Patients’ expectations of shoulder instability repair

Purpose

To analyze and compare patient expectations of primary and revision shoulder stabilization and to assess the factors associated with patients’ expectations.

Methods

Pre-operative patient expectations after shoulder instability repair were prospectively assessed using a self-designed questionnaire. The survey included questions on the expected level and type of return to sports, instability, pain, risk of osteoarthritis, and overall shoulder condition.

Results

One-hundred and forty-five patients (99 primary; 46 revision repair) were included. A return to sport at the same level with slight to no restrictions was expected in 95%, a return to high-risk activities in 34%, to moderate in 58%, and to low-risk activities in 9%. No pain [instability] independent of the activity level was expected by 71% [79%] and occasional pain [instability] during contact and overhead activities by 25% [19%]. 61% expected to have no risk of glenohumeral osteoarthritis, 37% a slight, and 2% a significant risk. The overall expectation for the post-operative shoulder was indicated to be normal or nearly normal in 99% of patients. The revision group did not differ from the primary repair group in any variable. High pre-operative sport performance was positively correlated with post-operative sport expectations. The number of dislocations, the duration of instability, and the subjective instability level were negatively correlated with return to sport expectations.

Conclusion

Patient expectations for primary and revision shoulder instability repair are high. Realistic patient expectations regarding the surgical procedure are necessary to avoid low patient satisfaction, especially in pre-operatively highly active and demanding athletes. The surgeon must not solely base the treatment on the pathology and possible risk factors for failure but should also take the individual expectation of the patient into account.

Level of evidence

III.

     

Magnetic resonance imaging of the shoulder: rationale and current applications

Because it can demonstrate a wide range of tissue contrast with excellent resolution, magnetic resonance (MR) imaging has revolutionized imaging in many areas of the musculoskeletal system and has generated excitement among those interested in the painful shoulder. Shoulder impingement syndrome and glenohumeral instability constitute the two major categories of shoulder derangements. Correct diagnosis requires the use of appropriate pulse sequences and imaging planes, proper patient positioning, and a satisfactory surface coil. In addition the imager must have a thorough understanding of shoulder anatomy and pathology. We present a summary of the current status of MR imaging of the shoulder including technical, anatomic, and pathologic considerations and a review of the pertinent literature.     

Combined lesions of the glenoid labrum

Advances in shoulder arthroscopy and improved understanding of the pathoanatomy following shoulder instability have led to increased recognition of combined lesions of the glenoid labrum. Although the diagnosis of combined labral tears is often made with physical examination and magnetic resonance imaging, combined tears can be discovered intraoperatively. A high index of suspicion is necessary, especially in the setting of chronic recurrent shoulder instability or previous failed labral repair. Over a 6-year period at a military institution, combined labral repairs comprised 37% of all patients undergoing any labral repair. With accurate identification of all labral pathology and a systematic approach to labral repair, successful outcomes can be achieved.     

Anatomy, pathophysiology, andbiomechanics of shoulder instability

Instability in the athlete presents a unique challenge to the orthopaedic surgeon. A spectrum of both static anddynamic pathophysiology, as well as gross and microscopic histopathology, contribute to this complex clinical continuum. Biomechanical studies of the shoulder and ligament cutting studies in recent years have generated a more precise understanding of the individual contributions of the various ligaments and capsular regions to shoulder instability. An understanding of the underlying pathology and accurate assessment of degree and direction of the instability by clinical examination and history are essential to developing appropriate treatment algorithms.     

Screening the athlete's shoulder for impingement symptoms: a clinical reasoning algorithm for early detection of shoulder pathology

Chronic shoulder pain and dysfunction are common complaints among overhead athletes seeking care from physical medicine and rehabilitation. Impingement is a frequently described pathological condition in the overhead athlete. Impingement symptoms may be the result of rotator cuff pathology, shoulder instability, scapular dyskinesis or muscle dysfunction, biceps pathology, SLAP lesions and chronic stiffness of the posterior capsule. At present, numerous different shoulder tests have been described in literature and discussed with respect to their individual diagnostic accuracy. However, in view of the number of shoulder tests, it is often a challenge for the clinician to select the appropriate tests for diagnosing the underlying pathology. The purpose of this paper is to present and discuss a clinical algorithm which may be used in the early detection of the underlying causes of impingement symptoms. In this algorithm, a specific chronology and selection of diagnostic tests may offer the clinician a guideline in his physical examination of the athlete with shoulder pain.     

Evaluation and treatment of shoulder instability

The shoulder joint has a wide range of motion as a result of a complex interplay of soft tissue and bone structures. It is also the most frequently dislocated joint in the body. Shoulder dislocations are generally classified as traumatic and nontraumatic. There are many specific causes, each of which necessitate individualized treatment modalities. Accurate diagnosis requires a careful history and physical examination. Arthroscopic surgery and advances in imaging have expanded our understanding of anatomy and pathology relevant to shoulder instability and its treatment. Surgery is the treatment of choice for recurrent traumatic instability. Surgery may also be indicated in some first-time traumatic dislocations in young contact athletes, whereas rehabilitation is the initial treatment of choice in older patients with initial instability and in those with nontraumatic dislocations. Results of arthroscopic capsulolabral repair now equal those of open capsulolabral repair and have become the surgical treatment of choice for most patients. However, in cases of recurrent instability and significant bone deficiency of either the glenoid or humeral head, open bone reconstructive procedures are often necessary to ensure successful outcomes.     

The proximal biceps tendon: tricks and pearls

The diagnosis and treatment of proximal biceps tendon injuries continue to be a challenge. The difficulty lies on determining if there is isolated biceps pathology versus concomitant rotator cuff tears or instability. Imaging modalities, such as magnetic resonance imaging, continue to provide us with the extra tool to help us confirm our suspicion of additional pathology. Symptomatic biceps tendon tears can undergo debridement, tenotomy, or tenodesis if nonoperative measures fail to provide relief. Reports from performing a biceps tenotomy often give similar functional outcomes compared with tenodesis. Cosmetic deformity on the lateral arm may be noted with tenodesis and initial fatigue. Tenodesis may subject the patient to a longer rehabilitation process and increased pain. The decision of which one should be performed lies between the physician and the patient's expectations.     

Sports-related injuries of the shoulder: instability

With current technology a properly conceived imaging strategy can demonstrate instability lesions in the athlete. Plain radiographs can diagnose acute dislocations and assess successful reductions. In addition, plain radiographs can demonstrate Hill-Sachs and, more importantly for instability, osseous Bankart lesions. In the acute setting, conventional MRI nicely demonstrates labral Bankart, ligamentous. and tendonous injuries that result from dislocations and can lead to instability. In the setting of chronic instability, MR arthrography best evaluates these lesions. In the postoperative shoulder, muitislice CT arthrography may be the modality of choice, but further investigation is needed. If large series validate multislice CT arthrography for the evaluation of postoperative instability lesions, this technique may become widely used in athletes and in other populations where recurrent instability is a problem. Other imaging strategies may also find an increasing central role in evaluating shoulder instability lesions. Indirect MR arthrography, for example, may have a role in assessing these lesions in athletes . Another intriguing technology for this application is the development of high field (0.5 Tesla or greater) open magnets. In such a setting, physiological relationships in the shoulder with motion and stress may be evaluated. Such imaging may farther illuminate our understanding of the stable and unstable shoulder. Unfortunately, with all imaging modalities, whether widely used or experimental, outcomes data is Lacking. How do the various imaging modalities and strategies affect patient outcome? The answer is unknown and needs to be answered before a definitive patient work-up for shoulder instability can be established.     

Evaluation and Treatment of Shoulder Instability

Abstract

The shoulder joint has a wide range of motion as a result of a complex interplay of soft tissue and bone structures. It is also the most frequently dislocated joint in the body. Shoulder dislocations are generally classified as traumatic and nontraumatic. There are many specific causes, each of which necessitate individualized treatment modalities. Accurate diagnosis requires a careful history and physical examination. Arthroscopic surgery and advances in imaging have expanded our understanding of anatomy and pathology relevant to shoulder instability and its treatment. Surgery is the treatment of choice for recurrent traumatic instability. Surgery may also be indicated in some first-time traumatic dislocations in young contact athletes, whereas rehabilitation is the initial treatment of choice in older patients with initial instability and in those with nontraumatic dislocations. Results of arthroscopic capsulolabral repair now equal those of open capsulolabral repair and have become the surgical treatment of choice for most patients. However, in cases of recurrent instability and significant bone deficiency of either the glenoid or humeral head, open bone reconstructive procedures are often necessary to ensure successful outcomes.     

Arthroscopic bankart repair with the suretac device for traumatic anterior shoulder instability in athletes

Arthroscopic treatment of anterior shoulder instability in the athlete has evolved tremendously over the past decade. Currently, most techniques include the use of suture and suture anchors. However, the variety of arthroscopic instruments and techniques that are available shows the complexity of intra-articular tissue fixation, which includes anchor placement, suture passing, and knot tying. Stabilization using the Suretac device (Acufex Microsurgical, Mansfield, MA) simplifies tissue fixation by eliminating the need for arthroscopic suture passing and intraarticular knot tying. However, a successful outcome is highly dependent on accurate patient selection. Preoperative evaluation, examination under anesthesia, and the pathoanatomy defined by a thorough arthroscopic examination suggest the most effective treatment strategy. The ideal candidate for shoulder stabilization using the Suretac device is an athlete with a relatively pure traumatic anterior instability pattern with detachment pathology (eg, a Bankart lesion) and minimal capsular deformation.     

Clinical tests for the diagnosis of rotator cuff disease

Several tests have been described to examine the shoulder. However, there is a lack of consensus on clinical assessment of patients with shoulder pain and suspected rotator cuff pathology. This review reports the diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for rotator cuff pathology. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, and accuracy of 21 clinical tests for rotator cuff pathology are reported from the available literature. Twenty studies investigated supraspinatus pathology, 12 infraspinatus pathology, and 9 subscapularis pathology. Most tests for rotator cuff pathology are inaccurate, and the recent literature shows that there is insufficient evidence to recommend 1 clinical test over another for diagnosis of rotator cuff pathology. Poor diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests for rotator cuff pathology may be related to the close relationships of structures in the shoulder, to a lack of understanding of anatomical basis of the tests, or to their lack of reproducibility.     

Surgical management of large rotator cuff tears combined with instability in elite rugby football players

Large rotator cuff tears are extremely uncommon in young people and when they occur they may be associated with shoulder instability. This paper reports on a series of six elite rugby union and rugby league footballers who presented with shoulder instability and large rotator cuff tears. They were treated with a two stage procedure: an open rotator cuff repair followed by an open shoulder stabilisation some 10 weeks later. All had successful outcomes. The paper also highlights the risk of tearing the rotator cuff when a patient continues to play contact sport with an untreated unstable shoulder.     

Return to play for rotator cuff injuries and superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) lesions

The shoulder is a frequently injured joint in athletes, and the most common injuries in active patients include instability, rotator cuff injuries, and superior labrum lesions. These three types of injuries often involve different mechanisms of injury, variable methods of surgical repair, and different considerations in rehabilitation and return to play. This article focuses upon rotator cuff injuries and superior labrum lesions, treated nonoperatively and operatively. Return to play with these injuries depends upon many factors including upon the age of the patient, the severity of the pathology,the type of treatment rendered, and the expectations of the patient.     

Arthroscopic shoulder instability surgery. Complications.

Complications associated with arthroscopic shoulder stabilization are relatively common. Excluding recurrence, complications are rarely disabling. Current statistics undoubtedly underestimate the true incidence of complications. Many complications, including neurovascular injuries and articular damage, are preventable and can be minimized through familiarity with anatomy, proper surgical technique and instrumentation, and clinical experience. Nevertheless, despite these efforts, a few complications, including recurrent instability, persist. Despite careful patient selection and attention to labral pathology and capsular laxity, arthroscopic repairs continue to have success rates lower than those achieved through open means. While cautiously proceeding toward a more complete understanding of the instability continuum, surgeons must maintain a high index of suspicion for new techniques that purport to "solve" the problem of arthroscopic shoulder stabilization, lest the history of enthusiastic but ultimately unsubstantiated claims is repeated. Outcomes must withstand the rigors of scientific scrutiny and the test of time. Without this cautious vigilance, the appeal of today's solutions becomes the fodder of tomorrow's articles about the complications of arthroscopic shoulder stabilization.     

Management of complications of surgery for anterior shoulder instability

Both operative and nonoperative management of the unstable shoulder requires a thorough understanding of the natural history of instability, as well as the normal anatomy and biomechanics of the shoulder joint. Failure of management may occur at any time during the course of treatment, and may be a result of either physician or patient error, or a combination of both. The correct diagnosis allows for selection of the most appropriate treatment, and the success of surgical treatment depends on proper recognition of the pattern of instability and technically adequate anatomic capsulolabral reconstruction. Complications that can occur include making the shoulder too loose or too tight, injury to the neurovascular elements about the shoulder, and articular injury from hardware usage about the shoulder.     

Management of shoulder instability in in-season athletes

Although shoulder instability is common in young athletes, there are limited prospective data to guide treatment for competitive athletes who sustain a dislocation mid-season. The management of athletes during their competitive season requires an understanding of the natural history of shoulder instability, the specific needs of the injured athlete (eg, specific sport, player position), and the duration of treatment. Rehabilitation can enable an athlete with a shoulder dislocation to return to play within 3 weeks of injury. Bracing is an option, but it can result in restricted glenohumeral motion and thereby possibly affect performance. Surgical stabilization should be considered for the athlete with recurrent instability or inability to perform; however, this frequently results in the termination of the player's season. In this article, we review the available literature to help guide physicians treating athletes with shoulder instability.     

Arthroscopic versus open Bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability

After more than 15 years of experience, arthroscopic shoulder stabilization is becoming less controversial. Historically, recurrence rates following arthroscopic stabilization have been higher than with open stabilization. Although a negligible advantage may exist in terms of expedited postoperative rehabilitation and improved postoperative recovery of motion, critics suggest that its use in contact athletes be limited. The indications for arthroscopic stabilization are expanding, in part, because of improved understanding of the pathophysiology of shoulder instability. Understanding the mechanism of recurrent instability following arthroscopic stabilization offers clues to how physicians can prevent unsatisfactory results in the future. With newer instrumentation and the ability to thermally treat capsular tissue, coexisting pathology, such as capsular plastic deformation, rotator interval lesions, and unrecognized intra-articular pathology, can now be addressed arthroscopically. The judicious use of these techniques is warranted until long-term study results become available. Ideal patients for arthroscopic Bankart repair have a discrete Bankart lesion; a robust, well-developed IGHL; no significant capsular laxity or intraligamentous injury; and an absence of concomitant intra-articular pathology. Additional findings on MR imaging or CT evidence of a discrete labral lesion and pure unidirectional anterior instability during EUA are also good prognostic indicators for arthroscopic Bankart repair. Arthroscopic criteria that render patients less appropriate for an arthroscopic repair include capsular injury, capsular laxity, a bony Bankart lesion, glenohumeral arthritis, and a rotator cuff tear. The authors' believe that either absent or patulous, poorly developed glenohumeral ligaments represent a poor prognostic indicator for a successful outcome following standard arthroscopic Bankart repair. Individuals with poor-quality tissue are more predictably managed using open capsulorrhaphy. Patients with pathologic ligamentous laxity in the absence of a Bankart lesion or any apparent intraligamentous injury to the IGHL are also good candidates for treatment with an open capsulorrhaphy. Findings determined from a thorough physical examination, EUA, and the pathology appreciated during diagnostic arthroscopy help to appropriately choose the surgical procedure that effectively addresses pathology in patients who present with recurrent traumatic anterior instability. Patient preferences and surgical experience are important determinants of procedure selection, and current arthroscopic techniques lack the versatility to uniformly address the entire spectrum of pathology that may be associated with traumatic anterior shoulder instability. Surgeons should always be prepared to convert to an open-stabilization technique if the arthroscopic technique is deficient in addressing all pathology identified at the time of surgery.     

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.     

Arthroscopic reconstructionof traumatic anterior instability

As techniques evolve, instrumentation improves, knowledge of instability increases, and as longer follow-upsbecome available, there appears to be a trend toward performing arthroscopic reconstruction for traumatic instability of the shoulder in athletes. It is essential to make an accurate diagnosis from an extensive history and a thorough physical examination. Surgically, all pathologic lesions should be identified and addressed. Specific care must be taken to protect the capsulolabral complex and prepare the glenoid to stimulate a healing response. The capsule must be freed and advanced superiorly and laterally to have a successful result. Although capsular injury and microscopic failure may not be apparent, it must be recognized and addressed. The depth of the glenohumeral cup must be restored and the anterior bumper re-created. Portal placement is critical in anchor insertion and knot typing. Arthroscopic reconstruction is only as successful as the healing that occurs. Athletes involved in contact sports and immature athletes are at high risk for recurrence of injury. Patients with large Hills-Sachs lesions and glenoid rim fractures are also at increased risk. To achieve successful results, the surgeon must pay strict attention to detail, technique, and patient selection. Arthroscopic reconstruction for traumatic instability in athletes is demanding but rewarding. Each athlete should be carefully evaluated for pathology, and functional demands, and expectations and treatment should be individualized.