Open shoulder stabilization: current trends and 1-year postoperative complications (original) (raw)
Related papers
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research, 2014
Background Arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet bone block procedure are widely considered mainstays for surgical treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The choice between these procedures depends mainly on surgeon preference or training rather than published evidence. Questions/purposes We compared patients with recurrent posttraumatic anterior shoulder instability treated with arthroscopic Bankart or open Latarjet procedure in terms of (1) frequency and timing of recurrent instability, (2) risk factors for recurrent instability, and (3) patient-reported outcomes. Methods In this retrospective comparative study, we paired 93 patients undergoing open Latarjet procedures with 93 patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repairs over the same period for posttraumatic anterior shoulder instability by one of four surgeons at the same center. Both groups were comparable except that patients in the Latarjet group had more glenoid lesions and more instability episodes preoperatively. Minimum followup was 4 years (mean, 6 years; range, 4-10 years). Patients were assessed with a questionnaire, including stability, Rowe score, and return to sports. Recurrent instability was defined as at least one episode of recurrent dislocation or subluxation. Return to sports was evaluated using a 0% to 100% scale that patients completed after recovery from surgery. Various risk factors for recurrent instability were also analyzed. Results At latest followup, 10% (nine of 93) in the Latarjet group and 22% (20 of 93) in the Bankart group demonstrated recurrent instability (p = 0.026; odds ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17-0.91). Ten recurrences in the Bankart group (50%) occurred after 2 years, compared to only one (11%) in the Latarjet group. Reoperation rate was 6% and 7% in the Bankart and Latarjet groups, respectively. In both groups, patients younger than 20 years had higher recurrence risk (p = 0.019). In the Bankart group, independent factors predictive for recurrence were practice of competitive sports and shoulder hyperlaxity (ie, passive external rotation [ 85°in the contralateral uninjured shoulder). Although return to sports was not different between groups, the mean Rowe score was higher in the Latarjet group (78 versus 68, p = 0.018). Conclusions Patients who had the open Latarjet procedure had less recurrent instability and better Rowe scores over a mean 6-year followup. We now perform isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair for carefully selected patients, including patients with an Instability Severity Index Score of 3 or less. Level of Evidence Level III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery, 2020
Purpose: To systematically review the results of systematic studies regarding open versus arthroscopic Bankart repairs for recurrent anterior shoulder instability and quantitatively analyze the effect of primary-literature publication dates on reported outcomes in these systematic studies. Methods: A systematic search was conducted to identify systematic studies reporting outcomes of both arthroscopic and open Bankart repairs for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Patient-reported outcome measures, recurrent instability rates, definitions of instability, and procedure types reported by included study characteristics were qualitatively analyzed. Correlation coefficient analyses were performed to investigate if a systematic study's proportion of included primary literature published after 1999, 2000, 2001, or 2002 affected that study's reported mean difference in instability recurrence between open and arthroscopic procedures. The Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews criteria were used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. Results: Of 130 identified articles, 6 met the inclusion criteria. Patient-reported outcome measures were poorly reported. Among mean differences in instability recurrence rates, the results were indeterminate: Although 5 studies reported arthroscopic surgical procedures as having a higher recurrence rate, only 1 reported a statistically significant difference. Within the 5 included systematic reviews reporting the number of included studies, 37 of 56 observations were published after 2000. The proportion of studies published after 2000 (Pearson r ¼ 0.88, P ¼ .052) was positively associated with differences in instability recurrence rates between open and arthroscopic procedures. Conclusions: Systematic studies that included newer studies (published after 2000) were associated with more favorable arthroscopic outcomes. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level III and IV studies.
Arthroscopic Bankart repair: Have we finally reached a gold standard?
Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2016
Traditionally, surgical stabilization of the unstable shoulder has been performed through an open incision. Arthroscopic Bankart repair with suture anchors is now widely considered the treatment of choice for anterior shoulder instability in patients who have failed conservative management. Many different factors have now been elucidated for adequate treatment of glenohumeral instability. Because of technical advances in instability repair combined with an increased understanding of factors that lead to recurrent instability, the outcomes following arthroscopic Bankart repair have significantly improved and approach those of open techniques.
Ten percent re-dislocation rate 13 years after the arthroscopic Bankart procedure
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy, 2019
The aim of the present study was to determine the long-term outcome after the arthroscopic Bankart procedure, in terms of recurrent instability, shoulder function, glenohumeral arthropathy and patient satisfaction. Methods Patients who underwent the arthroscopic Bankart procedure between January 1999 and the end of December 2005 were invited to complete a set of Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and visit the hospital for clinical and radiological assessment. PROMs included the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (OSIS) and additional questions on shoulder instability and patient satisfaction. Clinical assessment included the apprehension test and the Constant-Murley score. The Samilson-Prieto classification was used to assess arthropathy on standard radiographs. The primary outcome was a re-dislocation that needed reduction. Secondary outcomes in terms of recurrent instability included patient-reported subluxation and a positive apprehension test. Results Of 104 consecutive patients, 71 patients with a mean follow-up of 13.1 years completed the PROMs, of which 53 patients (55 shoulders) were also available for clinical and radiological assessment. Re-dislocations had occurred in 7 shoulders (9.6%). Subluxations occurred in 23 patients (31.5%) and the apprehension test was positive in 30 (54.5%) of the 55 shoulders examined. Median functional outcomes were 236 for WOSI, 45 for OSIS, and 103 for the normalized Constant-Murley score. Of all 71 patients (73 shoulders), 29 (39.7%) reported being completely satisfied, 33 (45.2%) reported being mostly satisfied and 8 (11%) reported being somewhat satisfied. Glenohumeral arthropathy was observed in 33 (60%) of the shoulders. Conclusion Despite 10% re-dislocations and frequent other signs of recurrent instability, shoulder function and patient satisfaction at 13 years after arthroscopic Bankart repair were good. Level of evidence Level IV.
Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine
Background: Limited evidence is available regarding the recommended technique of revision surgery for recurrent shoulder instability. Only 1 previous study has compared the results of soft tissue repair and the Latarjet technique in patients with persistent shoulder instability after primary surgical stabilization. Purpose/Hypothesis: To evaluate the results of revision surgery in patients with previous surgical stabilization failure and subcritical glenoid bone defects, comparing repeated Bankart repair versus arthroscopic Latarjet technique. The hypothesis was that Latarjet would be superior to soft tissue procedures in terms of objective and subjective functional scores, recurrence rates, and range of movement. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Included were 45 patients (mean age, 29.1 ± 8.9 years) with subcritical bone loss (<15% of articular surface) who had undergone revision anterior shoulder instability repair after failed Bankart repair. Of these...
2020
Background The primary aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet procedure for recurrent dislocation of the shoulder. Secondary aims were to assess and compare the cost-effectiveness, satisfaction and complications, including recurrence and infection. Methods We retrospectively evaluated the patients who underwent either arthroscopic Bankart repair with or without Remplissage procedure or open Latarjet procedure between May 2015 and May 2018. The preoperative data were collected from the hospital records, and the postoperative data were collected during the follow-up visit. At the final follow-up, 41(male=32, female=9) patients in the Bankart group and 40(male=34 and female=6) patients in the Latarjet group were included in the study. Clinical outcomes were assessed using the ASES score, Rowe score, and Quick DASH score. A self-constructed scale that consisted of satisfied and dissatisfied was used to ...
Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2017
Arthroscopic Bankart repair is commonly utilized for shoulder stabilization in patients with anterior shoulder instability with minimum glenoid bone loss. The purpose of this review is to provide the indications, surgical technique, complications, and recent outcomes in arthroscopic Bankart repair for shoulder instability. Improvements in arthroscopic techniques have led to better patient outcomes, as well as an improved understanding of the pathoanatomy of instability. More recent studies have shown that one of the potential failures of primary arthroscopic repair may be due to unaddressed bone loss. This underscores the importance of evaluating glenoid bone loss and proper patient selection for this procedure to ensure successful outcome. When indicated, arthroscopic stabilization is the treatment of choice for many surgeons due to its lower morbidity and low overall complication rate. Future work must focus on longer-term outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repai...
Bankart repair in traumatic anterior shoulder instability
Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery, 2002
The purpose of this study was to compare the results of open and arthroscopic Bankart repair using suture anchors in traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability. Variables measured were recurrence rate, range of motion, and return to preinjury activity. Type of Study: Case control study. Methods: Eighty-nine shoulders in 88 patients with traumatic unilateral anterior shoulder instability were evaluated using Rowe and University of California Los Angeles scores, recurrence, return to activity, and range of motion by an independent examiner at an average of 39 months after either an arthroscopic or open Bankart repair using suture anchors. The arthroscopic technique included a minimum of 3 anchors in most patients and a routine incorporation of capsular plication and proximal shift. Of the 89 shoulders, 30 shoulders (30 patients) underwent open Bankart repair and 59 shoulders (58 patients) underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair. Results: Twenty-six shoulders (86.6%) in the open repair group showed excellent or good results, and 54 (91.5%) shoulders in the arthroscopic repair group showed excellent or good results. The arthroscopic group revealed slightly higher scores in the Rowe (P ϭ .041) and UCLA scores (P ϭ .026). Two patients (6.7%) in the open repair group and 2 (3.4%) in the arthroscopic repair group had experienced at least 1 episode of redislocation after the surgery. One patient (3.3%) in the open repair group and 4 (6.8%) in the arthroscopic repair group demonstrated mild apprehension. The overall residual instability was 10% in the open repair group and 10.2% in the arthroscopic repair group. There were no significant differences in the loss of external rotation and return to prior activity between the 2 groups (P Ͼ .05). Residual instability occurred more frequently in patients with fewer anchors. Conclusions: Arthroscopic suture anchor capsulorraphy showed similar results to the open Bankart procedure.