Glenoid Rim Fractures Research Articles

Surgical management and results of glenohumeral combination fractures of the anterior glenoid rim and the proximal humerus

IntroductionThe combination of anterior large glenoid rim fractures (GRF) and proximal humerus fractures (PHF) is rare, with limited data available on specific treatments for these glenohumeral combination fractures (GCF). This study aimed to evaluate the treatment approaches for GCF, analyze patient outcomes, and outline surgical management strategies for different fracture types.Materials and methodsThis retrospective study included patients with GCF, excluding those with fossa glenoidalis fractures, isolated greater tuberosity fractures, or small glenoid rim fractures (< 5 mm). Preoperative radiographs, CT scans, and follow-up radiographs were reviewed. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the Constant-Murley Score (CMS), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), Rowe Score (RS), and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS).ResultsSixteen patients with 17 GCFs (mean age 62 years) were followed for an average of 39 months. PHFs were categorized into three-part (76%), four-part (12%), and two-part fractures (12%). The average medial displacement of GRF was 5 mm, with an average dehiscence of 4 mm in the sagittal plane. Fourteen patients (88%) underwent surgical treatment; 35% had only the PHF surgically addressed, while 53% had both lesions surgically treated. Two patients (12%) received non-operative treatment. Complications were observed in 29% of cases, primarily involving the humeral side. The average CMS was 68 points, WOSI was 75%, RS was 77 points, and OSS was 41 points.ConclusionTreating GCF is complex and routinely necessitates surgical intervention, with or without GRF refixation. CT imaging is crucial for precise assessment of fracture morphology. The involvement of the minor tuberosity is critical in selecting the optimal surgical approach and managing the subscapularis muscle.

Arthroscopic repair of anteroinferior glenoid rim fractures: mean 10-year clinical and radiologic results

BackgroundTo date, long-term results of the arthroscopic repair of glenoid rim fractures are missing. The aim of this study was, to evaluate clinical and radiographic results following arthroscopic repair of anteroinferior glenoid fractures using anchors or bioabsorbable compression screws after a mean follow-up period of ten years. MethodsClinical outcome measures included evaluation of recurrent instability, the Constant Score (CS), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Rowe Score (RS), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Score (WOSI) and Melbourne Instability Shoulder Score (MISS). X-ray images were obtained for assessment of an instability arthropathy (IA). Results23 patients (7 female and 16 male, mean (± SD) age 48 ± 15 years) who underwent arthroscopic repair of an acute substantial solitary or multifragmented anteroinferior glenoid rim fracture were enrolled. After a mean follow-up period of 10 ± 2 years, patients reached a mean CS of 92 ± 10 points, SSV of 93 ± 11%, RS of 84 ± 20 points, WOSI of 98 ±2% and MISS of 91 ± 11 points. No patient suffered recurrent dislocation. Radiographic results were obtained of 18 patients. Signs of IA were noted in nine patients (50%) with progression of IA in all cases in comparison to the preoperative status. Patients with IA were significantly older (52 versus 38 years, p = 0.04). Clinical score results did not show a significant difference in patients with versus without IA except for the RS (74 versus 94 points, p = 0.02). No intra- or postoperative complications were observed, and no patient required revision endoprosthetic surgery. ConclusionArthroscopic repair of acute anteroinferior glenoid rim fractures shows good clinical long-term results. High rates of IA were observed especially in older patients. However, the presence of IA did not seem to influence the subjective shoulder score outcomes.

Arthroscopic suture anchor fixation results in similar clinical outcomes, less range of motion limitation, but poorer quality of reduction compared to open screw fixation for acute large anterior glenoid rim fractures

BackgroundThe purpose of the present study was to retrospectively compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic suture anchor fixation and open screw fixation for acute large anterior glenoid rim fractures. MethodsThis study enrolled patients with acute large anterior glenoid rim fractures treated with arthroscopic suture anchor fixation (group A) or open screw fixation (group O) from January 2013 to June 2020 with a minimum follow-up of＞2 years. The Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Rowe score, Constant score, range of motion (ROM), recurrent instability rate, and complications were recorded as clinical results. The quality of the postoperative reduction, reconstructed glenoid sizes, rate of fracture healing, and progression of osteoarthritis (OA) were evaluated as radiological outcomes. ResultsThis retrospective study included 66 patients, including 37 in Group A and 29 in Group O with a mean follow-up of 46.9 (range, 24.3-94.2) months and a mean patient age of 46.8 (range, 21-69) years. No significant differences were found in the clinical outcomes between the two groups. A significant ROM limitation in all planes was found in both groups and group O showed more limitations in external rotation at the side (ERs) (18° vs. 10°, P = 0.002). The reduction quality was better in group O (P < 0.001). However, there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of reconstructed glenoid size (101.6% ± 4.6% vs. 100.6% ± 7.1%, P = 0.460) and the rate of OA progression (26.9% vs. 20%, P = 0.525). ConclusionArthroscopic suture anchor fixation and open screw fixation achieved similar clinical outcomes, reconstructed glenoid sizes, and OA progression in patients with acute large anterior glenoid rim fractures. Arthroscopic suture fixation showed a poorer quality of reduction but less ERs limitations.

Epidemiology, treatment, and mortality of 3973 scapula fractures from the Swedish fracture register

BackgroundScapula fractures are relatively uncommon, accounting for <1% of all fractures and approximately 3-5% of shoulder girdle fractures. This study comprehensively describes the epidemiology, fracture classification, treatment, and mortality associated with scapula fractures within a large adult Swedish population. MethodsThis observational study included all patients ≥18 years old at the time of injury with a scapula fracture (ICD S42.1) registered in the Swedish Fracture Register between March 2011 and June 2020. Variables studied were age, sex, and injury mechanism, including energy level, fracture classification, associated fractures, treatment, and mortality. ResultsWe included 3,930 patients (mean age 58 years, SD 18, 64% men) with 3,973 scapula fractures. Some 22% of the fractures were caused by high-energy trauma and 21% had at least one associated fracture. High energy-injuries were most common in glenoid neck (44%) and scapular body (35%) fractures. However, same-level falls were the most common cause of glenoid rim (62%) and intra-articular glenoid (55%) fractures. Clavicle fractures (9%) and proximal humerus fractures (5%) were the most commonly associated fractures. The most common fracture types were the glenoid rim (n=1,289, 32%) and scapular body (n=1,098, 28%) fractures. Nonoperative treatment was performed in 81% of patients. Glenoid rim and intra-articular glenoid fractures were treated operatively in over 30% of cases. The mortality rate for the whole cohort was 4% at 1 year. ConclusionsScapula fractures are predominately sustained by men. High energetic injuries and associated fractures are present in one in five patients. Nonoperative treatment is chosen in four of five patients, but for some fracture types one in three undergo surgery.

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.

Arthroscopic Fixation of Acute Large Bony Bankart with Suture-assisted Reduction and Screw Fixation - Surgical Technique.

Glenoid rim fractures with Bankart lesions are called bony Bankart lesions and are associated with persistent glenohumeral joint instability. Acute bony Bankart lesions can be treated by various arthroscopic techniques. Here, we present a technique of arthroscopic bony Bankart repair using suture-assisted reduction and screw fixation. The conventional suture anchor repair does not provide compression of the fractured fragment, and the bony piece may tilt because of the single-point fixation. This procedure can achieve firm compression between the bony fragments and prevent rotation of fragment during screw fixation to the glenoid. The capsular plication distributes the loads to the surrounding soft tissues. Hence, this procedure should be offered to all patients presenting acutely with a large bony Bankart of size >25% of glenoid width, as it is minimally invasive as well as provides excellent outcomes and anatomical union.

How many anchors to use in arthroscopic Bankart repairs? A biomechanical study of postage-stamp glenoid fractures.

Deciding how many anchors to use in a Bankart repair is challenging because of the desire to enhance stability while avoiding a postage-stamp fracture of the glenoid rim. This controlled laboratory study investigated load to fracture of the anterior glenoid rim after drilling holes of varying number and diameter and inserting anchors of 2 different types and sizes, with and without perforation of the medial cortex of the glenoid, creating postage-stamp fractures using a metallic humeral head that was compressed against the anterior glenoid rim. A destructive model with a servohydraulic load frame was used to test 46 synthetic scapulae with compressive strength and elastic modulus similar to that of a human glenoid. Load to fracture of the intact glenoid was compared with groups with a varying number of anchor holes of different diameters, with anchors of different sizes and types, and with anchors perforating or not perforating the glenoid medial cortex. The percentage of force to fracture an intact specimen was used to identify relative risk of fracture: low risk >75%, moderate risk 75%-50%, and high risk <50% of intact load. The load to fracture of intact glenoids was 1276±42 N. Loads decreased linearly as the number of holes drilled on the glenoid rim increased. Compared with the 1.6-mm group, the 3.0-mm group had significantly lower glenoid rim strength in specimens with 4, 5, and 7 holes (P=.013, .032, and .045, respectively). All-suture anchors in 1.6-mm holes did not alter the glenoid rim strength, and up to 5 anchors were associated with low risk of fracture. Load to fracture was significantly higher with 3.0-mm rigid core bioabsorbable anchors with 4 anchors (1081±6 N) compared with the 4-hole condition (838±107 N; P=.033). Perforating the glenoid medial cortex with five 1.6-mm anchors significantly weakened the glenoid rim to 58% of intact (P=.012). Perforating the medial cortex weakened the glenoid rim to 52% and 42% (P<.001 for both) of intact in the 3.0-mm 4-anchor and 5-anchor constructions, constituting moderate and high risk of fracture, respectively. Up to five 1.6-mm all-suture anchors and four 3.0-mm bioabsorbable rigid-core anchors were associated with low risk of fracture of the glenoid rim. Smaller diameter all-suture anchors best preserved structural integrity of the glenoid rim, whereas tunnel enlargement and perforation of the glenoid medial cortex were associated with moderate or high risk of a postage-stamp fracture.

Latarjet Procedure to Restore Glenohumeral Stability in a Patient With a Postage Stamp Fracture

The “postage stamp fracture” is an anterior glenoid rim fracture following arthroscopic repair of a Bankart lesion. Often occurring at the time of an acute trauma, a fracture line propagates though the previous Bankart repair anchor sites, resulting in recurrent anterior instability of the glenohumeral joint. The resultant glenoid rim fracture edge gives a similar appearance as the edge of a stamp, with the osseous edge having the classic “perforation” pattern. When patients present with a postage stamp fracture, even in the setting of subcritical glenoid bone loss, we believe that additional soft-tissue stabilization procedures and/or fracture fixation pose a significant risk of failure. In our opinion, a Latarjet procedure is recommended in a majority of patients with a postage stamp fracture for restoration of glenohumeral stability. The procedure offers a reliable, reproducible surgical intervention that controls for many of the factors that can make arthroscopic revision unreliable, such as poor bone quality, adhesions, labral degeneration, and bone loss. Here, we outline our preferred surgical technique to restore glenohumeral stability using the Latarjet procedure for a patient with a postage stamp fracture.

Remplissage in Addition to Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Shoulder Instability With On-Track Hill–Sachs Lesions Reduces Residual Apprehension Without External Rotation Limitation

<h3>Purpose</h3> To evaluate the role of remplissage as an adjunct to Bankart repair in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation combined with on-track Hill–Sachs lesion. <h3>Methods</h3> Arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage data (December 2018-2020) were collected (BR group). Inclusion criteria were (1) recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation, (2) on-track Hill–Sachs lesion, (3) minimal/subcritical glenoid bone loss (<17%), and (4) postoperative follow-up >1 year. Exclusion criteria were (1) revision surgery, (2) first dislocation with acute glenoid rim fracture, and (3) combined with other surgery. The control group was identified in Bankart repair–only cohort (B group). All patients were evaluated preoperatively, and at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and then annually postoperatively. Visual analogue scale for pain, Self-Assessment Numerical Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder score, ROWE, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability were evaluated at preoperative and final follow-up. Residual apprehension experience and external rotation deficit were evaluated. Patients, who were followed-up for more than 1 year, were asked how often they experienced any subjective apprehension in 4 grades (1: always, 2: frequently, 3: occasionally, 4: never). Patients who had a history of recurrent dislocation or revision surgery were investigated. <h3>Results</h3> In total, 53 patients (B, 28; BR, 25) were included. At final follow-up, both groups showed improvement in 5 clinical scores postsurgery (<i>P</i> < .001). The BR group showed greater ROWE scores than the B group (B: 75.2 ± 13.6, BR: 84.4 ± 10.8; <i>P</i> = .009). Residual apprehension patient ratio (B: 71.4% [20/28], BR: 32% [8/25]; <i>P</i> = .004) and the mean subjective apprehension grade (B: 3.1 ± 0.6, BR: 3.6 ± 0.6; <i>P</i> = .005) showed statistically significant difference, whereas no patients in either group experienced external rotation deficit (B: 14.8 ± 12.9°, BR: 18.0 ± 15.2°, <i>P</i> = .420). Only 1 patient in the B group had not responded to surgery, with dislocation recurrence (<i>P</i> = .340). <b>Conclusions</b>: Remplissage with arthroscopic Bankart repair in on-track Hill–Sachs lesion has a role in reducing residual apprehension without external rotation limitation. <h3>Level of Evidence</h3> Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.

Open reduction and internal fixation of Ideberg type IA glenoid fractures: Tricks, pearls, and potential pitfalls based on a retrospective cohort of 33 patients focusing on the rehabilitation protocol.

The standard treatment of anterior glenaoid fractures carrying > 20% of the glenoid fossa is open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF). In the herein study, we report our outcomes in a retrospective cohort of anterior and anteroinferior glenoid rim fractures using an accelerated postoperative rehabilitation protocol. A secondary aim is to describe the surgical steps for ORIF of anterior and anteroinferior glenoid rim fractures using the anterior axillary approach, describing the tricks, pearls, and pitfalls of this surgical technique. A retrospective cohort of skeletally mature patients treated for an anterior glenoid rim fracture carrying > 20% of the glenoid fossa during a 10-year period were operated on using a vertical axillary incision, osteosynthesis with 2.0-mm cortical screws, and labral repair with small diameter metallic anchors and non-absorbable sutures. Rehabilitation began on the first postoperative day, including passive external rotation exercises and active-assisted flexion, adduction, and abduction exercises as tolerated. The exercises are performed with the patient sitting or lying down. Phase 1 is continued for 6-10weeks until the patient regains painless, normal, or near-normal ROM. Usually by 10weeks, the fracture and labrum are healed, so phase 2 rehabilitation begins with strengthening and ROM exercises. Radiologic and clinical outcomes, including active range of motion (ROM), glenohumeral stability, and visual analogue scale (VAS) were measured. About 33 patients (35 fractures) had complete medical records and pre- and post-operative imaging exams available for further analysis regarding the surgical protocol, with a mean of 4.8years. The mean DASH questionnaire was 3.75 ± 9.0 and the mean CM score was 62.5 ± 0.1. Active flexion and internal rotation were recovered in all patients, while external rotation presented an average loss of 8° (p = 0.12) and abduction of 5° (p = 0.33). The mean VAS was 1.1 ± 0.8. No patient reported major or disabling symptoms, or great difficulty or inability to perform daily or recreational activities. No patient presented residual instability of the glenohumeral joint. In this retrospective cohort, ORIF using a vertical axillary incision, osteosynthesis with 2.0-mm screws, and labral repair with small diameter metallic anchors and non-absorbable sutures was a safe approach, with a minimal risk of complications and residual instability. The accelerated postoperative rehabilitation protocol, allowing immediate passive external rotation of the operated shoulder, resulted in a non-significant loss of ROM compared to the contralateral side. Therefore, we recommend this management strategy for anterior glenoid rim fractures in patients with unstable shoulder joint after traumatic glenohumeral dislocation. Therapeutic Study (Surgical technique and Retrospective cohort).

Anteroinferior Glenoid Rim Fractures Are a Relatively Common Finding in Shoulder Instability Patients Aged 50 Years or Older but May Not Portend a Worse Prognosis

PurposeTo investigate the incidence of anteroinferior glenoid rim fractures (AGRFs) after anterior shoulder instability (ASI) in patients aged 50 years or older, identify risk factors for surgical intervention for AGRFs, compare initial treatment strategies, and compare clinical outcomes of patients with and without associated AGRFs.MethodsAn established geographic medical record system was used to identify patients aged 50 years or older with ASI between 1994 and 2016. Patients with radiographic evidence of AGRFs were identified and matched 1:1 to patients without AGRFs. Outcome measures included recurrent instability, recurrent pain events, conversion to arthroplasty, and osteoarthritis graded with the Samilson-Prieto classification for post-instability arthritis.ResultsOverall, 177 patients were identified, with a mean follow-up period of 10.8 years. Of these patients, 41 (23.2%) had AGRFs and were matched to 41 control patients without AGRFs. The average age was 58.6 and 58.2 years for the AGRF and control groups, respectively. Rates of surgical intervention (27% vs 49%), recurrent instability (12% vs 20%), progression of osteoarthritis (34% vs 39%), and conversion to arthroplasty (2% vs 5%) were similar between AGRF patients and controls. For patients with AGRFs, increased bone fragment size (odds ratio, 1.1) and increased body mass index (odds ratio, 1.2) correlated with an increased risk of surgery. The cutoff value for an increased risk of surgery in patients with AGRFs was a fragment size 33% of the glenoid width or greater.ConclusionsOf patients aged 50 years or older at presentation of ASI, 23.2% presented with an associated AGRF. A fragment size 33% of the glenoid width or greater and a higher patient body mass index were significant factors for surgical intervention; however, most patients did not require surgery and still showed acceptable clinical outcomes, and the most common reason for surgical intervention was a rotator cuff tear. Overall, the presence of an AGRF did not portend a worse prognosis as treatment strategies and long-term outcomes including recurrent instability, progression of osteoarthritis, and conversion to arthroplasty were similar to those in patients without AGRFs.Level of EvidenceLevel III, retrospective comparative study.

Prospective assessment of osteoporosis in total shoulder arthroplasty

HypothesisThe risks of shoulder arthroplasty in those with osteopenia and osteoporosis are not fully understood. The purpose of this study was to prospectively evaluate intraoperative complications in those undergoing shoulder arthroplasty with low bone mineral density (BMD). MethodsWe prospectively enrolled consecutive patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty with a preoperative computed tomography (CT) scan from January to July 2021. Exclusion criteria included age <50 years, revision surgery, fracture, diagnosis of inflammatory arthropathy, or active infection. An intraoperative survey assessing bone quality and complications was collected. A blinded reviewer then measured bone quality based on preoperative CT scan using a previously validated method. Subjects were then divided between normal and low BMD groups with low BMD including both osteopenia and osteoporosis. ResultsWe enrolled 75 consecutive patients who met all inclusion criteria. Nine patients were excluded due to incomplete imaging leaving a final cohort of 66 patients. The average age was 69.2 years (50.4-88.5 years), with 41 males (62.1%) and 25 females (37.9%). There were 33 anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties and 33 reverse shoulder arthroplasties. Surgeons were very accurate in identifying normal bone intraoperatively (95.5% correct) but less accurate in identifying poor bone quality (45.5% correct). Surgeons reported making changes to their plan or technique in 8 cases (12%), with 7 (87.5%) of these changes occurring in those with poor bone quality. The lesser tuberosity was damaged with posterior retraction in 16 cases (24.2%), with 13 (81.3%) of those being in patients with poor bone quality. There was 1 intraoperative glenoid rim fracture, which occurred in a patient with low bone density. ConclusionThe prevalence of osteoporosis in the population undergoing shoulder arthroplasty is high. Performing shoulder arthroplasty on those with poor bone quality presents multiple challenges, which are underappreciated. Being able to better predict bone quality based on preoperative CT imaging can alert the surgeon to potential intraoperative complications.

Arthroscopic Techniques to Stabilize Glenoid Bony Bankart Fragments

A bony Bankart lesion is an avulsion of the labroligamentous complex associated with an anterior glenoid rim fracture. Bony Bankart lesions can be seen in up to 70% of traumatic shoulder dislocations. With such a high prevalence, the development of an optimal repair technique is important. Selection of the most appropriate repair method depends heavily on the individual hard- and soft-tissue characteristics of the presenting lesion, as well as surgeon experience with the various repair options. We describe 3 arthroscopic Bankart fixation techniques (labrum alone, transosseous, and double row) to address a range of presenting Bankart pathologies.

Paper 91: Anteroinferior Glenoid Rim Fractures in Shoulder Instability Patients Over 50: A Matched Cohort Analysis of Risk Factors, Treatment Strategies, and Outcomes

Objectives: Background:Although they are common, there remains a paucity of data regarding traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations (ASI) associated with anteroinferior glenoid rim fractures (AGRF) in older patients.Purpose:To describe the incidence of AGRF in this population following ASI, identify risk factors for AGRF, compare treatment strategies, and compare clinical outcomes of patients with and without an associated AGRF.Methods:An established geographic medical record system was used to identify patients >50 years of age with ASI between 1994 and 2016. Patients with radiographic evidence of AGRF were identified and matched 1:1 to patients without AGRF. Comparative analysis was conducted to determine differences between groups.Results:Overall, 186 patients were identified with a mean follow-up of 10.4 years (range, 2.0 – 25.4). Of these, 42 (22.6%) had AGRF and were matched to 42 control patients without AGRF. Average age was 58.9 and 58.2 years for the AGRF and control groups, respectively. Rates of surgical intervention (29% vs. 43%), recurrent instability (14% vs. 17%), progression of osteoarthritis (34% vs. 39%), and conversion to arthroplasty (2% vs. 5%) were similar between AGRF and control cohorts. Control patients were more likely to report recurrent pain (p=.046). For patients with AGRF, increased bone fragment size (OR 1.1) and increased BMI (OR 1.2) correlated with an increased risk for surgery. The cut-off value for surgery in patients with AGRF was a fragment size ≥33% of the glenoid width.Conclusions:In patients ≥ 50 years at presentation of ASI, 22.6% presented with an associated AGRF. Increased fragment size and greater patient BMI were significant factors associated with undergoing surgical intervention; however, most patients did not require surgery. Patients without AGRF were more likely to report recurrent pain, possibly due to a higher prevalence of rotator cuff derangement. Overall, the presence of an AGRF did not portend a worse prognosis as treatment strategies and long-term outcomes in terms of recurrent instability, progression of osteoarthritis, and conversion to arthroplasty were similar between patients with and without AGRF at the time of ASI diagnosis.

Arthroscopic Reduction and Internal Fixation of an Osseous Bankart Lesion.

The current surgical video article outlines a technique for an osseous Bankart repair in a patient with a displaced fracture as well as substantial pain and instability. First, the amount of bone loss is measured on 3-dimensionally reconstructed computed tomography (CT) imaging, with the humeral head digitally subtracted2. The procedure is then performed arthroscopically with the patient in the lateral decubitus position. A diagnostic evaluation, beginning with posterior and anterior portal placement in the rotator interval, is completed to assess any rotator cuff injury and the extent of labral tearing and osseous displacement. Next, the bone fragment is elevated into its anatomical position. This fragment is then reduced with use of a double-row suture technique, followed by concomitant capsulolabral repair. Nonoperative treatment with a sling can be utilized as long as post-reduction CT scans reveal anteroposterior centering of the humeral head on the glenoid3. Rehabilitation can include active-assisted and passive glenohumeral mobilization, as well as daily pendulum exercises and physiotherapy. Osseous Bankart repair has been shown to effectively improve patient-reported outcomes and normalize glenoid morphology1,3,4. Failure to recognize and appropriately treat an osseous Bankart fracture may lead to osseous erosion caused by repetitive episodes of subluxations or dislocations, along with substantial pain and weakness5. Indications for arthroscopic Bankart repair include young, active patients with a reducible fracture fragment, an anterior glenoid deficit of >10%, and a history of failed nonoperative treatment3-8. Clinical outcomes following the osseous Bankart repair procedure have been shown to be highly successful, with high rates of return to sport, minimal reduction in range of motion, and restoration of shoulder function and stability4. Additionally, long-term follow-up has shown successful osseous union and normalization of glenoid anatomy1. Apply tension to sutures with a suture retriever before the PushLock anchors (Arthrex) are placed during fracture reduction.Utilize a trans-subscapularis portal for anchor placement medial to the fracture on the glenoid neck.Perform adjustable tensioning during labral repair with knotless all-suture anchors.Utilize a lateral distraction device with the patient in the lateral decubitus position to completely visualize the anteroinferior glenoid.Chronic onset and late intervention may cause difficulties in the reduction of the bone fragment.Suture management may be difficult, particularly for surgeons at an early stage of the learning curve.A defect that is wide (from medial to lateral) may be difficult to maneuver around and reduce. GH = glenohumeralGHL = glenohumeral ligamentPts = patientsPMH = previous medical historyFE = forward elevationER = external rotationIR = internal rotationABD = abductionEXT = external rotationXR = radiographic imagingMRI = magnetic resonance imagingCT = computed tomographyROM = range of motionFU = follow-upRTS = return to sportsRTPP = return to previous level of play.

Arthroscopic Bony Bankart Repair Using Suture Suspension to Increase Bone Contact Area

Bony Bankart lesions are anteroinferior glenoid rim fractures associated with capsulolabral tears. Untreated bony Bankart lesion can cause recurrent dislocation. So, the large bony Bankart lesions should be treated by anatomical reduction and stabilization. This Technical Note describes an arthroscopic bony Bankart lesion repair using suture suspension to increase contact area to gain more contact area and tissue compression to maximize the stability of the repair.

Open Screw Fixation of Large Anterior Glenoid Rim Fractures Using a Deltopectoral Approach With Subscapularis Splitting.

Anterior glenoid rim fracture is a consequence of the humeral head impacting the glenoid fossa. The management of large glenoid fractures involving more than 20% of the articulating glenoid requires surgical treatment. The 2 main techniques are open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) by screws and arthroscopic treatment using suture anchors or transcutaneous screws. Next to the technical equipment, a surgeon requires extensive experience to achieve good results with the arthroscopic technique. The main disadvantage using the ORIF technique is the detachment of the subscapularis muscle, which is often criticized for causing functional deficits of the subscapularis. Our study demonstrates the feasibility of the ORIF technique through a deltopectoral approach and splitting of the subscapularis. To our knowledge, subscapularis splitting has never been described to treat glenoid fractures.

The Independent Double-Row (IDR) Bony Bankart Repair Technique.

A displaced anterior glenoid rim fracture, the so-called bony Bankart lesion, occurs after a traumatic shoulder dislocation resulting from a high energy trauma and is associated with recurrent shoulder instability. Different surgical techniques have been described in the literature to address this pathology, including open reduction and fixation, as well as arthroscopic transosseous, and single-row or double-row approaches with the use of suture anchors. However, there is currently no gold standard of treatment and the stability of fixation and the healing of the bony fragment are still a concern. The purpose of this report was to introduce an arthroscopic independent double-row (IDR) bony Bankart repair technique for fixation of large glenoid fractures.

Inlay total shoulder arthroplasty for primary glenohumeral arthritis.

BackgroundAnatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with a nonspherical humeral head and inlay glenoid replacement has been introduced in the past; however, clinical evidence remains limited. We hypothesized that patients with advanced glenohumeral arthritis demonstrate significant improvements in pain and function.MethodsProspective patient-reported outcomes (PROs) included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, a pain visual analog scale, and satisfaction. Range of motion was compared to the preoperative status. A sensitivity analysis examined responder rates and compared them to literature thresholds using the minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit. The preoperative glenoid morphology was determined using the Walsh classification. Zone-specific periprosthetic radiolucent lines were quantified at the last follow-up.ResultsThirty-nine shoulders in 36 patients (3 bilateral) with a mean age of 65.9 years (26 males, 13 females) and a mean follow-up of 41.0 months were included. Ninety-three percent had grade III osteoarthritis, and 7% grade II. The glenoid Walsh classification included A1 (25%), A2 (25%), B1 (22%), B2 (25%), and C (3%). All PROs improved significantly (P < .001) with a mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score from 30.4 to 77.1, a pain visual analog scale from 8.1 to 1.5, and excellent (9.1/10) patient satisfaction. PRO-related responder rates for minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit were ≥85%. Forward elevation improved from 107° to 155°, and external rotation from 22° to 51°. One intraoperative glenoid rim fracture led to advanced radiolucency; no other clinically relevant lucency was observed.ConclusionTreatment with inlay total shoulder arthroplasty demonstrated significant functional improvement, excellent pain relief, and patient satisfaction in patients with advanced shoulder arthritis and various glenoid morphology types. Our initial results provide further support for this new option in primary shoulder replacement.

Instability and results after non-operative treatment of large anterior glenoid rim fractures: is there a correlation between fragment size or displacement and recurrence?

IntroductionThere is little data available on non-operative treatment of anterior glenoid rim fractures (GRF). Nothing is known about fracture size and displacement in comparison to clinical outcomes and instability in a mainly middle-aged patient population. The aim of this study was to demonstrate the results of non-operative treatment in anterior glenoid rim fractures with the special focus on potential instability/recurrence.MethodsThe inclusion criteria were non-operatively treated anterior GRF of at least ≥ 5 mm width using the age- and gender-matched Constant/Murley score (a.-/g.-CMS) and the Western Ontario Instability Index (WOSI). Radiographic parameters (fracture morphology, displacement, major tuberosity fractures and Hill–Sachs lesion using initial CT and radiographs) and the proportion of the fractured glenoid were detected (2D-CT-circle-method) and osteoarthritis (A.P. and axial radiographs) was classified according to Samilson/Prieto. Proportion of fractured glenoid and medial displacement were correlated with the recurrence rate and the clinical scores.ResultsN = 36 patients could be followed-up after a mean of 4.4 years [12–140 month, average age: 58 (± 13, 33–86) years]. The a.-/g.-CMS was 93 (± 11, 61–100) points, and the WOSI was 81% (± 22%, 35–100%) on average. The mean intraarticular displacement was 4 mm (± 3 mm; 0–14 mm). The 2D-circle-method showed a mean glenoid fracture involvement of 21% (± 11, 10–52%). Two cases of frozen shoulders and one case with biceps pathology were associated with the trauma. Within the followed-up patient group re-instability has occurred in n = 2 patients (6%) within the first two weeks after trauma. Osteoarthritis was found in n = 11 cases. There was no correlation between the scores and the fracture size/displacement [(a.-/g.-CMS vs. displacement: r = − 0.08; p = 0.6; vs. size: r = − 0.29; p = 0.2); (WOSI vs. displacement: r = − 0.14; p = 0.4; vs. size: r = − 0.37; p = 0.06)], but very large (≥ 21%) fractures with displacement ≥ 4 mm showed slightly worse results without significant difference (a.-/g.-CMS p = 0.2; WOSI p = 0.2). The apprehension test was negative in all patients at final follow-up.ConclusionNon-operative treatment of anterior GRF was associated with overall good results within a mainly middle-aged larger patient group. Re-instability is rare and is not associated with fragment size but can occur in the first weeks after trauma. Size and dislocation of the fracture is not a criterion for the prognosis of potential instability.Level of evidenceLevel IV, retrospective case series.