumeral joint. The mean patient age was 28.1 ± 6.5 years, and the mean time between primary Bankart repair and revision surgery was 5.4 ± 4.1 years. Compared with the number of suture anchors used in the primary operation, significantly more all-suture anchors were inserted in the revision surgery (3.1 ± 0.5 vs 5.8 ± 1.3, P < .001). During the mean follow-up period of 31.8 ± 10.1 months, 3 patients (10.7%) required reoperation because of traumatic redislocation and symptomatic instability. Of patients with symptoms that did not require reoperation, 2 patients (7.1%) had subjective instability with apprehension depending on the arm position. There was no significant change between preoperative and postoperative ROM. However, ASES (preoperative: 61.2 ± 13.3 to postoperative: 81.4 ± 10.4, P < .01) and Rowe (preoperative: 48.7 ± 9.3 to postoperative: 81.7 ± 13.2, P < .01) scores were significantly improved after revision surgery. Eight patients (28.6%) showed arthritic changes in the glenohumeral joint on final plain anteroposterior radiographs. Revision arthroscopic labral repair using all-suture anchors demonstrated satisfactory 2-year clinical outcomes in terms of functional improvement. Postoperative stability was obtained in 82% of patients without recurrent shoulder instability after failed arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Adolescent Anterior Shoulder Instability: Clinical and Imaging Predictors of Revision Surgery and Recurrent Subjective Instability

Background: Multiple clinical and radiologic risk factors for recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair have been described. Humeral bone loss has gained more recent attention, particularly with respect to “off-track” lesions and increased rates of recurrent instability and revision surgery. Purpose: To evaluate clinical and radiologic predictors of failure after arthroscopic Bankart repair in adolescents. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A single-institution retrospective study was performed in patients <19 years of age treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair from 2011 to 2017. Magnetic resonance imaging measurements of glenoid and humeral bone loss, the glenoid track, and the presence of off-track Hill-Sachs (HS) lesions were assessed. All patients had a minimum follow-up of 24 months and completed patient-reported outcome scores. Failure was defined as revision surgery or postoperative subjective instability. Results: A total of 59 patients (46 male, 13 female) with a median age of 16 years (range, 12-18 years) were included. Ten patients (17%) had revision surgery and 8 patients (14%) had subjective instability without revision surgery. No clinical or radiologic factors were significantly different between the failure cohort and the nonfailure cohort. Four patients (7%) measured off-track, and 2 of these patients experienced failure. A total of 38 patients (64%) were identified to have an HS defect. Subgroup analysis of these patients identified a greater HS interval (HSI) in patients who underwent revision surgery as compared with those patients who did not have revision surgery. Among patients with GT ratio ≥15 mm, there was a 50% rate of revision surgery. The Pediatric/Adolescent Shoulder Survey (PASS) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores at the final follow-up were not significantly different among patients with or without revision surgery. However, those with subjective instability who had not undergone revision surgery had significantly lower PASS and SANE scores as compared with the remainder of the cohort. Conclusion: Of the adolescents in this cohort, 31% either had revision surgery (17%) or reported subjective feelings of instability (14%) after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Off-track instability was identified in 7% of the cohort but was not predictive of failure. Among the subgroup of patients with an HS defect, those who underwent revision surgery had a significantly larger HSI.

Shoulder Surgery Postoperative Immobilization: An International Survey of Shoulder Surgeons

There is currently no consensus on immobilization protocols following shoulder surgery. The aim of this study was to establish patterns and types of sling use for various surgical procedures in the United States (US) and Europe, and to identify factors associated with the variations. An online survey was sent to all members of the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) and European Society for Surgery of the Shoulder and Elbow (ESSSE). The survey gathered member data, including practice location and years in practice. It also obtained preferences for the type and duration of sling use after the following surgical procedures: arthroscopic Bankart repair, Latarjet, arthroscopic superior/posterosuperior rotator cuff repair (ARCR) of tears <3 cm and >3 cm, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse TSA (rTSA), and isolated biceps tenodesis (BT). Relationships between physician location and sling type for each procedure were analyzed using Fisher's exact tests and post-hoc tests using Bonferroni-adjusted p-values. Relationships looking at years in practice and sling duration preferred were analyzed using Spearman's correlation tests. In total, 499 surgeons with a median of 15 years of experience (IQR = 9-25) responded, with 54.7% from the US and 45.3% from Europe. US respondents reported higher abduction pillow sling use than European respondents for the following: Bankart repair (62% vs. 15%, p < 0.0001), Latarjet (53% vs. 12%, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (80% vs. 42%, p < 0.001) and >3 cm (84% vs. 61%, p < 0.001), aTSA (50% vs. 21%, p < 0.001) and rTSA with subscapularis repair (61% vs. 22%, p < 0.001) and without subscapularis repair (57% vs. 17%, p < 0.001), and isolated BT (18% vs. 7%, p = 0.006). European respondents reported higher simple sling use than US respondents for the following: Bankart repair (74% vs. 31%, p < 0.001), Latarjet (78% vs. 44%, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (50% vs. 17%, p < 0.001) and >3 cm (34% vs. 13%, p < 0.001), and aTSA (69% vs. 41%, p < 0.001) and rTSA with subscapularis repair (70% vs. 35%, p < 0.001) and without subscapularis repair (73% vs. 39%, p < 0.001). Increasing years of experience demonstrated a negative correlation with the duration of sling use after Bankart repair (r = -0.20, p < 0.001), Latarjet (r = -0.25, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (r = -0.14, p = 0.014) and >3 cm (r = -0.20, p < 0.002), and aTSA (r = -0.37, p < 0.001), and rTSA with subscapularis repair (r = -0.10, p = 0.049) and without subscapularis repair (r = -0.19, p = 0.022. Thus, the more experienced surgeons tended to recommend shorter durations of post-operative sling use. US surgeons reported longer post-operative sling durations for Bankart repair (4.8 vs. 4.1 weeks, p < 0.001), Latarjet (4.6 vs. 3.6 weeks, p < 0.001), ARCR < 3 cm (5.2 vs. 4.5 weeks p < 0.001) and >3 cm (5.9 vs. 5.1 weeks, p < 0.001), aTSA (4.9 vs. 4.3 weeks, p < 0.001), rTSR without subscapularis repair (4.0 vs. 3.6 weeks, p = 0.031), and isolated BT (3.7 vs. 3.3 weeks, p = 0.012) than Europe respondents. No significant differences between regions within the US and Europe were demonstrated. There is considerable variation in the immobilization advocated by surgeons, with geographic location and years of clinical experience influencing patterns of sling use. Future work is required to establish the most clinically beneficial protocols for immobilization following shoulder surgery. Level IV.

Evaluation of Arthroscopic Bankart Repair and Open Latarjet Technique for Treatment of Recurrent Shoulder Dislocation

Background: Arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet procedures are the most frequent surgical treatments for shoulder instability and recurrent shoulder dislocation. Objectives: Therefore, we performed research to assess the clinical outcomes and recurrence rate of instability between both Arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet techniques. Methods: A cross-sectional study was performed at Lahore General Hospital, Lahore from 2021-23, comprising 74 patients, managed surgically for the condition of recurrent shoulder dislocation. The patients were allocated into two groups viz Group A and B comprising 37 patients in each, who were managed through Arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet techniques, respectively. Post-operative complications, re-occurrence and success rate were measured in terms of SSV scores. Results: Average age of patients in Arthroscopic Bankart group was 28.34+5.31 years while in open Latarjet group; it was 29.09+6.19 years. 14 (37.83%) patients of Arthroscopic Bankart repair group revealed recurrent shoulder dislocation, while no such complaint was found in the open Latarjet technique. Twenty-seven patients of Arthroscopic Bankart group showed satisfaction with the procedure and 33 out of 37 patients (89.18%) were satisfied with open Latarjet technique. Patients in open Latarjet technique group showed successful recovery of shoulder dislocation and their SSV was 87.91%, while the patients in Arthroscopic Bankart repair group showed less SSV score of 59.76%. Conclusion: Open Latarjet group patients had a greater rate of functional satisfaction, while the arthroscopic Bankart repair group showed a trend for more recurrence. Open Latarjet operation had a higher success rate and patients had a better rate of return to previous top-level sports than Arthroscopic Bankart technique. Keywords: Latarjet; Re-occurrence; Shoulder dislocation; Sports medicine; Surgical complications.

Chronic posttraumatic shoulder instability

Chronic posttraumatic shoulder instability is characterized by trauma-associated, recurrent dislocations. Surgical treatment is indicated in most cases but it remains controversial how risk factors should be weighted to decide between arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR), Latarjet or alternative procedures. Known risk factors for recurrence are patient age, hyperlaxity, sports profile and bone loss. Surgical techniques are discussed in detail. The ABR leads to high patient satisfaction and return to sports; however, in association with risk factors, recurrent dislocations are seen even several years later. Latarjet or bone block procedures lead to high patient satisfaction, sustainable stability as arevision procedure, but can also be primarily indicated for chronic instability depending on risk factors. Early complications are more frequent but of a minor nature in most cases. All techniques are known for aserious learning curve. If performed well, they do not seem to increase the risk of arthritis, which is most affected by the number of lifetime dislocations and higher energy trauma.

Return to sports after arthroscopic Bankart repair in teenage athletes: a retrospective cohort study

BackgroundAnterior shoulder instability is frequent among young athletes. Surgical treatment for this injury aims to facilitate an early return to sports (RTS). However, the rate of recurrent instability after surgery is reportedly high among young patients, and it is unclear whether surgery ensures satisfactory RTS. The purpose of this study was to verify the clinical outcomes and RTS after arthroscopic Bankart repair in competitive teenage athletes without critical bone loss in the glenoid.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed competitive teenage athletes who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair. Patients with large bony defects in the glenoid, larger than 20% of the healthy side, were excluded. Clinical outcomes, recurrent instability, the final level of RTS, and the time needed for RTS were analyzed.ResultsIn total, 50 patients with a mean follow-up period of 44.5 ± 19.6 (range, 24–85 months) months were included. The mean age at surgery was 16.8 ± 1.7 (range, 13–19 years) years. Two patients (4.0%) experienced recurrent instability. All patients returned to sports, 96% of patients participated competitively, and 76% achieved a complete return to the pre-injury level without any complaints. The time for RTS was 6.6 ± 2.7 months (range, 3–18 months), to competitions was 9.3 ± 4.0 (range, 6–24 months) months, and to complete return was 10.6 ± 4.3 (range, 8–24 months) months. The complete return rates varied by sports type, with 82% in contact athletes, 59% in dominant-hand overhead athletes, and 100% in other athletes (P = 0.026). Other preoperative factors or concomitant lesion such as bony Bankart, superior labrum tear, or humeral avulsion of glenohumeral ligament lesion did not affect the complete RTS.ConclusionArthroscopic Bankart repair is an effective surgical procedure for anterior shoulder instability, even among competitive teenage athletes. Sports type was the only factor associated with complete RTS after surgery.

Arthroscopic Remplissage Combined With Bankart Repair Results in a Higher Rate of Return to Sport in Athletes Compared With Bankart Repair Alone or the Latarjet Procedure: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background: Traumatic anterior shoulder instability affects athletes at a higher rate compared with the general population. In recent years, indications for arthroscopic remplissage, an adjunct procedure classically used to reduce the recurrence of anterior shoulder instability in patients with off-track Hill-Sachs lesions, have expanded. Purpose: To investigate return-to-sport (RTS) rates, functional outcomes, and adverse events in athletes who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage compared with surgical alternatives such as Bankart repair alone or the Latarjet procedure. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A literature review of the Embase, PubMed (MEDLINE), and Web of Science databases was conducted for articles published before May 22, 2022. For the systematic review, 16 of 457 studies that reported RTS rates at any time point after remplissage were deemed eligible for inclusion in quantitative analysis and 17 of 457 studies in qualitative analysis. For the meta-analysis, 8 of 457 studies reported RTS rates after remplissage compared with surgical alternatives including Bankart repair alone or the Latarjet procedure and were deemed eligible for inclusion. Results: In total, 538 athletes underwent remplissage and were included in the study. RTS at any level was achieved by 86% (395/457) of patients, and the odds of RTS at any level were significantly higher after remplissage compared with surgical alternatives (odds ratio [OR], 2.71 [95% CI, 1.14-6.43]; P = .02). The odds of RTS at a previous or higher level were also significantly higher after remplissage compared with surgical alternatives (OR, 2.07 [95% CI, 1.29-3.31]; P = .002). The mean Rowe score increased significantly from 43.9 ± 7.77 preoperatively (n = 173) to 92.2 ± 4.02 after remplissage (n = 397) (P < .001), but there was no significant difference in Rowe scores between remplissage and surgical alternatives (P = .54). After remplissage, the recurrence rate was 5.0% for athletes (n = 220) and 7.3% for all patients (n = 634), with a mean time to recurrence of 24.0 ± 12.5 months. Reoperations occurred in 3.6% of athletes (n = 110) and 4.1% of all patients (n = 445). Recurrence and reoperations were significantly less likely after remplissage compared with surgical alternatives (OR, 0.18 [95% CI, 0.08-0.39]; P < .001 and OR, 0.17 [95% CI, 0.06-0.50]; P = .001, respectively). Conclusion: Arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage augmentation significantly improved RTS rates among athletes, both at any level and at previous levels of play. Additionally, remplissage appeared to significantly decrease recurrence and reoperation rates compared with surgical alternatives such as Bankart repair alone or the Latarjet procedure.

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.

Arthroscopic Bony Bankart Repair Technique: A Technical Note

Introduction: Labrum is a static stabilitator of the glenohumeral joint. Tear to this fibrocartilaginous structure could cause shoulder instability. Lately, anterior detachment of labrum is known as a contributor to recurrent anterior instability. Anterior labrum detachments are the classic Bankart lesion. Bankart lesion involving avulsion fracture is known as bony Bankart lesion. Management for this lesion is done operatively by doing antomical repair to return rigidity to its original state. Bankart repairs were originally done openly with coracoid osteotomy and subscapularis tenotomy. Currently, arthroscopic Bankart repair is often used as the preferred surgical management. Variations of portal placements, suture placements, suture technique and other components of Bankart repair can be found today, giving options for surgeons to achieve optimal results. Surgical Technique: In athletes, bony Bankart lesion, as an intraarticular lesion with displaced labrum and avulsion causing instability, is an absolute indication for surgical intervention to ensure function return. Nonoperative treatments have been reported on small bony Bankart lesions, but outcome on follow-up showed 25% recurrent instability. We performed arthroscopic bony Brankart repair by implementing labral repair, intraosesus tunneling and double-row suture bridge techniques. First, landmarks of incisions and portals were made. Incisions for visualisation were then done. Anterior portal and posterior portal were established before identifying bony Bankart lesion. A 5 o’ clock, trans subscapularis portal was then created. We released the bony Bankart and curatage the margin. A 6 o’clock stitch was anchored through rigid suture passage (drilled bone tunnel) in 5 o’clock direction. A 4.30 o’clock stitch was anchored in a 4 o’clock suture passage. The last stitch was a 3 o’clock stitch anchored through a 3 o’clock passage. Soft tissue release was conducted until subscapularis fibers were exposed. In the remodelling process, we performed overcorrection repair. Modifications done to the Bankart repair in this paper were done to achieve excellent post-op anterior stabilization.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: Surgical Pearls

The glenohumeral joint provides a wide range of motion, but is also particularly vulnerable to instability. Anterior instability is the most common type of shoulder instability. It can be due to either subluxation or dislocation. The evaluation and management of such instability is dependent on many factors and a thorough understanding is necessary to achieve an optimal outcome. A variety of treatment options, both surgical and non-surgical, exist to manage anterior instability, however, selecting the optimal surgical treatment is not always simple. The treatment plan should be individualized for all patients. Arthroscopic Bankart repair is a reliable surgical treatment to return the athlete and non-athlete back to activities. It has become a standard method and can successfully restore range of motion and stability and yield successful outcomes with low recurrence rate. To obtain a succesful surgery, it is imperative that the surgeon be aware of all technical pearls of how to effectively perform a successful arthroscopic Bankart repair.

New bone formation after arthroscopic Bankart repair for unstable shoulders with an erosion-type glenoid defect.

The purpose of the present study was to retrospectively evaluate new bone formation after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the influence of new bone formation on recurrence in shoulders with an erosion-type glenoid defect. We analyzed data on shoulders with an erosion-type glenoid defect. Participants were patients who underwent computed tomography to evaluate new bone formation after ABR performed from 2004 to 2021 and were followed for a minimum of 2 years. We investigated the factors influencing new bone formation, in particular the presence of an intraoperative bone fragment, and the influence of new bone formation and its size on postoperative recurrence. A total of 100 shoulders were included. The mean glenoid defect size was 10.1%±6.3% (range, 1.2%-31.5%). New bone formed postoperatively in 15 shoulders (15.0%) and was seen in significantly more shoulders with an intraoperative bone fragment (11 of 18, 61.1%) than in those without a fragment (4 of 82, 4.9%; P<.001). Recurrence occurred in 22 shoulders (22.0%), and the rate of recurrence was not different between shoulders with new bone formation (3 of 15, 20.0%) and without new bone formation (19 of 85, 22.4%; P=.999). Among the 15 shoulders with new bone formation, the size of the new bone fragments relative to glenoid width was <5% in 2 shoulders, 5%-<7.5% in 8 shoulders, 7.5%-<10% in 3 shoulders, and ≥10% in 2 shoulders; in all 3 shoulders with postoperative recurrence, the relative size was <7.5%. Even in shoulders with an erosion-type glenoid defect, new bone may form after ABR, especially in shoulders with an intraoperative bone fragment. However, new bone formation does not decrease the rate of postoperative recurrence.

Anterior glenoid rim erosion in the early stage after arthroscopic Bankart repair affects postoperative recurrence.

Recent studies reported that anterior glenoid rim erosion can occur in the early period after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) for traumatic anterior shoulder instability. However, it is unknown whether such erosion is a risk factor for postoperative recurrence. This study evaluated risk factors for postoperative recurrence after ABR, specifically aiming to elucidate whether reduction of postoperative glenoid width due to anterior glenoid rim erosion is one of such factors. A total of 220 shoulders that underwent ABR alone between 2013 and 2020 were retrospectively investigated. Patient age at surgery, whether the patient was a collision/contact athlete, anchor placement, preoperative glenoid bone defect (%), localization of the Hill-Sachs lesion, and change of glenoid width (%) in the 6 months after surgery were investigated for their statistical relation to recurrence by univariate and multiple logistic regression analysis. Postoperative recurrence occurred in 32 of 220 shoulders (14.5%). In univariate analysis, being a collision/contact athlete was the only variable with a significant effect on recurrence (odds ratio [OR], 2.555; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.123-5.814; P=.03). Change of glenoid width reduction was larger in those with recurrence than without recurrence, but the difference was not statistically significant (-7.0±6.6% vs.-5.0±9.3%; P=.14). However, in multivariate logistic analysis, preoperative glenoid bone defect (%) (adjusted unit OR, 1.076; 95% CI, 1.018-1.137; P=.010) and postoperative change of glenoid width (%) (adjusted unit OR, 0.946; 95% CI, 0.900-0.994; P=.028) had a significant influence on postoperative recurrence. Glenoid width reduction due to anterior glenoid rim erosion after ABR is a risk factor for recurrence.

Evaluation of Factors Affecting Outcomes in Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

Evaluation of Factors Affecting Outcomes in Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

The Statistical Fragility of Anterior Shoulder Instability using Arthroscopic vs. Open Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

The Statistical Fragility of Anterior Shoulder Instability using Arthroscopic vs. Open Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials

Increased Failure Rates After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair After Second Dislocation Compared to Primary Dislocation With Comparable Clinical Outcomes

The purpose of this study was to compare rates of recurrent dislocation and postsurgical outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability immediately after a first-time traumatic anterior dislocation versus patients who sustained a second dislocation event after initial nonoperative management. A retrospective chart review was performed of patients undergoing primary arthroscopic stabilization for anterior shoulder instability without concomitant procedures and minimum 2-year clinical follow-up. Primary outcome was documentation of a recurrent shoulder dislocation. Secondary clinical outcomes included range of motion, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (ASES), and Shoulder Activity Scale (SAS). Seventy-seven patients (mean age 21.3 years ± 7.3 years) met inclusion criteria. Sixty-three shoulders underwent surgical stabilization after a single shoulder dislocation, and 14 underwent surgery after 2 dislocations. Average follow-up was 35.9 months. The rate of recurrent dislocation was significantly higher in the 2-dislocation group compared to single dislocations (42.8% vs 14.2%, P= .03). No significant difference was present in range of motion, VAS, ASES, and SAS scores. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was 1.4 for VAS and 1.8 for SAS scores. The MCID was met or exceeded in the primary dislocation group in 31/38 (81.6%) patients for VAS, 23/31 (74.1%) for ASES, and 24/31 for SES (77.4%) scores. For the second dislocation cohort, MCID was met or exceeded in 7/9 (77.8%) for VAS, 4/7 (57.1%) for ASES, and 5/7 for SES (71.4%) scores. Immediate arthroscopic surgical stabilization after a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation significantly decreases the risk of recurrent dislocation in comparison to those who undergo surgery after 2 dislocation events, with comparable clinical outcome scores. These findings suggest that patients who return to activities after a primary anterior shoulder dislocation and sustain just 1 additional dislocation event are at increased risk of a failing arthroscopic repair. Retrospective comparative study; Level of evidence,3.

Distance to Dislocation and Recurrent Shoulder Dislocation After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: Rethinking the Glenoid Track Concept

Background: The “distance to dislocation” (DTD) calculation has been proposed as 1 method to predict the risk of recurrent dislocation after arthroscopic Bankart repair for an “on-track” shoulder. Rates of recurrent dislocation at specific DTD values are unknown. Hypothesis: Among patients with “on-track” shoulder lesions who underwent primary arthroscopic Bankart repair, the rate of recurrent dislocation would increase as DTD values decrease. Study Design: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 188 patients with “on-track” shoulder lesions who underwent primary arthroscopic anterior labral repair between 2007 and 2019, with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Glenoid bone loss, Hill-Sachs interval, glenoid track, and DTD were determined from preoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans. The rate of recurrent dislocation was determined at 2-mm DTD intervals. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between recurrent dislocation, patient characteristics, and bone loss variables. A multivariate regression model was created to predict the probability of failure at continuous DTD values. A subgroup analysis of failure rate based on collision sports participation was also performed. Results: A total of 29 patients (15.4%) sustained recurrent dislocations. Patient age (P = .046), multiple dislocations (P = .03), glenoid bone loss (P < .001), Hill-Sachs interval length (P < .001), and DTD (P < .001) were all independent predictors of failure. As the DTD decreased, the rate of recurrent dislocation increased. Below a DTD threshold of 10 mm, the recurrent dislocation rate increased exponentially. Up to a threshold of 24 mm, the failure rate for collision athletes remained >12.3%, independent of the DTD. Conversely, the failure rate among noncollision athletes decreased steadily as the DTD increased. Conclusion: For “on-track” shoulder lesions, as the DTD approached 0 mm (“off-track” threshold), the risk of recurrent dislocation after arthroscopic Bankart repair increased significantly. Below a DTD threshold of 10 mm, the risk of failure increased exponentially. The risk of recurrent dislocation for collision sports athletes remained elevated at higher DTD values than for noncollision athletes.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair With Remplissage as an Alternative to Latarjet for Anterior Glenohumeral Instability With More Than 15% Glenoid Bone Loss.

Surgical management of anterior shoulder instability continues to evolve. The clinical effectiveness of arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage (REMP) in patients with increasing glenoid bone loss (GBL) has not been thoroughly compared with Latarjet. The purpose of this study was to compare 2-year outcomes of REMP versus open Latarjet in patients with >15% GBL. We hypothesized that there would be no difference. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. A multicenter, retrospective study was performed on a consecutive series of patients who underwent primary REMP or Latarjet by 4 shoulder specialists between August 2013 and December 2019 for >15% GBL. Procedure performance was based on shared decision making between the surgeon and patient. Baseline and 2-year postoperative range of motion (ROM) and the following patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were collected: Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and visual analog scale for pain. Return to sport, satisfaction, complications, recurrence, and revisions were reviewed. A total of 47 patients were available for study, including 22 who underwent REMP and 25 who underwent Latarjet. Baseline demographic characteristics, ROM, and PROs were similar between the groups. Mean preoperative GBL (REMP 25.8% ± 7.8% vs Latarjet 25.1% ± 9.0%; P = .800) and off-track lesions (REMP 59.1% vs Latarjet 44.0%; P = .302) were similar. Postoperative change in external rotation favored Latarjet (10° ± 22° vs -4° ± 13°; P = .017). Postoperative PROs, return to the sports (86.4% vs 87.5%; P = .99), and satisfaction (95.5% vs 95.8%; P = .99) were similar between groups. There were no recurrent dislocations in either group. One infected hematoma was encountered in the Latarjet cohort. At short-term follow-up, the hypothesis was upheld. REMP and Latarjet provided similar outcomes for patients with >15% GBL, although REMP patients experienced slightly decreased external rotation. Although larger series and longer-term follow-ups are required, remplissage may be considered in patients with >15% glenoid bone loss.

The process of bone union after arthroscopic bony Bankart repair in younger athletes with a subcritical glenoid defect: An advantage of remained large bone fragment

BackgroundThe purpose of the present study was to investigate the bone union process after arthroscopic bony Bankart repair (ABBR) in shoulders with a subcritical glenoid defect of 13.5% or larger. MethodsBone union process after ABBR performed from 2011 to 2018 were retrospectively investigated in 47 athletes younger than 30 years with a subcritical glenoid defect, who underwent CT at least twice postoperatively. The change of bone union between first CT within 6 months and final CT later than 6 months was investigated, especially noticing bone fragment size (≥7.5% versus <7.5%). ResultsThe mean period at first CT and at final CT was 4.1 ± 0.6 months (3–6 months) and 16.8 ± 11.6 months (7–71 months), respectively. From the first to final CT, among 15 shoulders with a small bone fragment (<7.5%), complete union increased from 4 shoulders (26.7%) to 8 shoulders (53.3%), while among 32 shoulders with a large bone fragment (≥7.5%), complete union increased from 15 shoulders (46.9%) to 25 shoulders (78.1%). On the other hand, while non-union or disappeared bone fragment was recognized in 8 shoulders (53.3%) with a small fragment and in 2 shoulders (6.3%) with a large fragment at first CT, it was solely recognized in 4 shoulders (26.7%) with a small fragment and in no shoulders with a large fragment at final CT. While postoperative glenoid fracture at the site of bone union was recognized in 7 shoulders, complete union was finally obtained after conservative treatment in 5 shoulders. So, final complete union was obtained in 9 (60%) of 15 shoulders with a small fragment and in 29 (90.6%) of 32 shoulders with a large fragment (p = 0.021). ConclusionsIn shoulders with a subcritical glenoid defect, when a large bone fragment (≥7.5%) was repaired, complete union rate was higher and complete union could be obtained earlier.

Effect of Playing Position on Return to Sport, Functional Outcomes, and Recurrence After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Soccer Players.

Little attention has been paid to playing position as a risk factor for recurrence after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) in soccer players. To compare return to sport, functional outcomes, and recurrence after ABR between goalkeepers and field position players in soccer. Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. A retrospective comparative cohort study was performed in soccer players who underwent ABR between January 2017 and December 2019. The minimum clinical follow-up was 2 years. Functional outcomes included the Rowe score, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and shoulder-dependent sports ability measured with the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS). The difference between the post- and preoperative scores was calculated; rate and level of return to sport, recurrent instability, and revisions were also evaluated according to position played. A total of 70 position players and 11 goalkeepers met the study criteria. Postoperative functional outcomes were significantly improved in both groups as compared with baseline (P < .001 for both), although the position players achieved significantly greater pre- to postoperative improvement (ΔVAS, -2 vs 0 points [P = .029]; ΔRowe, 45 vs 30 points [P = .046]; ΔASOSS, 45 vs 40 points [P = .028]). While all players returned to soccer, only 55% (n = 6) of goalkeepers returned to the same level versus 93% of field players (P = .003). The overall rate of recurrent instability was 8.6% but was significantly higher among goalkeepers (27.2% vs 5.7%; P = .049), and the odds of goalkeepers having a recurrence were significantly higher than field position players (odds ratio, 8.5 [95% CI, 1.2-57.2]; P = .027). Although the results of ABR were generally favorable in all soccer players, goalkeepers had significantly worse functional outcomes, a lower rate of return to the same level of sport, and a higher recurrence rate as compared with field position players.

Rate and time to return to shooting following arthroscopic and open shoulder surgery

There is limited information on return to shooting following shoulder surgery. The purpose of this study is to determine the rate and timing for resuming shooting a rifle following shoulder surgery. We performed a retrospective review of prospectively collected data. The study included patients undergoing arthroscopic and open shoulder stabilization for unidirectional shoulder instability, and arthroscopic surgery for rotator cuff tears, SLAP lesions, biceps tendinopathy, and acromioclavicular pathology. Data collected included the laterality of surgery, shooting dominance, and patient-reported outcome measures at the preoperative and postoperative visits. Starting at the 4.5-month clinic visit, patients were asked if they could shoot a military rifle. One hundred patients were identified with arthroscopic and open shoulder surgery with a mean age of 30 years (range, 18-45) and a mean follow-up of 24 months (range, 12-32). The cohort consisted of patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair (n=23), arthroscopic posterior labral repair (n=18), open Latarjet (n=16), mini-open subpectoral biceps tenodesis (OBT) (n=25), OBT with open distal clavicle resection (DCR) (n=10), open DCR (n=4), and arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with concomitant OBT (n=4). Significant improvement in SSV, VAS, ASES, and WOSI was shown at 1-year postoperative, SSV 85, VAS 2, ASES 85, WOSI 239, P=.001. The percentage of patients reporting the ability to shoot a military rifle postoperatively were 47%, 63%, 85%, and 94% at 4.5 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years, respectively. At 4.5 months postoperatively, patients who underwent surgery ipsilateral to their shooting dominance (n=59) had a rate of return to shooting (33%) versus shoulder surgery on the contralateral side of shooting dominance (n=41) (60%), P=.04. However, there was no significant difference in the groups at 6 months and 1 year. Additionally, there was a significant difference in the rate of return to shooting at 6 months in patients undergoing arthroscopic posterior labral repair versus the remainder of the cohort (posterior instability (33%) vs. (69%), P=.016), and a significant difference between posterior shoulder stabilization and anterior shoulder stabilization (70%), P=.03. Patients undergoing arthroscopic and open shoulder surgery have a high rate of return to shooting. Approximately 60% of patients resume shooting at 6 months postoperatively and 85% return at 1 year. Patients undergoing shoulder surgery on the contralateral side of their shooting dominance return to shooting significantly faster than those with shoulder surgery ipsilateral to their shooting dominance. Additionally, those undergoing arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization return to shooting at a slower rate than anterior stabilization surgery.