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

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

Coracoid fractures during screw insertion and graft osteolysis are serious concerns with standard screw fixation techniques in Latarjet procedure. This study tends to evaluate the outcome of mini open Latarjet using Arthrex mini-plate for coracoids graft fixation. We did retrospective analysis of 30 patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability after arthroscopic Bankart's repair. A low profile wedge plate (Arthrex) with two low profile screws was used for fixation of the coracoid graft. CT analysis was performed at final follow up to see graft union and results were evaluated using American shoulder and elbow score (ASES) and Western Ontario shoulder instability score (WOSIS). Mean follow up time was 24 months. Postoperatively, mean forward elevation was 162.8 degrees and external rotation was 44.6 degrees. All patients returned to their previous occupation. None reported to be having any recurrent subluxation post-surgery. The mean ASES score was 92.5 while the mean WOSIS score was 76.84%. Only one patient had screw backing out from the plate. There was no case of coracoid graft osteolysis. The mini-open Latarjet procedure with graft fixation with Arthrex mini-plate provides satisfactory outcome and stabilization in patients who present with dramatic bone loss and failed soft tissue reconstruction. It not only ensures early rehabilitation but also minimum loss of external rotation. The only drawback is the relatively high cost of the implant

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

Background:. Individuals with large Hill-Sachs lesions may be prone to failure and reoccurrence following standard arthroscopic Bankart repair. Here, the Remplissage procedure may promote shoulder stability through infraspinatus capsulo-tenodesis directly into the lesion. Little biomechanicaldata about the Remplissage procedure on glenohumeral kinematics, stability, and range of motion (ROM) currently exists. Questions/purposes:. What are the biomechanical effects of Bankart and Remplissage repair for large Hill-Sachs lesions?. Methods:. Six cadaveric shoulders were tested using a custom shoulder testing system. ROM and glenohumeral translation with applied loads in anterior-posterior (AP) and superior-inferior (SI) directions were quantified at 0° and 60° gleno-humeral abduction. Six conditions were tested: intact, Bankart lesion, Bankart with 40% Hill-Sachs lesion, Bankart repair, Bankart repair with Remplissage, and Remplissage repair alone. Results:. Humeral external rotation (ER) and total range of motion (TR) increased significantly from intact after the creation of the Bankart lesion at both 0° abduction (ER +27.0°, TR +35.8°, p < 0.05) [Fig 1] and 60° abduction (ER +9.5°, TR +30.7°, p < 0.05) [Fig 2], but did not increase further with the addition of the Hill-Sachs lesion. The Bankart repair restored range of motion to intact values 0° abduction at addition of the Remplissage repair did not significantly alter range of motion from the Bankart repair alone. There were no significant changes in AP or SI translation between Bankart repair with and without Remplissage compared to the intact specimen. Conclusions:. The addition of the Remplissage procedure for treatment of large Hill-Sachs lesions had no statistically significant effect on ROM or translation for treatment for large Hill-Sachs lesions. Clinical Relevance: The Remplissage technique may be a suitable option for engaging Hill-Sachs lesions. Further clinical studies are warranted

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

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

Anatomic studies have demonstrated that bipolar glenoid and humeral bone loss have a cumulative impact on shoulder instability, and that these defects may engage in functional positions depending on their size, location, and orientation, potentially resulting in failure of stabilisation procedures. Determining which lesions pose a risk for engagement remains a challenge, with Itoi's 3DCT based glenoid track method and arthroscopic assessment being the accepted approaches at this time. The purpose of this study was to investigate the interaction of humeral and glenoid bone defects on shoulder engagement in a cadaveric model. Two alternative approaches to predicting engagement were evaluated; 1) CT scanning the shoulder in abduction and external rotation 2) measurement of Bankart lesion width and a novel parameter, the intact anterior articular angle (IAAA), on conventional 2D multi-plane reformats. Hill-Sachs and Bony Bankart defects of varying size were created in 12 cadaveric upper limbs, producing 45 bipolar defect combinations. The shoulders were assessed for engagement using cone beam CT in various positions of function, from 30 to 90 degrees of both abduction and external rotation. The humeral and glenoid defects were characterised by measurement of their size, location, and orientation. The abduction external rotation scan and 2D IAAA approaches were compared to the glenoid track method for predicting engagement. Engagement was predicted by Itoi's glenoid track method in 24 of 45 specimens (53%). The abduction external rotation CT scan performed at 60 degrees of glenohumeral abduction (corresponding to 90 degrees of abduction relative to the trunk) and 90 degrees of external rotation predicted engagement accurately in 43 of 45 specimens (96%), with sensitivity and specificity of 92% and 100% respectively. A logistic model based on Bankart width and IAAA provided a prediction accuracy of 89% with sensitivity and specificity of 91% and 87%. Inter-rater agreement was excellent (Kappa = 1) for classification of engagement on the abduction external rotation CT, and good (intraclass correlation = 0.73) for measurement of IAAA. Bipolar lesions at risk for engagement can be identified using an abduction external rotation CT scan at 60 degrees of glenohumeral abduction and 90 degrees of external rotation, or by performing 2D measurements of Bankart width and IAAA on conventional CT multi-plane reformats. This information will be useful for peri-operative decision making around surgical techniques for shoulder stabilisation in the setting of bipolar bone defects

Acute Hill-Sachs (HS) reduction represents a potential alternative method to remplissage for the treatment of an engaging HS lesion. The purpose of this study is to biomechanically compare the stabilising effects of a acute HS reduction technique and remplissage in a complex instability model. This was a comparative cadaveric study of 6 shoulders. For the acute HS lesion, a unique model was used to create a 30% defect, compressing the subchondral bone while preserving the articular surface in a more anatomic fashion. In addition, a 15% glenoid defect was made in all specimens. The HS lesion was reduced through a lateral cortical window with a bone tamp, and the subchondral void was filled with Quickset (Arthrex) bone cement to prevent plastic deformation. Five scenarios were tested; intact specimen, bipolar lesion, Bankart repair, remplissage with Bankart repair and HS reduction technique with Bankart repair. Translation, kinematics and dislocation events were recorded. For all 6 specimens no dislocations occurred after either remplissage or the reduction technique. At 90 degrees of abduction and external rotation (ABER), anterior-inferior translation was 11.1 mm (SD 0.9) for the bipolar lesion. This was significantly reduced following both remplissage (5.1±0.7mm; p<0.001) and HS reduction (4.4±0.3mm; p<0.001). For anterior-inferior translation there was no significant difference in translation between the reduction technique and remplissage (p=0.91). At 90 degrees of ABER, the intact specimens average joint stiffness was 7.0±1.0N/mm, which was not significantly different from the remplissage (7.8±0.9 N/mm; p=0.9) and reduction technique (9.1±0.6 N/mm; p=0.50). Compared with an isolated Bankart repair, the average external rotation loss after also performing a remplissage procedure was 4.3±3.5 deg (p=0.65), while average ER loss following HS reduction was 1.1±3.3 deg (p=0.99). There was no significant difference in external rotation between remplissage and the reduction technique (p=0.83). Similar joint stability was conferred following both procedures, though remplissage had 3.2-degree loss of ER in comparison. While not statistically significant, even slight ER loss may be clinically detrimental in overhead athletes. Overall, the acute reduction technique is a more anatomic alternative to the remplissage procedure with similar ability to prevent dislocation in a biomechanical model, making it a viable treatment option for engaging Hill-Sachs lesions

Purpose. An open superior capsular shift is a well-established technique for the management of patients with multidirectional shoulder laxity and the absence of a Bankart lesion. Few studies have reported on functional and quality of life outcomes using arthroscopic technique for shoulder stabilization using superior capsular shift in patients with no Bankart lesion. The purpose of this study was to assess the functional and quality of life outcome scores following shoulder stabilization with a selective arthroscopic superior capsular shift with suture anchors, for treatment of multidirectional laxity and the absence of a Bankart lesion. Method. Case Series Level 4 Evidence. Thirty-six (36) patients with a mean age of 30.8 years, with a diagnosis of recurrent anterior atraumatic shoulder instability, and no Bankart lesion, were identified in a single surgeons practice. These patients underwent an arthroscopic shoulder stabilization with an anterior inferior to superior capsular shift. The labrum was arthroscopically released from the anterior/inferior glenoid and was shifted superiorly in conjunction with a capsular plication. A retrospective analysis was performed on prospectively collected outcome scores of patients who had with a minimum of 1 year of follow-up. The ASES and WOSI scores were administered pre-operatively and at 6 and 12 month follow-up. The presence of a positive post-operative apprehension sign was also recorded on follow-up. Results. After an arthroscopic capsular shift, the ASES and WOSI scores improved significantly from 57, 28 to 78, 68 respectively (P<0.001). Few patients had a positive apprehension sign at 1 year follow-up. Conclusion. An arthroscopic capsular shift is a reliable procedure that resulted in satisfactory outcomes in patients with shoulder instability and the absence of a Bankart lesion

Purpose. The remplissage procedure may be performed as an adjunct to Bankart repair to address an engaging Hill-Sachs defect. Clinically, it has been reported that the remplissage procedure improves joint stability but that it may also restrict shoulder range of motion. The purpose of this biomechanical study was to examine the effects of the remplissage procedure on shoulder motion and stability. We hypothesized that the remplissage procedure would improve stability and prevent engagement but may have a deleterious effect on motion. Method. Eight cadaveric forequarters were mounted on a custom biomechanical testing apparatus which applied simulated loads independently to the rotator cuff muscles and to the anterior, middle and posterior deltoid. The testing conditions included: intact shoulder, Bankart defect, Bankart repair, 2 Hill-Sachs defects (15%, 30%) with and without remplissage. Joint range of motion and translation were recorded with an optical tracking system. Outcomes measured were internal-external rotation range of motion in adduction and 90 combined abduction, extension range of motion and stability, quantified in terms of joint stiffness and engagement, in abduction. Results. With a 15% Hill-Sachs defect, the remplissage significantly reduced internal-external rotation in adduction (15.111.1, p=0.039), but not in abduction (7.79.0, p=0.380). In a 30% Hill-Sachs defect, the remplissage procedure significantly reduced internal-external rotation in adduction (19.57.8, p=0.001), and in abduction (12.28.6, p=0.03). The remplissage procedure significantly enhanced stability in the 15% Hill-Sachs defect (4.74.0 N/mm, p=0.038), and in the 30% defect (3.93.2 N/mm, P=0.030) compared to the unrepaired defect. All of the unrepaired 30% defects engaged and the remplissage procedure successfully eliminated engagement in each case. However, impingement of the repair on the posterior glenoid with paradoxical posterior pivoting of the humeral head was observed in 50% of the specimens. Conclusion. The remplissage procedure significantly augmented a Bankart repair in 15% and 30% Hill-Sachs defects and, in 30% Hill-Sachs defects, the remplissage successfully prevented engagement of the defect. The remplissage procedure, however, did significantly reduced shoulder internal-external rotation range of motion as reported clinically, and was also found to reduce extension in the two defect groups. During extension the intra-articular soft tissue bumper created by the remplissage procedure was found to impinge on the posterior glenoid rim and cause pivoting, which produced non-physiologic glenohumeral joint distraction. Therefore, the remplissage procedure stabilized the joint to a significantly greater degree than did a Bankart repair alone; however, it also significantly reduced shoulder range of motion

Glenoid exposure is the name of the game in total shoulder arthroplasty. I can honestly say that it took me more than 5 years but less than 10 to feel confident exposing any glenoid, regardless of the degree of bone deformity and the severity of soft-tissue contracture. This lecture represents the synthesis of my experience exposing some of the most difficult glenoids. The basic principles are performing extensive soft-tissue release, minimizing the anteroposterior dimension of the humerus by osteophyte excision, making an accurate humeral neck cut, having a plethora of glenoid retractors, and knowing where to place them. The ten tips, in reverse order of importance are: 10.) Tilt the table away from operative side—this helps face the surface of the glenoid, especially in cases of posterior wear, toward the surgeon. 9.) Have multiple glenoid retractors—these include a large Darrach, a reverse double-pronged Bankart, one or two blunt Homans, small and large Fukudas. 8.) Remove all humeral osteophytes before attempting to retract the humerus posteriorly to expose the glenoid—this helps to decrease the overall anteroposterior dimension of the humerus and allows for maximum posterior displacement of the humerus. 7.) Make an accurate humeral neck cut—even 5mm of extra humeral bone will make glenoid exposure difficult. 6.) Optimal humeral position—it has been taught that abduction, external rotation, and extension is the optimal position. It may vary with each case. Therefore, experiment with humeral rotation to find the position that allows maximum visualization. This is often the position that makes the cut surface of the humerus parallel to the surface of the glenoid. 5.) Optimal retractor placement—my typical retractor placement is a Fukuda on the posterior lip of the glenoid, a reverse double-pronged Bankart on the anterior neck of the scapula, and a blunt Homan posterosuperiorly. Occasionally, a second blunt Homan anteroinferiorly is helpful, particularly in muscular males with a large pectoralis major. 4.) Laminar spreader for lateral humeral displacement—this can be helpful for posterior capsulorrhaphy or for posterior glenoid bone grafting. 3.) Maximal humeral capsular release—the release of the anterior capsule from the humerus must go well past the 6 o'clock position and up the posterior surface of the humerus. This aides in humeral exposure but also allows for more posterior displacement of the humerus during glenoid exposure. 2.) Anteroinferior capsular release or excision—extensive anteroinferior release or excision (my preference), allows for maximal posterior humeral displacement and also restores external rotation. 1.) Posterior or posteroinferior capsular release—release of the posteroinferior corner of the capsule from the glenoid results in a noticeable increase in posterior humeral retractability. In cases without substantial posterior subluxation, extensive release of the entire posterior capsule is performed

Hill-Sachs and reverse Hill-Sachs lesions come in different shapes and sizes, and their effect on “glenoid track” can vary. Small Hill-Sachs lesions that do not engage can be successfully treated with a Bankart repair alone done arthroscopically or open. Moderate, engaging, Hill-Sachs lesions can be treated either with the addition of remplissage to an arthroscopic Bankart or by adding the triple blocking effect of the Bristow-Latarjet procedure. Surface replacements vary in size from the small hemi-cap type of procedure to an entire humeral head replacement (HHR). These devices can be used as opposed to allograft replacement when the risk of post-reconstruction arthritis is high with the aforementioned more conventional treatment techniques. When 45% or more of the humeral head is involved with the lesion, or Outerbridge stage III and IV changes prevail, a HHR is preferred. An oval shaped HHR is the author's preference, and the long diameter can be used to provide coverage anteriorly or posteriorly and is particularly useful in large Hill-Sachs lesions associated with epilepsy

Glenoid exposure is the name of the game in total shoulder arthroplasty. I can honestly say that it took me more than 5 years but less than 10 to feel confident exposing any glenoid, regardless of the degree of bone deformity and the severity of soft-tissue contracture. This lecture represents the synthesis of my experience exposing some of the most difficult glenoids. The basic principles are performing extensive soft-tissue release, minimizing the anteroposterior dimension of the humerus by osteophyte excision, making an accurate humeral neck cut, having a plethora of glenoid retractors, and knowing where to place them. The ten tips, in reverse order of importance are: 10.) Tilt the table away from operative side—this helps face the surface of the glenoid, especially in cases of posterior wear, toward the surgeon. 9.) Have multiple glenoid retractors—these include a large Darrach, a reverse double-pronged Bankart, one or two blunt Homans, small and large Fukudas. 8.) Remove all humeral osteophytes before attempting to retract the humerus posteriorly to expose the glenoid—this helps to decrease the overall anteroposterior dimension of the humerus and allows for maximum posterior displacement of the humerus. 7.) Make an accurate humeral neck cut—even 5mm of extra humeral bone will make glenoid exposure difficult. 6.) Optimal humeral position—it has been taught that abduction, external rotation, and extension is the optimal position. It may vary with each case. Therefore, experiment with humeral rotation to find the position that allows maximum visualization. This is often the position that makes the cut surface of the humerus parallel to the surface of the glenoid. 5.) Optimal retractor placement—my typical retractor placement is a Fukuda on the posterior lip of the glenoid, a reverse double-pronged Bankart on the anterior neck of the scapula, and a blunt Homan posterosuperiorly. Occasionally, a second blunt Homan anteroinferiorly is helpful, particularly in muscular males with a large pectoralis major. 4.) Laminar spreader for lateral humeral displacement—this can be helpful for posterior capsulorrhaphy or for posterior glenoid bone grafting. 3.) Maximal humeral capsular release—the release of the anterior capsule from the humerus must go well past the 6 o'clock position and up the posterior surface of the humerus. This aides in humeral exposure but also allows for more posterior displacement of the humerus during glenoid exposure. 2.) Anteroinferior capsular release or excision—extensive anteroinferior release or excision (my preference), allows for maximal posterior humeral displacement and also restores external rotation. 1.) Posterior or posteroinferior capsular release—release of the posteroinferior corner of the capsule from the glenoid results in a noticeable increase in posterior humeral retractability. In cases without substantial posterior subluxation, extensive release of the entire posterior capsule is performed. Following these steps will help the surgeon to gain adequate glenoid exposure, even in the most difficult cases

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%

Hypothesis. Recurrent shoulder dislocation is associated with bony defect of the glenoid rim, commonly seen along with bankart tear - a soft tissue injury of glenoid labrum. This cadaveric study compares the bone block effect of coracoid transfer using using two common techniques, Classical Latarjet technique and the Congruent-Arc Latarjet. We hypothesized that the force needed to dislocate the shoulder would be greater in Congruent Arc technique than the Classical Latarjet, because of increased contact surface area as a result of greater linear dimensions. Material and methods. We dissected 14 cadaveric shoulders. A bony Bankart lesion was created in form of an inverted pear glenoid. The humeral head was attached to a pulley system that was sequentially loaded until the shoulder dislocated anteriorly. The force needed to dislocate was noted. This was repeated after coracoid transfer with two common techniques, Classical Latarjet technique and the Congruent-Arc Latarjet. Results. The mean force required to dislocate shoulder post-Classical Latarjet technique was 325.71N, compared to 123.57 N in uncorrected shoulder. Similarly, the mean force required to dislocate shoulder post Congruent-Arc Latarjet technique was 327.14 N compared to 123.57 N in uncorrected shoulder. The two-tailed P value in either case was less than 0.0001, thus statistically significant. Unpaired t-test was done to compare the force required to dislocate the shoulder post procedure. Mean force required to dislocate shoulder post-Classical Latarjet, was 325.7N compared to 327N in post-Congruent Arc. The two-tailed P value equals 0.9020 and the 95% confidence interval was from −25.05 to 22.19, thus the difference was not statistically significant. Conclusion. The results confirm that both (Classical and Congruent-Arc Latarjet) techniques are good for addressing the shoulder instability, however bone block effect provided by one is not superior to other

Michael Robinson has been a Consultant Orthopaedic Surgeon and Senior Lecturer in the Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology in Edinburgh, Scotland, United Kingdom for 10 years. His special interests include the treatment of proximal humeral and clavicle fractures, and shoulder instability. Primary traumatic anterior dislocations of the glenohumeral joint in young adults are common injuries, which are associated with persistent deficits of shoulder function and a high risk of recurrent instability. Although several risk factors have been implicated, a younger age at the time of the primary dislocation, and male gender, are the factors that have been most consistently associated with a higher risk of recurrence. Recent studies have suggested that primary arthroscopic repair of the anteroinferior detachment of the glenoid labrum (Bankart repair) may reduce the risk of subsequent recurrent instability and improve function, when compared with non-operative treatment. However, the unblinded or single-blind design of these studies fails to eliminate the potential for error due to observer or subject bias, and the therapeutic effects of the Bankart repair cannot be distinguished from those of the arthroscopic examination and washout alone. The latter may reduce the rate of subsequent instability, by promoting healing of the labral detachment, or by altering the patient's subsequent level of physical activity and compliance with rehabilitation protocols. A clinical trial conducted recently in our Institution assessed the efficacy of a primary arthroscopic stabilisation after a first-time dislcoation, whilst controlling for the therapeutic effects of the arthroscopic examination and washout alone. We aimed to specifically test the null hypothesis, that an arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) would not produce an improvement in the rate of recurrent instability, functional outcome, range of movement, levels of patient satisfaction or total cost of treatment, when compared with an arthroscopic examination and washout (AWO) alone. The results of this study will be presented, together with an overview of the advantages and disadvantages of primary arthroscopic stabilisation. None of the authors have received any payment or consideration from any source for the conduct of this study

Purpose. The management of moderate to large engaging Hill-Sachs lesions is controversial and surgical options include remplissage, allograft reconstruction, and partial resurfacing arthroplasty. Few in-vitro studies have quantified their biomechanical characteristics and none have made direct comparisons. The purpose of this study was to compare joint stability and range of motion (ROM) among these procedures using an in-vitro shoulder simulator. It was hypothesized that all procedures would prevent defect engagement, but allograft and partial resurfacing would most accurately restore intact biomechanics; while remplissage would provide the greatest stabilization, possibly at the expense of motion. Method. Eight cadaveric shoulders were tested on an active in-vitro shoulder simulator. Each specimen underwent testing in 11 conditions: intact, Bankart lesion, Bankart repair, and two unrepaired Hill-Sachs lesions (30% & 45%) which were then treated with each of the three techniques. Anterior joint stability, ROM in extension and internal-external rotation, and glenohumeral engagement were assessed. Stability was quantified as resistance, in N/mm, to an anteriorly applied load of 70N. Results. Remplissage significantly increased joint stiffness compared to both defects (6.43.8 N/mm, p=0.01) and the allograft and partial resurfacing (p <= 0.04). No technique significantly surpassed the stability of the intact state (p>0.05). In adduction, the remplissage significantly reduced internal-external rotation compared to both defects (p <= 0.01), but only the 30% repair caused a significant change compared to the intact state (14.511.3 N/mm, p=0.05). In abduction, all repairs reduced rotation ROM compared to the Hill-Sachs defect (>= 8.24o, p <= 0.04), but none with respect to the intact condition (p >= 0.05). Remplissage had significantly less extension than either resurfacing procedure (>= 15.4o, p <= 0.02) and resulted in a greater reduction in extension ROM for 45% defects compared to 30% defects (11.918.91, p=0.06). All unrepaired lesions engaged during extension. None of the remplissage or allograft reconstructions engaged, however, 75% of partial resurfacing arthroplasties partially engaged. Conclusion. This study is the first biomechanical evaluation to directly compare three surgical procedures for engaging Hill-Sachs lesions. Each procedure enhanced stability; however, the enhancement provided by the resurfacing repairs more closely resembled the intact state. Remplissage of the 30% and the 45% defects improved stability and eliminated glenohumeral engagement but caused significant and progressive reductions in ROM. In comparison, both the allograft and partial resurfacing procedures re-established ranges of motion approaching those of the intact joint; however, the partial resurfacing could not fully prevent engagement. These findings indicate that the effects of each technique are not equivalent and further clinical and biomechanical studies are required

Purpose. The remplissage technique of insetting the infraspinatus tendon and posterior joint capsule into an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion has gained in popularity. However, a standardized technique for suture anchor and suture placement has not been defined for this novel procedure. The purpose of this biomechanical study was to compare three remplissage techniques by evaluating their effects on joint stiffness and motion. Method. Cadaveric forequarters (n=7) were mounted on a custom active biomechanical shoulder simulator. Three randomly ordered techniques were conducted: T1- anchors in the valley of the defect, T2- anchors in the rim of the humeral head; T3- anchors in the valley with medial suture placement. The testing conditions included: intact, Bankart, Bankart repair, and 15% & 30% HS lesions with repairs (T1, T2, T3). Outcome measures including internal-external range of motion and stability were recorded. Stability was quantified in terms of glenohumeral joint stiffness against an externally applied anterior force of 70N. Results. In abduction, no significant reduction in range of motion was observed between any of the remplissage techniques compared to the intact for 15% defects. For 30% defects, T1 and T2 produced significant reductions (T1:14.36.7o, p=0.02; T2:20.79.8o, p=0.02), but T3 had the greatest mean reduction (26.816.6o, p=0.08) in range of motion. In adduction, for the 15% defect, T1 did not cause a significant reduction in internal-external rotation range of motion; however, T2 reached and T3 approached a significant difference compared to intact (T2:10.75.8o, p=0.02 and T3:20.914.7o, p=0.06, respectively). For the 30% defect, T1 and T3 repairs significantly reduced range of motion (11.0–28.2o, p <= 0.05), while the reduction in motion following T2 repair was not significant (18.815.9o, p=0.3). All three techniques were found to greatly increase joint stiffness when an external anterior force was applied in abduction and 60o of external rotation; however, no comparisons to the unrepaired defect or the intact state were significant. Additionally, T3 produced the greatest increases in stiffness followed by T1 and T2 (9.20 >= 7.06 >= 6.05 N/mm), but these differences were not significant. Conclusion. All remplissage techniques were observed to decrease shoulder motion. Specifically, T3 was found to consistently produce the greatest mean reductions in rotation while T1 produced the smallest decreases. The remplissage procedure also produced increases in joint stiffness in all cases, with T3 producing the greatest increases; however, excessive variation may have prevented these findings from being statistically significant. The choice of remplissage technique does have an impact on joint stiffness and motion. Further biomechanical and clinical studies are required to determine the optimum technique that maximizes stability and motion

This is a case series of a senior surgeon's experience; the purpose being to illustrate the problems encountered when using bio-absorbable anchors for various indications in shoulder surgery. Method. A retrospective analysis of 7 patients' notes, radiology and arthroscopic findings between 2006 and 2010. Results. There were 5 females and 2 males, with an average age of 50 years 3 months. The indications for using these anchors varied; 5 patients had rotator cuff repairs, 1 had a SLAP repair and the other had a Bankart repair. Patients complained of pain (3), a noisy shoulder (2), deformity (1) and symptoms similar to an infection (1). Average time from surgery to symptoms varied, with the shortest time being 3 months and the longest being 4 years 2 months. Some had dramatic MRI changes showing significant lysis around the anchors. Arthroscopic findings included anchor debris in the joint, loose anchors with significant defects and resultant irreversible cartilage damage. Conclusion. We conclude that even though these anchors are widely marketed and used in shoulder surgery, they are not without their problems, which can occur as early as three months post insertion. This has certainly changed our minds regards the use of bio-absorbable anchors in our practice