Long-Term Outcomes After Bankart Shoulder Stabilization.

Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rush Medical College of Rush University, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. Electronic address: .
Arthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery (Impact Factor: 3.19). 02/2013; DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2012.11.010
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT PURPOSE: The purposes of this study were (1) to analyze long-term outcomes in patients who have undergone open or arthroscopic Bankart repair and (2) to evaluate study methodologic quality through validated tools. METHODS: We performed a systematic review of Level I to IV Evidence using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Clinical outcome studies after open or arthroscopic Bankart repair with a minimum of 5 years' follow-up were analyzed. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were extracted and reported. Study methodologic quality was evaluated with Modified Coleman Methodology Scores and Quality Appraisal Tool scores. RESULTS: We analyzed 26 studies (1,781 patients). All but 2 studies were Level III or IV Evidence with low Modified Coleman Methodology Scores and Quality Appraisal Tool scores. Patients analyzed were young (mean age, 28 years) male patients (81%) with unilateral dominant shoulder (61%), post-traumatic recurrent (mean of 11 dislocations before surgery) anterior shoulder instability without significant glenoid bone loss. The mean length of clinical follow-up was 11 years. There was no significant difference in recurrence of instability with arthroscopic (11%) versus open (8%) techniques (P = .06). There was no significant difference in instability recurrence with arthroscopic suture anchor versus open Bankart repair (8.5% v 8%, P = .82). There was a significant difference in rate of return to sport between open (89%) and arthroscopic (74%) techniques (P < .01), whereas no significant difference was observed between arthroscopic suture anchor (87%) and open repair (89%) (P = .43). There was no significant difference in the rate of postoperative osteoarthritis between arthroscopic suture anchor and open Bankart repair (26% and 33%, respectively; P = .059). There was no significant difference in Rowe or Constant scores between groups (P > .05). CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability using arthroscopic suture anchor and open Bankart techniques yields similar long-term clinical outcomes, with no significant difference in the rate of recurrent instability, clinical outcome scores, or rate of return to sport. No significant difference was shown in the incidence of postoperative osteoarthritis with open versus arthroscopic suture anchor repair. Study methodologic quality was poor, with most studies having Level III or IV Evidence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of studies with Level I through IV Evidence.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The primary aim of this study was to record how orthopaedic surgeons are currently managing acute first-time anterior shoulder dislocation (AFASD) 8 years after introduction of the Dutch national guideline: "acute primary shoulder dislocation, diagnostics and treatment" in 2005. The second aim was to evaluate how these surgeons treat recurrent instability after AFASD. An online questionnaire regarding the management of AFASD and recurrent shoulder instability was held amongst orthopaedic surgeons of all 98 Dutch hospitals. The overall response rate was 60 %. Of the respondents, 75 % had a local protocol for managing AFASD, of which 28 % had made changes in their treatment protocol after the introduction of the national guideline. The current survey showed wide variety in the overall treatment policies for AFASD. Twenty-seven percent of the orthopaedic surgeons were currently unaware of the national guideline. The variability in treatment for AFASD was present throughout the whole treatment from which policy at the emergency department; when to operate for recurrent instability; type of surgical technique for stabilization and type of fixation of the labrum. As for the treatment of recurrent instability, the same variability was seen: 36 % of the surgeons perform only arthroscopic procedures, 7 % only open and 57 % perform both open and arthroscopic procedures. Despite the introduction of the national guideline for the initial management of AFASD in 2005, still great variety among orthopaedic surgeons in the Netherlands was present. As for the surgical stabilization technique, the vast majority of the respondents are performing an arthroscopic shoulder stabilization procedure at the expense of the more traditional open procedure as a first treatment option for post-traumatic shoulder instability.
    Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery 02/2015; 135(4). DOI:10.1007/s00402-015-2156-3 · 1.36 Impact Factor
  • The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 10/2014; 96(20):1753-1758. DOI:10.2106/JBJS.N.00744 · 4.31 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We describe the presentation, exam findings, surgical repair techniques, and short-term outcomes in a series of patients with isolated inferior labral tears. A retrospective chart review was performed at a large academic medical center. Isolated inferior labral tears were defined as between the 4 o'clock and 8 o'clock position of the glenoid as determined by direct arthroscopic visualization. Tears that were smaller were also included but were required to cross the 6 o'clock point, having anterior and posterior components. Patients were excluded if they had any other pathology or treatment of the shoulder. 1-year follow-up was required. Of the 17 patients who met inclusion criteria for review, 12 were available for a minimum 1-year follow-up. Average total follow-up for patients to complete the phone interview/Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (OSIS) was an average of 37.7 months (range: 16-79 months). Postoperatively, all reported symptom improvement or resolution since surgery. The mean preoperative pain on a scale of 0-10 was 6.3 (range: 0-10). Mean postoperative pain on a scale of 0-10 was 2.25 (range: 0-5). Eleven of 12 patients (91.7%) had returned to the level of activity desired. The mean OSIS was 41.4 (median: 43; range: 27-47). Eleven of 12 patients (91.7%) had good or excellent scores. Ten of 12 patients (83.3%) had a feeling of stability in the shoulder. All 12 patients reached were satisfied with the procedure and would undergo surgery again in a similar situation. We have presented our series of patients with isolated inferior labral injury, and have shown that when surgically treated, outcomes of this uncommon injury are good to excellent and a full return to sports can be expected.
    International Journal of Shoulder Surgery 01/2015; 9(1):13-9. DOI:10.4103/0973-6042.150218 · 0.51 Impact Factor