Magnetic resonance imaging analysis of the subscapularis muscle after arthroscopic and open shoulder stabilization

To evaluate the subscapularis muscle (SSC) after arthroscopic and open shoulder stabilization, three groups [after arthroscopic (A), after open shoulder stabilization (B), healthy volunteers (0)] underwent magnetic resonance imaging. Magnetic resonance parameters were compared with clinical SSC tests and shoulder scores. From Group 0 to B, the diameters of the SSC decreased, and the fatty degeneration of the upper SSC increased (P<.05) from Group 0 and A to B according to clinical findings. The functional shoulder scores did not differ (P>.05). Magnetic resonance analysis provides reasons of postoperative SSC dysfunction.     

Postoperative subscapularis muscle insufficiency after primary and revision open shoulder stabilization

BACKGROUND: Postoperative subscapularis muscle insufficiency after open shoulder stabilization procedures represents an unrecognized condition. HYPOTHESIS: Primary and revision open shoulder stabilization using the inverted L-shaped tenotomy approach impairs subscapularis muscle recovery and affects final clinical outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Twenty-five patients who underwent primary (group 1: n = 13; mean age, 36.5 years; follow-up, 48 months) or revision (group 2: n = 12; mean age, 34.2 years; follow-up, 52 months) open shoulder stabilization procedures were followed up clinically (clinical subscapularis tests and signs, Constant score, and Rowe score) and by magnetic resonance imaging (tendon integrity, defined muscle diameters, and signal intensity analysis [ratio infraspinatus/upper subscapularis muscle and infraspinatus/lower subscapularis muscle]). A third group (group 0) of 12 healthy volunteers served as a control. RESULTS: Clinical signs for subscapularis muscle insufficiency were present in 53.8% of cases in group 1 and 91.6% of cases in group 2. There were no significant differences between groups with regard to Constant and Rowe scores (P > .05). On magnetic resonance imaging, no complete tendon ruptures were found. The mean vertical diameter of the subscapularis muscle and the mean transverse diameter of the upper subscapularis muscle portion were significantly greater in group 0 than in group 1 and greater in group 1 than in group 2 (P < .05). The mean transverse diameter of the lower subscapularis muscle was comparable in all groups (P > .05). The signal intensity analysis revealed the infraspinatus/upper subscapularis muscle ratio was greater in group 0 than in group 1 and greater in group 1 than in group 2 (P < .05). The infraspinatus/lower subscapularis muscle ratio was lower in group 0 than in groups 1 and 2 (P < .05). CONCLUSION: Open shoulder stabilization using an inverted L-shaped tenotomy approach may lead to atrophy and fatty infiltration, particularly of the upper part of the subscapularis muscle, resulting in postoperative subscapularis muscle insufficiency. Revision procedures using the same approach may further compromise clinical subscapularis muscle function and structure. The lower portion of the subscapularis muscle seems to have a compensating effect that may, in addition to a meticulous capsulolabral reconstruction, account for the uncompromised overall clinical outcome.     

Poly-L-lactic acid tack synovitis after arthroscopic stabilization of the shoulder

BACKGROUND: Progress has been made in the design of bioabsorbable implants, with reduced complication rates and slower degradation times. PURPOSE: To report on complications related to use of poly-L-lactic acid implants after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization procedures. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. METHODS: Between 1997 and 1999, 52 patients underwent arthroscopic stabilization at one institution with an average of 2.2 poly-L-lactic acid tacks. Ten patients (19%), with an average age of 30 years, developed delayed onset of symptoms at an average of 8 months after surgery, including pain in all 10 and progressive stiffness in 6. The patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging and arthroscopic evaluation and debridement. RESULTS: Nine patients had gross implant debris. Evidence of glenohumeral synovitis was seen arthroscopically in all 10 patients. Three patients had significant full-thickness chondral damage on the humeral head. All preexisting labral lesions were healed. One year after arthroscopic debridement, loose body removal, and synovectomy, seven patients reported no or minimal pain and full return of motion. Two patients continued to have persistent pain and stiffness, and one patient reported discomfort with overhand throwing; all three had chondral lesions. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with symptoms of delayed pain and progressive stiffness after arthroscopic stabilization with poly-L-lactic acid implants should be evaluated for synovitis and chondral injury. Arthroscopic treatment provides a significant decrease in symptoms and increased range of motion.     

关节镜下修复肩胛下肌损伤对早期肩关节功能的临床疗效评价

目的 探讨关节镜下修复肩胛下肌损伤对早期肩关节功能的临床疗效.方法 回顾性分析2018年3月—2019年4月新疆医科大学第一附属医院运动医学科收治的肩胛下肌损伤患者27例,男性10例,女性17例;年龄46～72岁,平均56.6岁,均为肌腱退变或喙突撞击导致,均行关节镜手术治疗.MRI检查示肩胛下肌不同程度损伤.关节镜下...     

Concomitant coracoplasty during arthroscopic subscapularis repair does not yield better clinical outcomes and structural integrity

Purpose

Few studies have examined whether concomitant coracoplasty is necessary to improve clinical and radiological outcomes after arthroscopic subscapularis repair. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical outcomes and structural integrity after arthroscopic repair of isolated subscapularis full-thickness tear, either with or without concomitant coracoplasty.

Methods

This study included 62 patients who underwent arthroscopic subscapularis repair either with coracoplasty (Group A, 35 patients) or without coracoplasty (Group B, 27 patients). Preoperative and postoperative visual analog scale pain scores, subjective shoulder values, University of California at Los Angeles shoulder scores, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon scores, subscapularis strength, and shoulder active range of motion (ROM) were assessed. Postoperative magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) or computed tomographic arthrography (CTA) was performed 6 months postoperatively for structural integrity assessment.

Results

At 2-year follow-up, all functional scores and ROM improved significantly in both groups compared with preoperative values (p < 0.001). However, none of these values differed significantly between groups. On follow-up MRA or CTA images, although postoperative coracohumeral distance was significantly greater in Group A (8.4 mm ± 2.3 mm versus 7.0 mm ± 2.0 mm) (p = 0.018), the re-tear rates were not significantly different between groups (5/35 (14%) in Group A and 4/27 (15%) in Group B).

Conclusions

For isolated subscapularis full-thickness tears, concomitant coracoplasty with arthroscopic repair did not produce better clinical outcomes or structural integrity than repair without coracoplasty. This suggests that concomitant coracoplasty may not be imperative during arthroscopic repair of isolated subscapularis full-thickness tears.

Level of evidence

III.

     

Anterior shoulder stabilization in collision athletes: arthroscopic versus open Bankart repair

BACKGROUND: Collision athletes are reported to be at high risk for redislocation after anterior stabilization of shoulder instability. Some authors have suggested that arthroscopic stabilization produces results similar to those of open stabilization. PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of anterior shoulder stabilization in collision athletes and to compare the clinical results between the arthroscopic and open methods. HYPOTHESIS: Open stabilization might produce better results than does arthroscopic stabilization in collision athletes. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Forty-eight shoulders of 46 collision athletes were enrolled for this study. The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was 20 years, and the mean follow-up period was 72 months (range, 30-136 months). Sixteen shoulders underwent arthroscopic stabilization; 32 shoulders had open repairs. RESULTS: Visual analog scale, Rowe, and Constant scores improved after surgery, but no statistically significant difference was found between the arthroscopic and open repair groups. Thirty-seven athletes (83%) returned to near-preinjury sports activity levels (>/= 90% recovery) after operation. Two patients (4%) had subluxation and 6 (12.5%) had redislocation after surgery. The number of shoulders with postoperative subluxation or dislocation was 4 (25%) in the arthroscopic group and 4 (12.5%) in the open group (P = .041). Revision surgery was performed on 5 shoulders (10.4%). CONCLUSIONS: There were 8 (16.5%) instances of postoperative instability among the collision athletes studied. The arthroscopic group yielded a higher failure rate than did the open group. The authors believe open stabilization to be a more reliable method for anterior shoulder instability in collision athletes.     

Predictors of functional outcomes and recurrent shoulder instability after arthroscopic anterior stabilization

Purpose

To investigate what factors might predict the results of arthroscopic stabilization for anterior shoulder instability.

Methods

One hundred and forty-three patients averaging 25 (15–58) years with traumatic anterior shoulder instability who underwent arthroscopic stabilization were reviewed at a median follow-up of 81 (24–172) months. Sixty-two (56.4 %) individuals were involved in contact sport activities, and there were 40 (30 %) patients who had only one dislocation prior to having surgery. Rowe score was measured preoperatively and at follow-up.

Results

Thirty-three (23.1 %) patients experienced recurrent instability 12 (1–120) months after surgery, and 15 of those underwent further surgery. There was a statistically significant lower risk of failure (p = 0.027) for patients who had a surgical procedure after only one episode of shoulder dislocation. Patients treated after the second or further episode of shoulder dislocation exhibited a mean odds ratio for failure of 3.8 (95 % confidence interval 1.2–11.6, p = 0.044) with regard to first-time dislocators. The Rowe score significantly improved from a preoperative value of 25 (5–55) to a postoperative value of 100 (40–100) (p < 0.001). A significantly higher postoperative Rowe score was found in patients older than 24 years of age at the operation (p = 0.011) and in patients with less than eight dislocations prior to surgery (p = 0.05).

Conclusions

These results suggest that better functional results following arthroscopic stabilization can be expected in patients over 24 years of age and in those with a fewer number of dislocations preoperatively. A lower rate of recurrence can be expected if the patient undergoes surgery after the first episode of dislocation.

Level of evidence

Prognostic study, Level II.

     

Recent advances and perspectives on arthroscopic stabilization of the shoulder

The goal of surgical stabilization of the unstable glenohumeral joint is to produce a stable yet mobile joint that can return to preinjury function. Open surgical procedures (in particular, the Bankart procedure) have evolved to a point where stability and mobility are being attained with a low complication rate, but the rate of return to preinjury function, particularly in overhead athletes, has not been ideal. Arthroscopic stabilization is an attractive alternative to open procedures, particularly in those patients who have a history of traumatic and unidirectional recurrent dislocations with a labral detachment. A variety of techniques for reattaching a detached labro-ligamentous complex have been described. Longer follow-up is needed to assess the efficacy of these procedures fully, particularly in light of the good results now being obtained with the open Bankart procedure. Longer-term studies have shown a higher rate of recurrence of dislocation with the arthroscopic technique than with the open technique. Arthroscopic stabilization offers the potential advantages of shorter hospitalization, less traumatic treatment of the soft tissues, more thorough examination of the glenohumeral joint and subacromial bursa, and greater cosmesis. It could also provide a means by which selective stabilization of those initial anterior dislocations that might be prone to recurrence could be performed. Long-term follow-up and randomized studies comparing open and arthroscopic techniques are needed to further define the best role of arthroscopic shoulder stabilization and to determine which of the several techniques described provides the best results with the fewest complications.     

Comparison of open and arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent shoulder dislocation in patients with a Bankart lesion

We performed a prospective study of 117 patients (119 shoulders) with symptomatic, recurrent anterior posttraumatic shoulder instability to compare open versus arthroscopic reconstruction. Arthroscopic reconstructions (N = 66) were performed using bioabsorbable tacks (Suretac fixators), whereas open reconstructions (N = 53) were performed with suture anchors. All of the patients had a Bankart lesion. Independent observers examined 108 of the 119 shoulders (91%) at a median follow-up period of 28 months (range, 24 to 63) for the arthroscopic group and 36 months (range, 24 to 63) for the open group. The recurrence rate, including both dislocations and subluxations, was 9 of 60 (15%) in the arthroscopic group, compared with 5 of 48 (10%) in the open group. At follow-up, the Rowe score was 93 points (range, 39 to 100) and the Constant score was 91 points (range, 56 to 100) in the arthroscopic group, compared with 89 points (range, 53 to 100 and 57 to 100 for the Rowe and Constant scores, respectively) for both scores in the open group. The only significant difference was in external rotation in abduction, which was 90 degrees (range, 50 degrees to 135 degrees) in the arthroscopic group and 80 degrees (range, 25 degrees to 115 degrees) in the open group. Both methods produced stable and well-functioning shoulders in the majority of patients.     

Comparison of shoulder stabilization using arthroscopic transglenoid sutures versus open capsulolabral repairs: a 5-year minimum follow-up

BACKGROUND: Few long-term studies have compared the efficacy of shoulder stabilization using arthroscopic or open procedures. PURPOSE: To directly compare the outcomes of shoulder stabilization using arthroscopic transglenoid sutures versus open capsulolabral repairs. STUDY DESIGN: Uncontrolled retrospective review. METHODS: Fifty patients (30 arthroscopic and 20 open) were followed for a minimum of 5 years (mean, 68 months). Pain, motion, strength, function, stability, patient satisfaction, radiographs, and ability to return to preinjury activity levels were evaluated. RESULTS: The arthroscopic group had a 17% (5 of 30) dislocation rate and a 60% (18 of 30) rate of instability. Sixty-seven percent (6 of 9) of patients participating in collision sports had repeat instability. Eight of 18 patients with instability required open repair for persistent symptoms. There were no limitations of motion following arthroscopic stabilization. The open group had no episodes of dislocations or instability. Forty-five percent (9 of 20) had some loss of external rotation (range, 10 degrees -40 degrees ) with a mean loss of 18. The one failure in this group had a 40 degrees loss of external rotation and difficulty with recreational activity. No patients participating in collision sports had repeat instability. CONCLUSION: We recommend open stabilization for patients participating in collision sports (for example, football, wrestling) or activities where better stability is required. For those participating in sports where performance may be compromised by loss of external rotation (such as swimming), newer arthroscopic techniques are recommended.     

关节镜下肩袖损伤修补术后早期运动和制动对肩关节功能的影响

目的 探讨早期康复被动运动和制动对关节镜下肩袖损伤修补术后肩关节功能的影响.方法 采用回顾性病例对照研究分析2016年1月至2017年12月上海交通大学医学院附属新华医院收治的78例肩袖损伤患者临床资料,其中男36例,女42例;年龄35～78岁[(62.7 ±3.2)岁].中度撕裂(1～3 cm)36例,小撕裂(<1 ...     

A prospective cohort study investigating the effect of generalized joint hypermobility on outcomes after arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization

Objectives: Generalized joint laxity has been proposed as a significant risk factor for failure after arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization. The purpose of this study was to prospectively measure joint mobility in patients undergoing arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization and to determine whether hypermobility is a risk factor for worse outcomes compared with patients having normal joint mobility.

Methods: Patients with anterior shoulder instability were prospectively enrolled. Generalized joint hypermobility was measured using the Beighton Hypermobility Score and the Rowe, UCLA, SANE, SST, and WOSI scores were administered and reported as patient outcomes preoperatively and following arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization at 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months postoperatively. Patients were stratified into two groups based on their Beighton Hypermobility Score, with scores ≥ 4/9 indicative of joint hypermobility.

Results: Sixteen patients with joint hypermobility (JH) and 18 non-hypermobile patients (NJH) were enrolled. At baseline, there were no significant differences in demographic characteristics or baseline patient-reported outcomes. Significantly more patients in the NJH group had SLAP tears (n = 10) compared to the JH group (n = 2) (p = .013). At all follow-up times, there were no significant differences between the NJH and JH groups with regard to patient-reported outcome scores (p > .05). In the JH group, 17% of patients reported recurrent instability at two years postoperatively compared to 25% of patients in the NJH group. There was no significant difference in failure rate (p = .67).

Conclusion: There was no significant difference in patient-reported outcomes or recurrent instability in patients with versus without joint hypermobility undergoing arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization.     

Arthroscopic and open shoulder stabilization using absorbable implants A clinical and radiographic comparison of two methods

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic results in patients with recurrent unidirectional, post-traumatic shoulder instability (dislocations/subluxations). All the patients had a Bankart lesion and underwent reconstruction using either an open or an arthroscopic technique and absorbable implants. Thirty-three consecutive patients (36 shoulders) were operated on by one surgeon. Group A comprised 18 shoulders which underwent an open Bankart reconstruction using absorbable 3.7-mm TAG suture anchors. Group B comprised 18 shoulders which underwent a combination of an intra- and extra-articular arthroscopic stabilization using 8-mm Suretac fixators. The median number of dislocations before the reconstruction was 5 (0–45) in group A and 4 (0–30) in group B (NS). The follow-up examination was performed by an independent observer after a median of 31 (range 25–38) months in group A and 28 (range 18–46) months in group B (NS). An independent radiologist without any knowledge of the surgical procedure evaluated all the radiographs. There were no re-dislocations in either group. In group A, the Rowe and Constant scores were 86 (range 61–98) and 89 (range 73–99), respectively. The corresponding values in group B were 92 (range 83– 98; P = 0.05) and 96 (range 75– 100; NS). The external rotation in abduction was 65° (range 20°–90°) in group A and 83° (range 65°–105°) in group B (P = 0.0017). The radiographs revealed that 10/18 (56%) in group A and 4/18 (23%) in group B had visible drill-holes or cystic formations in conjunction with the drill-holes (P = 0.002). In this study the open procedure resulted in a restriction in external rotation more frequently than the arthroscopic procedure. The radiographs revealed visible drill-holes or cystic formations in conjunction with the drill-holes more frequently when TAG suture anchors were used than when Suretac fixators were used. The radiographic changes did, not appear to affect the clinical outcome, however. Received: 27 September 1997 Accepted: 22 January 1998