Recurrent shoulder instability after open reconstruction in athletes involved in collision and contact sports

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of recurrent instability in a group of young athletes who underwent open shoulder stabilization with a modified Bankart repair and anterior capsulorrhaphy. Recurrent dislocation was defined as an instability episode resulting in complete dislocation requiring manual reduction. Recurrent subluxation was defined as the subjective history of the shoulder "slipping or popping out" or pain and apprehension that caused cessation of athletics for at least 1 day. Sixty-six patients (64 men and 2 women) were included in the study. A collision sport precipitated instability in 53 patients and a contact sport in 13. The average follow-up was 47 months (range, 24 to 72). The average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 95 points (range, 71 to 100). The average Rowe score was 80 points (range, 40 to 100). Two patients had experienced recurrent dislocation after surgery (3%). Eight patients (12%) had rare (fewer than three) episodes of postsurgical subluxation. Five patients (8%) had multiple recurrent subluxations after surgery. Postsurgical recurrent instability was significantly associated with preoperative episodes of subluxation. However, all patients with rare subluxation had an excellent functional result.     

A prospective outcome evaluation of arthroscopic Bankart repairs: minimum 2-year follow-up

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic treatment of anterior shoulder dislocation has become possible through improvements in instruments and techniques. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively evaluate results of arthroscopic Bankart repairs at a minimum 2-year follow-up for patients with histories of shoulder dislocation and an anterior-inferior labral tear at the time of diagnostic arthroscopy. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A consecutive series of 85 patients (70 men, 15 women; mean age, 26 years) with Bankart lesions were treated with arthroscopic repair using suture anchors; 18 patients (27%) had extension of the labral injury into the superior labrum affecting some or all of the biceps anchor. Anchors were loaded with no. 2 nonabsorbable braided suture and placed 2 mm into the edge of the glenoid surface. A low anterior (5-o'clock) portal through the subscapularis tendon was used in all patients; 72 patients were evaluated at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively (mean, 46 months). RESULTS: Seven patients (10%) experienced recurrent instability after repair. Four patients had redislocations; 3 experienced recurrent subluxations. One patient had pain with the apprehension test without a clear history of recurrent instability. Of 18 collision athletes, 2 had dislocations at 22 and 60 months postoperatively. There were no complications, including no neurologic deficits. Clinical strength testing of the subscapularis muscle was normal in all patients. The mean Rowe score was 88 of 100 points, with 90% excellent or good results. Simple Shoulder Test responses improved from 66% positive preoperatively to 88% positive postoperatively. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scoring index averaged 92 of 100 points postoperatively. Pain analog scales improved from 5.5 preoperatively to 0.35 postoperatively on a 10-point scale. SF-12 scores improved for physical function. Patient satisfaction was rated 8.9 on a 10-point visual analog scale. CONCLUSION: Bankart repairs performed arthroscopically using properly implanted suture anchors and nonabsorbable sutures and in which associated pathoanatomy is addressed demonstrate low recurrence rates (10%) similar to historical open controls.     

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.     

Prospective evaluation of thermal capsulorrhaphy for shoulder instability: indications and results, two- to five-year follow-up

BACKGROUND: Thermal shrinkage of capsular tissue has recently been proposed as a means to address the capsular redundancy associated with shoulder instability. Although this procedure has become very popular, minimal peer-reviewed literature is available to justify its widespread use. PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate the efficacy of arthroscopic electrothermal capsulorrhaphy for the treatment of shoulder instability. STUDY DESIGN: This nonrandomized prospective study evaluated the indications and results of thermal capsulorrhaphy in 84 shoulders with an average follow-up of 38 months. METHODS: Patients were divided into three clinical subgroups: traumatic anterior dislocation (acute or recurrent), recurrent anterior anterior/inferior subluxation without prior dislocation, and multidirectional instability. Patients underwent arthroscopic thermal capsulorrhaphy after initial assessment, radiographs, and failure of a minimum of 3 months of nonoperative rehabilitation. RESULTS: Outcome measures included pain, recurrent instability, return to work/sports, and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Shoulder Assessment score. Overall results were excellent in 33 participants (39%), satisfactory in 20 (24%), and unsatisfactory in 31 (37%). CONCLUSIONS: The high rate of unsatisfactory overall results (37%), documented with longer follow-up, is of great concern. The authors conclude that enthusiasm for thermal capsulorrhaphy should be tempered until further studies document its efficacy.     

The effects of thermal capsular shrinkage on the outcomes of arthroscopic stabilization for primary anterior shoulder instability

BACKGROUND: The effectiveness of arthroscopic thermal capsulorrhaphy in the prevention of recurrent instability in primary anterior stabilization is undetermined. PURPOSE: To determine if patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability who have labral repair plus arthroscopic thermal capsulorrhaphy have better outcomes than those with labral repair alone. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHOD: There were 72 patients who underwent arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization with Suretac II tacks (n = 32) during 1996 to 1999 or with Suretac II tacks plus arthroscopic radiofrequency capsular shrinkage (n = 40) from 1999 to 2002. Standardized patient-determined and examiner-determined outcome measures were obtained preoperatively and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Statistical analyses included a Kaplan-Meier analysis of time to recurrent instability. RESULTS: Of the 72 patients, 66 had complete follow-up, including 28 patients treated with the Suretac stabilization and 38 patients with the Suretac plus radiofrequency shrinkage, for a mean follow-up of 58 and 30 months, respectively. All patients had a Bankart lesion. Both groups had similar results with respect to patient-determined and examiner-determined outcome measures. The only adverse outcome was postoperative recurrent instability in 6 of 28 cases in the Suretac group alone and 8 of 38 cases in the Suretac-plus -shrinkage group. Most recurrent instability occurred between 6 and 24 months. Kaplan-Meier analysis for time to recurrent instability showed no differences in the rate of instability recurrence between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic thermal capsulorrhaphy neither enhanced nor impaired the outcomes of arthroscopic labral repair with biodegradable tacks in patients with primary recurrent anterior shoulder instability.     

A prospective,randomized evaluation of arthroscopic stabilization versus nonoperative treatment in patients with acute,traumatic, first-time shoulder dislocations

BACKGROUND: Nonoperative treatment of traumatic shoulder dislocations leads to a high rate of recurrent dislocations. HYPOTHESIS: Early arthroscopic treatment for shoulder dislocation will result in a lower recurrence rate than nonoperative treatment. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized clinical trial. METHODS: Two groups of patients were studied to compare nonoperative treatment with arthroscopic Bankart repair for acute, traumatic shoulder dislocations in young athletes. Fourteen nonoperatively treated patients underwent 4 weeks of immobilization followed by a supervised rehabilitation program. Ten operatively treated patients underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair with a bioabsorbable tack followed by the same rehabilitation protocol as the nonoperatively treated patients. The average follow-up was 36 months. RESULTS: Three patients were lost to follow-up. Twelve nonoperatively treated patients remained for follow-up. Nine of these (75%) developed recurrent instability. Six of the nine have required subsequent open Bankart repair for recurrent instability. Of the nine operatively treated patients available for follow-up, only one (11.1%) developed recurrent instability. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic stabilization of traumatic, first-time anterior shoulder dislocations is an effective and safe treatment that significantly reduces the recurrence rate of shoulder dislocations in young athletes when compared with conventional, nonoperative treatment.     

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.     

Long-term results of arthroscopic Bankart repair with a bioabsorbable tack

BACKGROUND: Short-term to midterm data are available on arthroscopic shoulder stabilization using bioabsorbable tacks or suture anchors. It remains unknown whether these techniques can equal the success of open Bankart repair in the long term. PURPOSE: To assess the long-term outcome of arthroscopic Bankart repair using bioabsorbable tacks in patients with traumatic anterior shoulder instability with a minimum follow-up of 7 years. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Treatment outcomes were determined prospectively according to the Rowe score and retrospectively according to the Constant and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores. Included in this study were 18 consecutive patients with a mean age of 26.8 years (range, 16-62 years) who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair using bioabsorbable tacks for traumatic anterior shoulder instability. The study group consisted of 14 male and 4 female patients. The mean follow-up was 8.7 years (range, 7.0-9.8 years). RESULTS: One patient had recurrent dislocations requiring further surgery, for an overall failure rate of 5.6%. An additional patient had 1 traumatic subluxation episode within the first postoperative year that did not recur. According to the Rowe score, which increased to 90.3 (17.8) from 32.8 (8.3) points preoperatively, 15 patients (83.3%) achieved a good or excellent result. The mean Constant score was 91.3 (SD, 6.9) points, and the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 92.1 (SD, 6.9) points postoperatively. A return to the preinjury level of sports competition was reported by 64% of patients. No signs of synovitis occurred in any patient postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic Bankart repair for the treatment of recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability repair using bioabsorbable tacks offers reliable results with respect to failure rate, range of motion, and shoulder function during a minimum follow-up of 7.0 years. In contrast to previous reports on arthroscopic Bankart repair, results did not deteriorate during follow-up.     

Arthroscopic treatment of posterior shoulder instability: results in 33 patients

BACKGROUND: Posterior shoulder instability is a relatively rare condition and a surgical challenge. Arthroscopic techniques have allowed for a potential improvement as well as diagnosis and management of this condition. PURPOSE: To evaluate the outcomes of arthroscopic posterior shoulder stabilization and to evaluate preoperative and intraoperative variables as predictors of success. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: Thirty-three consecutive patients with a mean age of 25 years (range, 19-34 years) who underwent posterior arthroscopic shoulder stabilization with suture anchors (mean, 3 anchors) or suture capsulolabral plication (mean, 5.3 stitches) or both were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 39.1 months (range, 22-60 months). Shoulder outcomes rating scores were determined using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Rating Scale, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, the Subjective Patient Shoulder Evaluation, and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. RESULTS: There were 7 failures: 4 for recurrent instability and 3 for symptoms of pain. Overall, outcomes scores demonstrated mean values of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Rating Scale of 94.6, Subjective Patient Shoulder Evaluation of 20.0, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index of 389.4 (81.5% of normal), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation of 87.5. Patients with voluntary instability demonstrated worse outcomes (P = .025), and those with prior surgery of the shoulder also did worse (P = .02). CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic treatment of posterior shoulder instability is an effective means to improve symptoms associated with recurrent posterior subluxation of the shoulder. It can provide predictable success in the setting of unidirectional, nonvoluntary posterior instability without prior surgery.     

关节镜下盂唇修补合并改良Remplissage术治疗伴Hill-Sachs损伤肩关节前方不稳的临床对照研究

目的:研究盂唇修补合并改良Remplissage手术治疗伴肱骨头中小型Hill-Sachs骨性缺损的创伤性复发性肩关节前方不稳的疗效。方法:选取2006年至2010年经影像学检查确诊为伴肱骨头中小型Hill-Sachs损伤的创伤性复发性肩关节前方不稳患者共42例行回顾性随访研究。所有患者均由同一名医生施行关节镜下前方稳定术。根据是否加用改良Remplissage术式分为A、B两组。A组26例,在2006年至2009年行关节镜下单纯盂唇修补术。B组16例,在2009年至2010年行关节镜下盂唇修补术加改良Remplissage术,采用双线锚钉将后方关节囊(非冈下肌腱)填充于肱骨头缺损处。两组患者术后采用相同方法进行康复训练。采用牛津肩关节不稳评分(OSIS)和ROWE评分进行疗效评估、对比术前和术后3个月、6个月、9个月及12个月时肩关节活动度。结果:所有患者均获得随访,A组随访平均(28.0±5.6)个月(20～38个月);术前、术后OSIS评分分别为(37.0±4.2)分(27～43分)和(18.0±3.3)分(12～25分),ROWE评分分别为(20.2±12.2)分(5～40分)和(83.8±7.3)分(70～95分);术后再脱位患者1例,由再次创伤造成,半脱位患者5例。B组随访平均(19.6±3.8)个月(14～27个月);术前、术后OSIS评分分别为(37.9±4.9)分(29～44分)和(13.4±2.1)分(12～20分),ROWE评分分别为(18.4±8.3)分(5～30分)和(95.3±5.3)分(80～100分);术后无再脱位患者。对两组患者术后肩关节活动度分别测量的结果显示,两组患者术后中立位外旋活动度恢复趋势无明显差异。Kaplan-Meier生存分析显示,两组患者术后不稳复发率差异有统计学意义(P=0.043)。结论:关节镜下盂唇修补合并改良Remplissage手术是治疗伴肱骨头中小型Hill-Sachs损伤的创伤性复发性肩关节前方不稳的有效方法,可显著提高肩关节稳定性,并对术后肩关节活动度无明显影响。     

Operative stabilization of posterior shoulder instability

BACKGROUND: Symptomatic, traumatic posterior shoulder instability is often the result of a posteriorly directed blow to an adducted, internally rotated, and forward-flexed upper extremity. Operative repair has been shown to provide favorable results. Current arthroscopic techniques with suture anchors and the ability to plicate the capsule using a nonabsorbable suture may provide favorable outcomes with reduced morbidity. PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of operative shoulder stabilization in patients with traumatic posterior shoulder instability. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: A consecutive series of patients who underwent arthroscopic or open posterior stabilization for traumatic posterior shoulder instability were evaluated using subjective assessments, physical examinations, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Rowe score, Simple Shoulder Test, and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index.Results: Between May 1996 and February 2002, 31 shoulders (30 patients) underwent posterior stabilization (19 arthroscopically, 12 open). There were 29 men and 1 woman (mean age, 23 years). Preoperatively, all patients had a distinct traumatic cause for the instability. On physical examination, all patients had posterior apprehension and increased (2+, 3+) posterior load-shift testing. Preoperative radiographs and/or magnetic resonance imaging revealed posterior rim calcification or reverse Bankart lesions in 29 cases (94%). At arthroscopy, posterior labral injuries, reverse Bankart lesions, or humeral head defects were identified. Follow-up averaged 40 months, and the mean duration between injury and surgery was 21 months. The mean Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Rowe score, Simple Shoulder Test, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index scores, respectively, for the entire group were 89, 87, 11, and 346; for the open group, they were 81, 80, 10.5, and 594; for the arthroscopic group, they were 92, 92, 11.4, and 190. The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (P < .03) and Rowe score (P < .04) outcomes scores for the arthroscopic group were statistically better than those of the open group. Twenty-nine of 31 shoulders were rated as excellent or good. CONCLUSION: In the case of traumatic posterior shoulder subluxation, posterior lesions of the labrum ("reverse Bankart"), articular edge, and capsule are observed. Surgical treatment addressing these lesions led to satisfactory results for both the open and arthroscopic treated groups. In this study, an arthroscopic technique utilizing suture anchor repair with capsular placation provided the most favorable outcomes.     

Outcomes of combined arthroscopic rotator cuff and labral repair

BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff tears, Bankart lesions, and superior labral anterior posterior lesions commonly occur in isolation, but there is a subgroup of patients who experience combined injuries. Prior studies have excluded such patients as confounding groups. HYPOTHESIS: In patients with combined lesions of the labrum and rotator cuff, arthroscopic repair of both lesions will restore range of motion and stability and provide good clinical results. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical outcomes of a series of patients with combined rotator cuff and labral (Bankart or superior labral anterior posterior) lesions treated arthroscopically. RESULTS: Thirty patients (average age, 47.8 years) with combined rotator cuff and labral lesions were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 2.7 years (range, 24-54 months). Sixteen patients had Bankart lesions and 14 patients had SLAP lesions. Significant improvements in forward flexion (20.5 degrees, P = .005), external rotation (9.0 degrees, P = .008), and internal rotation (2 vertebral levels, P = .016) were observed. The mean L'Insalata and American Society of Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores for all patients were 92.9 and 94.3, respectively. Twenty-seven (90%) patients reported satisfaction as good to excellent, and 23 of 30 (77%) returned to their preinjury level of athletics. Two patients suffered recurrent rotator cuff tears. CONCLUSION: In patients with rotator cuff and labral lesions, arthroscopic treatment of both lesions yields good clinical outcomes, restoration of motion, and a high degree of patient satisfaction.     

Arthroscopic Bankart repair using suture anchors in athletes: patient selection and postoperative sports activity

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the results in selected high-risk patients who underwent arthroscopic stabilization of shoulders with recurrent anterior instability. HYPOTHESIS: Arthroscopic stabilization using suture anchors is useful for athletes younger than 25 years or for contact athletes without a large bone loss of glenohumeral articulation. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. METHODS: The study group comprised 55 patients, with a mean follow-up of 42 months (range, 25-72 months). Thirty-two patients had recurrent dislocations, 14 had recurrent subluxations, and 9 had recurrent subluxations after a single dislocation. Rowe score, range of motion, recurrence, and sports activities were evaluated. RESULTS: Mean Rowe score improved from 30.1 to 92.3 points; 45 scores (82%) were excellent, 5 (9%) good, 1 fair (2%), and 4 (7%) poor. Patients had lost a mean of 4 degrees of external rotation in adduction. Four (7%) had recurrence. The recurrence rate in contact athletes (9.5%, 2 of 21) was not statistically different from that in noncontact athletes (6%, 2 of 34). Forty-four (80%) returned at the same levels. The complete return rate in overhead-throwing athletes (68%, 17 of 25) was lower than that in nonoverhead athletes (90%, 27 of 30) (P = .0423). Five patients had unsatisfactory results. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic stabilization is a reliable procedure in selected high-risk patients.     

Arthroscopic versus open shoulder stabilization for recurrent anterior instability: a prospective randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic stabilization for anterior shoulder instability has been reported to result in a higher rate of recurrent instability compared to traditional open techniques. PURPOSE: To test the null hypothesis that there is no difference in the clinical outcomes in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability treated with open or arthroscopic stabilization. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A consecutive series of 64 patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability were randomized to receive either arthroscopic or open stabilization by a single surgeon. Magnetic resonance arthrogram studies were obtained preoperatively. These findings were compared to arthroscopic findings. Postoperative evaluations included range of motion, stability, and subjective assessments including Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Simple Shoulder Test, Western Ontario Instability Index, and University of California, Los Angeles evaluation. Failure was defined as a second dislocation, recurrent subluxation, or symptoms precluding return to previous work or unrestricted active military duty. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients, 29 who received open stabilization and 32 who received arthroscopic stabilization, were evaluated at a mean of 32 months postoperatively (range, 24-48 months). Patient demographics were equivalent. Preoperative magnetic resonance arthrogram findings were confirmed at arthroscopic examination. The mean operative time was significantly shorter for the arthroscopic repairs (59 vs 149 minutes; P < .001). There were 3 clinical failures (2 open stabilizations, 1 arthroscopic stabilization) by the established criteria. There was a statistically significant improvement from preoperative to postoperative Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores in both groups (P < .001). The mean loss of motion (compared to the contralateral shoulder) was greater in the open shoulders. Subjective evaluations were equal in both groups. Conclusion: Clinical outcomes after arthroscopic and open stabilization were comparable. Preoperative magnetic resonance arthrograms in shoulders with anterior instability allow an accurate diagnosis of intra-articular abnormality that correlates well with operative findings. Arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent anterior shoulder instability can be performed safely; the clinical outcomes are comparable to those after traditional open stabilization.     

Arthroscopic management of glenohumeral instability

There has been substantial development of techniques for performing arthroscopic surgery of the shoulder over the past 20 years. A multitude of arthroscopic techniques have been developed in an attempt to manage the unstable glenohumeral joint while decreasing surgical morbidity. The results obtained with arthroscopic stabilization have been widely variable. This review will examine the current status of arthroscopic management of glenohumeral instability. The techniques and results of arthroscopic stabilization for primary anterior glenohumeral instability, recurrent anterior instability, and multidirectional instability will be discussed. A brief discussion on thermal capsulorrhaphy is included.     

Revision using modified transglenoid reconstruction in recurred glenohumeral instability combined with anchor-induced arthropathy

A 25-year-old man presented with a history of pain and crepitus in the right shoulder; he had been previously treated with arthroscopic anterior stabilization using four metallic suture anchors for recurrent traumatic anterior instability 1 year earlier. In this report, we present a patient with recurrent glenohumeral instability combined with anchor-induced arthropathy who was managed with modified arthroscopic transglenoid reconstruction following arthroscopic suture anchor retrieval.     

Arthroscopic stabilization in patients with an inverted pear glenoid: results in patients with bone loss of the anterior glenoid

BACKGROUND: Recent literature has demonstrated that the success rates of arthroscopic stabilization of glenohumeral instability deteriorate in patients with an anteroinferior glenoid bone deficiency, also known as the "inverted pear" glenoid. PURPOSE: This study was conducted to assess the outcomes of arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent anterior shoulder instability in patients with a mean anteroinferior glenoid bone deficiency of 25% (range, 20%-30%). STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: Twenty-one of 23 patients (91% follow-up) undergoing arthroscopic stabilization surgery and noted to have a bony deficiency of the anteroinferior glenoid of 20% to 30% were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 34 months (range, 26-47). The mean age was 25 years (range, 20-34); 2 patients were female and 19 were male. All patients were treated with a primary anterior arthroscopic stabilization using a mean of 3.2 suture anchors (range, 3-4). Eleven patients had a bony Bankart that was incorporated into the repair; 10 had no bone fragment and were considered attritional bone loss. Outcomes were assessed using the Rowe score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Score, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) Index. Findings of recurrent instability and dislocation events were documented. RESULTS: Two patients (9.5%) experienced symptoms of recurrent subluxation, and 1 (4.8%) sustained a recurrent dislocation that required revision open surgery. The mean postoperative outcomes scores were as follows: SANE = 88.1 (range, 65-100; standard deviation [SD] 9.0); Rowe = 85.2 (range, 55-100; SD 14.1); ASES Score = 93.1 (range, 78-100; SD 5.3); and WOSI Index = 398 (82% of normal; range, 30-1175; SD 264). No patient with a bony fragment experienced a recurrent subluxation or dislocation, and mean outcomes scores for patients with a bony fragment were better than those with no bony fragment (P = .08). No patient required medical discharge from the military for his or her shoulder condition. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent instability, even in the presence of a significant bony defect of the glenoid, can yield a stable shoulder; however, outcomes are not as predictable especially in attritional bone loss cases. Longer-term follow-up is needed to see if these results hold up over time.     

Impingement of the rotator cuff in athletes caused by instability of the shoulder joint

An impingement of the rotator cuff can be caused by chronic anterior instability of the shoulder joint. This particular disease is often found in athletes engaged in overhead motion in abduction/external rotation of the arm, such as in ball sports like volleyball or European handball, racket sports like tennis or badminton, or swimming. For those patients that cannot be cured by conservative treatment such as muscular stabilization, surgical treatment is indicated: anterior reconstruction of the capsule and/or the glenoid labrum, and in addition — if necessary — subacromial decompression and revision of the rotator cuff. Between October 1988 and April 1992, we operated on 66 shoulders in 64 top athletes suffering from chronic anterior or multidirectional instability of the shoulder joint that had caused an impingement syndrome of the rotator cuff. In all cases, the athlete was unaware of the instability. Conservative treatment had been unsuccessful. Surgical treatment was successful in close to 90% of the athletes.     

Nonoperative management for in-season athletes with anterior shoulder instability

BACKGROUND: Acute or recurrent anterior shoulder instability is a frequent injury for in-season athletes. Treatment options for this injury include shoulder immobilization, rehabilitation, and shoulder stabilization surgery. PURPOSE: To determine if in-season athletes can be returned to their sports quickly and effectively after nonoperative treatment for an anterior instability episode. METHODS: Over a 2-year period, 30 athletes matched the inclusion criteria for this study. Nineteen athletes had experienced anterior dislocations, and 11 had experienced subluxations. All were treated with physical therapy and fitted, if appropriate, with a brace. These athletes were followed for the number of recurrent instability episodes, additional injuries, subjective ability to compete, and ability to complete their season or seasons of choice. RESULTS: Twenty-six of 30 athletes were able to return to their sports for the complete season at an average time missed of 10.2 days (range, 0-30 years). Ten athletes suffered sport-related recurrent instability episodes (range, 0-8 years). An average of 1.4 recurrent instability episodes per season per athlete occurred. There were no further injuries attributable to the shoulder instability. Sixteen athletes underwent surgical stabilization for their shoulders during the subsequent off-season. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the athletes were able to return to their sport and complete their seasons after an episode of anterior shoulder instability, although 37% experienced at least 1 additional episode of instability during the season.     

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.