We prospectively evaluated 61 patients treated arthroscopically for
We reviewed the outcome of arthroscopic stabilisation of
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
Surgical treatment for traumatic,
We identified ten patients who underwent arthroscopic revision of anterior shoulder stabilisation between 1999 and 2005. Their results were compared with 15 patients, matched for age and gender, who had a primary arthroscopic stabilisation during the same period. At a mean follow-up of 37 and 36 months, respectively, the scores for pain and shoulder function improved significantly between the pre-operative and follow-up visits in both groups (p = 0.002), with no significant difference between them (p = 0.4). The UCLA and Rowe shoulder scores improved significantly (p = 0.004 and p = 0.002, respectively), with no statistically significant differences between groups (p = 0.6). Kaplan-Meier analysis for time to recurrent instability showed no differences between the groups (p = 0.2). These results suggest that arthroscopic revision anterior shoulder stabilisation is as reliable as primary arthroscopic stabilisation for patients who have had previous open surgery for recurrent anterior instability.
We present the long-term outcome, at a median of 18 years (12.8 to 23.5) of open posterior bone block stabilisation for recurrent posterior instability of the shoulder in a heterogenous group of 11 patients previously reported on in 2001 at a median follow-up of six years. We found that five (45%) would not have chosen the operation again, and that four (36%) had further posterior dislocation. Clinical outcome was significantly worse after 18 years than after six years of follow-up (median Rowe score of 60 versus 90 (p = 0.027)). The median Western Ontario Shoulder Index was 60% (37% to 100%) at 18 years’ follow-up, which is a moderate score. At the time of surgery four (36%) had glenohumeral radiological osteoarthritis, which was present in all after 18 years. This study showed poor long-term results of the posterior bone block procedure for posterior instability and a high rate of glenohumeral osteoarthritis although three patients with post-traumatic instability were pleased with the result of their operations.
We have investigated the outcome of arthroscopic revision surgery for recurrent instability of the shoulder after failed primary anterior stabilisation. We identified 40 patients with failed primary open or arthroscopic anterior stabilisation of the shoulder who had been treated by revision arthroscopic capsulolabral reconstruction and followed up for a mean of 36 months (12 to 87). There were 34 men and six women with a mean age of 33.1 years (15 to 48). Details of the patients, the technique of the primary procedure, the operative findings at revision and the clinical outcome were evaluated by reviewing the medical records, physical examination and the use of the Western Ontario shoulder instability index score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and the health status questionnaire 12. Recurrent instability persisted in four patients after the revision arthroscopic procedure. At the final follow-up, the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 81.1 (17.5 to 99.5) and the mean Western Ontario shoulder instability index score was 68.2 (20 to 98.2). Quality-of-life scoring showed good to excellent results in most patients. Arthroscopic revision capsulolabral reconstruction can provide a satisfactory outcome in selected patients for recurrent instability of the shoulder provided that no large Hill-Sachs lesion is present.