Aims. The aims of this study were to validate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient-acceptable symptom state (PASS) thresholds for Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), Rowe score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and visual analogue scale (VAS) scores following arthroscopic Bankart repair, and to identify preoperative threshold values of these scores that could predict the achievement of MCID and PASS. Methods. A retrospective review was conducted on 131 consecutive patients with anterior shoulder instability who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair between January 2020 and January 2023. Inclusion criteria required at least one episode of shoulder instability and a minimum follow-up period of 12 months. Preoperative and one-year postoperative scores were assessed. MCID and PASS were estimated using distribution-based and anchor-based methods, respectively. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis determined preoperative patient-reported outcome measure thresholds predictive of achieving MCID and PASS. Results. MCID thresholds were determined as 169.6, 6.8, 7.2, and 1.1 for WOSI, Rowe, ASES, and VAS, respectively. PASS thresholds were calculated as ≤ 480, ≥ 80, ≥ 87, and ≤ 1 for WOSI, Rowe, ASES, and VAS, respectively. Preoperative thresholds of ≥ 760 (WOSI) and ≤ 50 (Rowe) predicted achieving MCID for WOSI score (p < 0.001). Preoperative thresholds of ≤ 60 (ASES) and ≥ 2 (VAS) predicted achieving MCID for VAS score (p < 0.001). A preoperative threshold of ≥ 40 (Rowe) predicted achieving PASS for Rowe score (p = 0.005). Preoperative thresholds of ≥ 50 (ASES; p = 0.002) and ≤ 2 (VAS; p < 0.001) predicted achieving PASS for the ASES score. Preoperative thresholds of ≥ 43 (ASES; p = 0.046) and ≤ 4 (VAS; p = 0.024) predicted achieving PASS for the VAS. Conclusion. This study defined MCID and PASS values for WOSI, Rowe, ASES, and VAS scores in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. Higher preoperative functional scores may reduce the likelihood of achieving MCID but increase the likelihood of achieving the PASS. These findings provide valuable guidance for surgeons to counsel patients realistically regarding their expectations. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1118–1124

Aims. The factors that predispose to recurrent instability and revision stabilization procedures after arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior glenohumeral instability remain unclear. We sought to determine the rate and risk factors associated with ongoing instability in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair for instability of the shoulder. Materials and Methods. We used the Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database to identify patients with a diagnosis of anterior instability of the shoulder undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair between 2003 and 2011. Patients were followed for a minimum of three years. Baseline demographics and subsequent further surgery to the ipsilateral shoulder were analyzed. Multivariate analysis was used to identify independent risk factors for recurrent instability. Results. A total of 5719 patients were analyzed. Their mean age was 24.9 years (. sd.  9.3); 4013 (70.2%) were male. A total of 461 (8.1%) underwent a further procedure involving the ipsilateral shoulder at a mean of 31.5 months (. sd.  23.8) postoperatively; 117 (2.1%) had a closed reduction and 344 (6.0%) had further surgery. Revision arthroscopic Bankart repair was the most common subsequent surgical procedure (223; 65.4%). Independent risk factors for recurrent instability were: age < 19 years (odds ratio 1.86), Caucasian ethnicity (hazard ratio 1.42), bilateral instability of the shoulder (hazard ratio 2.17), and a history of closed reduction(s) prior to the initial repair (hazard ratio 2.45). Revision arthroscopic Bankart repair was associated with significantly higher rates of ongoing persistent instability than revision open stabilization (12.4% vs 5.1%, p = 0.041). Conclusion. The incidence of a further procedure being required in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior glenohumeral instability was 8.1%. Younger age, Caucasian race, bilateral instability, and closed reduction prior to the initial repair were independent risk factors for recurrent instability, while subsequent revision arthroscopic Bankart repair had significantly higher rates of persistent instability than subsequent open revision procedures. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:324–30

Purpose: Although arthroscopic Bankart repair is yet an established procedure in the treatment of traumatic anterior shoulder instability, it is still not known whether it reproduces the good results of the open repair procedure. Aim of this investigation was to compare the functional and subjective outcome between open and arthroscopic Bankart repair. Material and methods: A retrospective cross sectional study design on the comparison of open and arthoscopic Bankart treatments between 1995 and 2004 was implemented at the Dresden Orthopedic Surgery Department. In this period a total of 223 patients underwent surgery due to anterior shoulder instability, among which 212 patients had posttraumatic instability. A diagnostic arthroscopy was performed in all patients, but only 40 patients with intact capsulolabral complex and without capsular laxity were treated arthroscopically, the remaining 183 patients underwent an open Bankart procedure. A total of 186 patients with posttraumatic anterior instability could be clinically re-examined within 1 to 5 years after initial surgery, among which 147 patients underwent an open and 39 patients an arthroscopic Bankart procedure. The median age of this sample was 27 years (interquartile range 21 – 37 years) at initial surgery, 21% of these patients were female. Results: After open surgery 11 of 147 patients (8%) and 6 of 39 (15%) after arthroscopic surgery reported one or more re-dislocation after initial treatment, which occurred after a mean dislocation free time of 62 versus 40 months, respectively (95% confidence intervals 59 – 65 versus 36 – 44 months). Both a univariate analysis (Logrank test p=0.012) and a multivariate Cox regression analysis (Likelihood Ratio p=0.023) confirmed a statistically significant difference in the time between initial surgery to first reluxation. 4 of the 11 re-dislocations after open and 1 of 6 after arthroscopic surgery occurred after a new accident. That makes a re-dislocation rate without new adequate trauma of 5% after open and 13% after arthroscopic treatment. ROM showed no difference between open and arthroscopic Bankart procedure for abduction and a mild difference for external rotation. 21 of 115 (18%) patients had an external rotation lag of 20° or more after open surgery versus 1 of 34 (3%) after arthroscopic treatment (Fisher p=0,027). The Rowe score demonstrated “good” or “excellent” functional results in 102 of 117 (87%) patients versus 28 of 35 (80%) patients after open versus arthroscopic treatment (Fisher p=0,285). Conclusion: In this sample arthroscopic Bankart repair demonstrated more frequently and significantly earlier re-dislocation after initial surgery than did the open treatment alternative. External rotation lags of at least 20° occured more frequently after the open procedure

Introduction. The Bankart lesion is the most common form of labro-ligamentous injury in patients with traumatic dislocations of the shoulder. Various methods have been described each with its own advantages and disadvantages. We describe 5-year results of arthroscopic Bankart repair using knotless anchors. Patients and Methods. There were 38 patients, with involvement of the dominant arm in 28 patients. Recurrent dislocation was the most common indication in 21 patients, followed by first dislocation in 9 patients and second dislocation in 8 patients. All patients were done under general anesthesia and regional block in beach-chair position. Standard portals were used and repair done using 2.9 mm pushlock knotless anchors (Arthrex®). Patients had sling for 4 weeks and followed by a strict physiotherapy rehab protocol. Patients were followed up at 6 weeks and 3 monthly thereafter. Results. Only one patient had symptoms of recurrent instability, but was not keen on further surgery. Two patients had limitation of external rotation to 10 degrees. The mean Carter-Rowe score was 77.3. 90% of patients were happy to recommend surgery. Conclusion. Arthroscopic Bankart repair appears to produce good mid-term results for patients with shoulder instability

Previously, we conducted a multi-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing arthroscopic Bankart repair with and without remplissage. The end point for the randomized controlled trial was two years post-operative, providing support for the benefits of remplissage in the short term in reducing recurrent instability. The aim of this study was to compare the medium term (3 to 9 years) outcomes of patients previously randomized to have undergone isolated Bankart repair (NO REMP) or Bankart repair with remplissage (REMP) for the management of recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability. The rate of recurrent instability and instances of re-operation were examined. The original study was a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial with two 1:1 parallel groups with recruitment undertaken between 2011 and 2017. For this medium-term study, participants were reached for a telephone follow-up in 2020 and asked a series of standardized questions regarding ensuing instances of subluxation, dislocation or reoperation that had occurred on their shoulder for which they were randomized. Descriptive statistics were generated for all variables. “Failure” was defined as occurrence of a dislocation. “Recurrent instability” was defined as the participant reporting a dislocation or two or more occurences of subluxation greater than one year post-operative. All analyses were undertaken based on intention-to-treat whereby their data was analyzed based on the group to which they were originally allocated. One-hundred and eight participants were randomized of which 50 in the NO REMP group and 52 in the REMP group were included in the analyses in the original study. The mean number of months from surgery to final follow-up was 49.3 for the NO REMP group and 53.8 for the REMP group. The rates of re-dislocation or failure were 8% (4/52) in the REMP group at an average of 23.8 months post-operative versus 22% (11/50) in the NO REMP at an average of 16.5 months post-operative. The rates of recurrent instability were 10% (5/52) in the REMP group at an average of 24 months post-operative versus 30% (15/50) in the NO REMP group at an average of 19.5 months post-operative. Survival curves were significantly different favouring REMP in both scenarios. Arthroscopic Bankart repair combined with remplissage is an effective procedure in the treatment of patients with an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion and minimal glenoid bone loss (<15%). Patients can expect favourable rates of recurrent instability when compared with isolated Bankart repair at medium term follw-up

Recurrence represents the leading complication of arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization. Even with modern suture anchor techniques, a recurrence rate of between 5 to 20% persists; emphasizing that arthroscopic Bankart repair cannot apply to all patients and selection must be done. Numerous prognostic factors have already been reported, but strict observance would eliminate almost all patients from arthroscopic Bankart repair. We hypothesised that clinical and radiological risk factors could be present and identifiable in the normal outpatient visit, and they could be integrated into a severity score. A case-control study was undertaken, comparing patients identified as failures after arthroscopic Bankart repair (i.e, recurrent instability) with those who had a successful result (i.e., no recurrence). Recurrence was defined as any new episode of dislocation or any subjective complains of subluxation. During a four-year period one hundred and thirty-one consecutive patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability, with or without shoulder hyperlaxity, were operated by the senior shoulder surgeon with an arthroscopic suture anchor technique and followed for a minimum of two years. Patients were excluded if concomitant pathology, including multidirectional instability, were present. Bony lesions were not excluded. A complete pre and postoperative questionnaire, physical exam, and anteroposterior x-ray were recorded. Mean follow-up was 31.2 months (range, twenty-four to fifty-two months). Nineteen patients had a recurrent anterior instability (14.5%). Preoperative evaluation demonstrated that age below twenty years old, involvement in athletic competition, participation in contact or forced-overhead sports, presence of shoulder hyperlaxity, Hill-Sachs lesion visible on AP external X-ray, and loss of inferior glenoid sclerotic contour on AP x-ray were all factors related to increased recurrence. These factors were integrated in an Instability Severity Index Score and tested retrospectively on the same population. Patients with a score of six or less had a recurrence risk of 10% and those over six had a recurrence risk of 70% (p< 0.001). This study proved that a simple scoring system based on factors of a preoperative questionnaire, physical exam, and anteroposterior x-ray can help the surgeon to select patients who would benefit from arthroscopic stabilization with suture anchors and those for whom an open surgery, like the Latarjet procedure, is a better option

In this study we evaluated whether the Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) could detect those patients at risk of failure following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Between April 2008 and June 2010, the ISIS and WOSI were recorded pre-operatively in 110 patients (87 male, 79%) with a mean age of 25.1 years (16 to 61) who underwent this procedure for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability. . A telephone interview was performed two-years post-operatively to determine whether patients had experienced a recurrent dislocation and whether they had returned to pre-injury activity levels. In all, six (5%) patients had an ISIS > 6 points (0 to 9). Of 100 (91%) patients available two years post-operatively, six (6%) had a recurrent dislocation, and 28 (28%) did not return to pre-injury activity. No patient who dislocated had an ISIS > 6 (p = 1.0). There was no difference in the mean pre-operative WOSI in those who had a re-dislocation and those who did not (p = 0.99). The pre-operative WOSI was significantly lower (p = 0.02) in those who did not return to pre-injury activity, whereas the ISIS was not associated with return to pre-injury activity (p = 0.13). . In conclusion, neither the pre-operative ISIS nor WOSI predicted recurrent dislocation within two years of arthroscopic Bankart repair. Patients with a lower pre-operative WOSI were less likely to return to pre-injury activity. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014; 96-B:1688–92

Purpose: Arthroscopic stabilization for post-traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability is designed to minimize soft tissue dissection while achieving similar or improved outcomes relative to open techniques. This study’s purpose was to determine the rate of post-operative recurrent instability and evaluate health related quality of life (HRQL) and shoulder range of motion (ROM) following arthroscopic Bankart repair using a bioabsorbable knotless implant. Method: Forty-three patients were prospectively evaluated following arthroscopic anterior stabilization to assess for recurrent instability, HRQL, and shoulder ROM. Assessments were performed pre-operatively and 3, 6 and 12–24 months postoperatively. The HRQL measures included the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score (ASES), and the Constant Score. Repeated measures ANOVA was utilized to evaluate ROM and HRQL. Results: The mean WOSI score improved from 45.67±17.99 pre-operatively to 83.16±18.58 at final follow-up. The mean ASES scores improved from 80.1±13.06 pre-operatively to 92.25±15.08, while the Constant score improved from 77.52±16.11 pre-operatively to 85.18±26.76. At final follow-up, 4 of 43 patients (9.3%) had experienced recurrent instability. For these 4 subjects, the WOSI score was significantly lower at final follow-up than those who did not experience recurrent instability (61.73±5.76 versus 84.38±16.94). The ASES and Constant scores at final follow-up were not significantly different between these two groups. Conclusion: Arthroscopic anterior stabilization using a bioabsorable tack led to a recurrent instability rate similar to previous reports, and resulted in improved HRQL and shoulder ROM. The WOSI score was better able to detect problems in HRQL related to instability than either the ASES or Constant score

The April 2023 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup. 360. looks at: Arthroscopic Bankart repair in athletes: in it for the long run?; Functional outcomes and the Wrightington classification of elbow fracture-dislocations; Hemiarthroplasty or ORIF intra-articular distal humerus fractures in older patients; Return to sport after total shoulder arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty; Readmissions after shoulder arthroplasty; Arthroscopic Bankart repair in the longer term; Bankart repair with(out) remplissage or the Latarjet procedure? A systematic review and meta-analysis; Regaining motion among patients with shoulder pathology: are all exercises equal?

Aims. The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for recurrent instability of the shoulder and assess the ability to return to sport in patients with engaging Hill-Sachs lesions treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair and Hill-Sachs remplissage (ABR-HSR). Methods. This retrospective study included 133 consecutive patients with a mean age of 30 years (14 to 69) who underwent ABR-HSR; 103 (77%) practiced sports before the instability of the shoulder. All had large/deep, engaging Hill-Sachs lesions (Calandra III). Patients were divided into two groups: A (n = 102) with minimal or no (< 10%) glenoid bone loss, and B (n = 31) with subcritical (10% to 20%) glenoid loss. A total of 19 patients (14%) had undergone a previous stabilization, which failed. The primary endpoint was recurrent instability, with a secondary outcome of the ability to return to sport. Results. At a mean follow-up of four years (1.0 to 8.25), ten patients (7.5%) had recurrent instability. Patients in group B had a significantly higher recurrence rate than those in group A (p = 0.001). Using a multivariate logistic regression, the presence of glenoid erosion of > 10% (odds ratio (OR) = 35.13 (95% confidence interval (CI) 8 to 149); p = 0.001) and age < 23 years (OR = 0.89 (0.79 to 0.99); p = 0.038) were associated with a higher risk of recurrent instability. A total of 80 patients (78%) could return to sport, but only 11 athletes (65%) who practiced high-risk (collision or contact-overhead) sports. All seven shoulders which were revised using a Latarjet procedure were stable at a mean final follow-up of 36 months (11 to 57) and returned to sports at the same level. Conclusion. Patients with subcritical glenoid bone loss (> 10%) and younger age (≤ 23 years) are at risk of failure and reoperation after ABR-HSR. Furthermore, following this procedure, one-third of athletes practicing high-risk sports are unable to return at their pre-instability level, despite having a stable shoulder. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(4):718–724

There is no simple method available to identify patients who will develop recurrent instability after an arthroscopic Bankart procedure and who would be better served by an open operation. We carried out a prospective case-control study of 131 consecutive unselected patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability who underwent this procedure using suture anchors. At follow-up after a mean of 31.2 months (24 to 52) 19 (14.5%) had recurrent instability. The following risk factors were identified: patient age under 20 years at the time of surgery; involvement in competitive or contact sports or those involving forced overhead activity; shoulder hyperlaxity; a Hill-Sachs lesion present on an anteroposterior radiograph of the shoulder in external rotation and/or loss of the sclerotic inferior glenoid contour. These factors were integrated in a 10-point pre-operative instability severity index score and tested retrospectively on the same population. Patients with a score over 6 points had an unacceptable recurrence risk of 70% (p < 0.001). On this basis we believe that an arthroscopic Bankart repair is contraindicated in these patients, to whom we now suggest a Bristow-Latarjet procedure instead

The aim of this study was to use motion analysis to study a surgeon’s learning curve for an arthroscopic Bankart repair on a training model in a skills laboratory. Six fellowship trained lower limb surgeons unfamiliar with advanced shoulder arthroscopy performed an arthroscopic Bankart repair on an ALEX shoulder model. Standardised training was given and then an electromagnetic tracking system used to objectively assess hand movements, distance travelled by hands and time taken while the surgeons performed the technique. The arthroscopic repair was repeated three times on four consecutive occasions by each surgeon giving a total of 72 repair episodes. Analysis revealed improvement of all outcome parameters with less hand movements, less distance travelled and less time to complete the task. This study objectively demonstrates a learning curve for arthroscopic Bankart suture in a skills laboratory. It indicates the potential benefits of practicing aspects of arthroscopic techniques in a skills centre on appropriately selected models

The aim of this study was to evaluate prospectively the outcome following arthroscopic Bankart repair using two types of suture anchors, absorbable and non-absorbable. Patients with a diagnosis of recurrent traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder, seen between April 2000 and June 2003 in a single unit, were considered for inclusion in the study. Patients were assessed pre-operatively and post-operatively using a subjective patient related outcome measurement tool (Oxford instability score), a visual analogue scale for pain and instability (VAS Pain and VAS instability) and a quality of life questionnaire (SF-12). The incidence of recurrent instability and the level of sporting ability were recorded. Patients were randomised to undergo surgical repair with either non-absorbable or absorbable anchors. 130 patients were included in the study. 6 patients were lost to follow-up and 124 patients (95%) completed the study. Both types of anchors were highly effective. There were no differences in the rate of recurrence or any of the scores between the two. Four patients in the non-absorbable group and 3 in the absorbable group experienced further episodes of dislocation after a traumatic event. The rate of redislocation in the whole series was therefore, 5.6%. In addition, 4 patients, all of them in the absorbable group (4%) described ongoing symptoms of instability but no true dislocations. 85% of the patients have returned to their previous level of sporting activity. There are no differences in the outcome of Arthroscopic Bankart repair using either absorbable or non-absorbable anchors. Both are highly effective, showing a redislocation rate of 5.6%

Currently there is no standard quantitative methodology for the description of Hill-Sachs defects (HSD), the size of which is important in planning surgical treatment for patients with anterior shoulder instability. The main purpose was to develop a simple imaging measurement to improve communication regarding HSDs. The secondary goal was to determine, using this new measurement, whether there was a significant difference in the size of HSDs in patients who underwent a Weber osteotomy (more invasive surgical intervention for those failing Bankart repair) compared with patients who underwent clinically successful arthroscopic Bankart repairs (the first surgical intervention for anterior shoulder instability). HSD volume was calculated with newly developed methodology using computed tomography in ten patients who required eleven Weber osteotomies and using magnetic resonance imaging in twenty-two patients who had clinically successful arthroscopic Bankart repairs. Within the Weber cohort, regression analysis was performed to determine correlation between HSD volume and each of height, maximum depth, and width. Student's t-test analysis was used to compare HSD volume between the Weber and Bankart cohorts. In the Weber cohort, there is a statistically significant correlation between the HSD Volume Ratio and the HSD Maximum Depth Ratio (R. 2. =0.83). The t-test comparison of mean HSD Volumes showed statistically significant (p<0.0015) larger HSD's in the Weber cohort than the Bankart cohort. HSD depth is a radiological indicator for HSD volume. This simple measurement may facilitate orthopaedic pre-operative planning for patients with severe recurrent anterior shoulder instability. In this preliminary study, patients who had Weber osteotomies after failed Bankart repairs had statistically significantly larger HSDs than patients with clinically successful Bankart repairs

Aim: The aim of this study was to evaluate prospectively the mid-term outcome following arthroscopic Bankart repair using two types of suture anchor, the G II (Mitek) non-absorbable and the Panalok (Mitek) absorbable anchor. Method: Patients with a diagnosis of recurrent traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder seen between April 2000 and June 2003 in a single unit were considered for inclusion in the study. Patients were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively using a subjective patient related outcome measurement tool (Oxford instability score), visual analogue scales for pain and instability and a quality of life questionnaire (SF-12). Patients were randomised to undergo surgical repair with either non-absorbable or absorbable anchors. Length of follow-up was 3.3–6.5 (mean 5.0) years. The incidence of recurrent instability and the level of sporting ability were recorded. Results: 130 patients were included in the study. 25 patients were lost to follow-up, 105 patients (81%) completed the study. 5 patients in absorbable group and 4 patients in non-absorbable group experienced further dislocation (8.5%). Both types of anchor were highly effective. There were no differences in the rate of recurrence or any of the scores between the two. Conclusions: There are no differences in the outcome of arthroscopic Bankart repair using either absorbable or non-absorbable anchors. Both are highly effective, showing a redislocation rate of 8.5%

[Hong Kong Orthopaedic Association, Travelling Fellow]. Glenoid bone loss predisposes to further dislocation and failure of arthroscopic Bankart repair in patients with recurrent shoulder dislocation. This study investigates quantification of glenoid bone loss in anterior shoulder dislocation using computerized tomography (CT). CT was performed in 40 patients (average age 31 years, range 16–82 years) with anterior shoulder dislocation. Of this group, 42 shoulders with anterior dislocation and 38 contralateral normal shoulders were examined. In addition, twenty shoulders in ten normal subjects were examined. CT technique comprised 1mm acquisition, pitch 1.0, simultaneously of both shoulders. Reformatted images en face to the glenoid fossa were obtained. Ten different measures of the glenoid fossa were obtained including cross sectional area, maximum height, and width and flattening of the anterior curvature of the glenoid. In normal subjects, maximum side to side difference in cross-sectional area was 14% and maximum glenoid width 4.1mm. For dislocating shoulders, flattening of the anterior edge of the glenoid fossa and a reduction in maximum glenoid width were the best objective criteria of bone loss. Flattening of the anterior glenoid curvature was a feature of 95% dislocated shoulders though was only seen in 1.5% of normal shoulders. Glenoid cross-sectional area was not a useful measure of glenoid bone deficiency. Variable glenoid bone loss is a measurable feature of anterior shoulder dislocation. CT can be used to objectively assess this preoperatively. This should help when deciding on whether to perform an arthroscopic Bankart repair or open bone block procedure

Purpose: The aim of this study was to evaluate prospectively the outcome following arthroscopic Bankart repair using two types of suture anchors, absorbable and non-absorbable. Method: Patients with a diagnosis of recurrent traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder, seen between April 2000 and June 2003, in a single unit were considered for inclusion in the study. Patients were assessed preoperatively and postoperatively using a subjective patient related outcome measurement tool (Oxford instability score), a visual analogue scale for pain and instability (VAS Pain and VAS instability) and a quality of life questionnaire (SF-12). Length of follow up was 1.5 to 5 years, mean 2.6 years. The incidence of recurrent instability and the level of sporting ability were recorded. Patients were randomised to undergo surgical repair with either non-absorbable or absorbable anchors. Results: 130 patients were included in the study. 6 patients were lost to follow up; therefore 124 patients (95%) completed the study. Both types of anchors were highly effective. There were no differences in the rate of recurrence or any of the scores between the two groups. 4 patients in the non-absorbable group and 3 in the absorbable group experienced further episodes of dislocation after a traumatic event: the rate of redislocation in the whole series was therefore 6%. In addition 4 patients, all of them in the absorbable group (4%,) described ongoing symptoms of instability but no true dislocations. 85% of the patients have returned to their previous level of sporting activity. Conclusions: There are no differences in the outcome of Arthroscopic Bankart repair using either absorbable or non-absorbable anchors. Both are highly effective, showing a redislocation rate of 5.6%

Recurrent anterior shoulder instability (RASI) is related to progressive bone loss on the glenoid and on the humeral head. Bone deficit magnitude is a well-recognized predictor of recurrence of instability after an arthroscopic Bankart surgery, but the best way to measure it is unknown. In this study, we want to determine which measurement method is the best predictor of recurrence of instability and function. For 10 years now, all patients undergoing surgery for RASI in 4 centers are included in a prospective study: the LUXE cohort. Patients with a pre-operative CT-scan and a minimum of 1-year follow-up were included. ISIS score was used to stratify patients. WOSI and Quick-Dash questionnaires were used to characterise function. Bone defects were assessed using the Clock method, the Glenoid Ratio, the Humeral Ratio, the Glenoid Track method and the angle of engagement in the axial plane. A total of 262 patients are now included in the LUXE study. One hundred and three patients met the inclusion criteria for analysis with a majority of male (79%) and a mean age is 28 years old. The median number of dislocations prior to surgery was 6. Seventy patients had an arthroscopic Bankart repair and 33 patients underwent an open Latarjet procedure. The ISIS score for these groups were of 2.7 and 4.8 respectively (p<0.001). The mean bone defect on the glenoid was of 1h51 with the Clock method (range: 0h-4h48; SD=1h46) and of 9% for the glenoid ratio (0–37%, 10%). On the humeral side, the bone defect was of 1h59 (0h-4h08; 0h49) for the Humeral clock method, 15% (0–36%; 6%) with the ratio method and 71 degrees of external rotation (SD=30 degrees) with the angle of engagement measurement. On the combined evaluations, 53 patients presented an off-track lesion, with mean combined hours of 3h53 (SD= 2h13). The greatest correlation obtained was between the glenoid ratio and the glenoid clock method (r=0.919, p<0.001). Eighteen patients had a recurrence of shoulder dislocation after the initial surgery, leading to a recurrence rate of 23% in arthroscopic surgery versus six percent after a Latarjet (OR= 4.6, p=0.034). No bone defect was correlated to Latarjet failure. For the arthroscopic group, the risk of recurrence was related to a smaller angle of engagement of the Hill-Sachs (p=0.05), a smaller Humeral clock measurement (p=0.034) and a longer follow-up (p=0.006). No glenoid or combined measurements were correlated with arthroscopic procedure failure. Recurrence of dislocation was associated to worst function according to the WOSI (1036 vs 573, p=0.002) and DASH (32 vs 15, p=0.03). Even with lower ISIS score, arthroscopic procedures are still leading to high risk of recurrence in this “all comer” consecutive cohort study AND it is related to humeral side parameters. Recurrence is also affecting daily function and creating higher anxiety related to the shoulder

The laterjet procedure is an important option in both primary and revision surgeries, especially in anterior shoulder instabilities that progress with glenoid bone loss. 12 patients who had a history of unsuccessful arthroscopic bankart repair and who underwent laterjet procedure in Ankara Atatürk Research and Training Hospital between 2013 and 2017 were included in the study and the patients were evaluated retrospectively. The mean age of the patients was calculated as 27.7 (range 21 to 38 years). Rowe and Walch-Duplay scores and operated shoulder (OS)-healthy shoulder (HS) range of motion (ROM) measurements were used to evaluate patients clinically and functionally. The mean follow-up time of the patients was calculated as 5.5±1.8 years. Firstly, no dislocation history was recorded in any patient afer the laterjet procedure. The mean Rowe score was calculated as 82.5 (range 60–100). Accordingly, 8 patients had excellent result, 3 patients had good result and 1 patient had fair result. The mean Walch-Duplay score was 81.4 (range 55–100). It was determined as excellent result in 6 patients, good result in 4 patients and fair result in 2 patients. Another data, joint ROM of the OS-HS of patients are shown in the table. There was some limitation in OS compared to the HS. p<0.05 value was accepted as statistically significant. While there was a statistically significant difference in external rotation (OS:35.2º, HS:56.4º)(p=0.003), internal rotation (OS:65.7º, HS:68.1º)(p=0.008) and flexion (OS:171.2º, HS:175.9º)(p=0.012) degrees but there was no statistically significant difference in abduction degrees (OS:164.3º, HS:170.4º) (p=0.089). In radiological evaluation, partial graft resorption was detected in 1 patient, but it was asymptomatic. The osteoarthritis which is one of the complications of laterjet procedure, was not detected radiologically. There are some limitations of the study. Firstly, it is a retrospective study. Secondly, the demographic features of the patients such as age, gender, profession and dominant hand are excluded. Thirdly, the mean follow-up time is not too long. Finally, some of the scales filled in are based on the patient's declaration, which may not yield sufficient objective results. In conclusion, the laterjet procedure is a suitable and reliable technique even for revision surgery in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability. It gives positive results in terms of shoulder stability and function. The major disadvantage was found to be the limitation of external rotation. Longer follow-up is needed for another outcomes and late complications, such as osteoarthritis. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Concepts in glenoid tracking and treatment strategies of glenoid bone loss are well established. Initial observations in our practice in Singapore showed few patients with major bone loss requiring glenoid reconstructions. This led us to investigate the incidence of and the extent of bone loss in our patients with shoulder instability. Our study revealed bony Bankart lesions were seen in 46% of our patients but glenoid bone loss measured only 6–10% of the glenoid surface. In the same study we found that arthroscopic labral repair with capsular plication and Mason-Ellen suturing (Hybrid technique) was sufficient to stabilise patients with bipolar bone defects and minor glenoid bone loss. This led us to develop the concept of minor bone loss and a new algorithm. Our algorithm and strategies to deal with major bone loss will also be discussed, and techniques & outcomes of Arthroscopic Bony Bankart repair, Arthroscopic Glenoid Reconstruction and Arthroscopic Remplissage procedures will be shown