Aims. The Bankart and Latarjet procedures are two of the most common surgical techniques to treat anterior shoulder instability with satisfactory clinical and functional outcomes. However, the outcomes in the adolescent population remain unclear, and there is no information regarding the arthroscopic Latarjet in this population. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of the arthroscopic Bankart and arthroscopic Latarjet procedures in the management of anterior shoulder instability in adolescents. Methods. We present a retrospective, matched-pair study of teenagers with anterior glenohumeral instability treated with an arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) or an arthroscopic Latarjet (AL) procedure with a minimum two-year follow-up. Preoperative demographic and clinical features, factors associated with dislocation, and complications were collected. Recurrence, defined as dislocation or subluxation, was established as the primary outcome. Clinical and functional outcomes were analyzed using objective (Rowe), and subjective (Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE)) scores. Additionally, the rate of return to sport was assessed. Results. A total of 51 adolescents were included, of whom 46 (92%) were male, with 17 (33%) in the Latarjet group and 34 (66%) in the Bankart group. The mean age at time of surgery was 18 years (15 to 19). There were no intraoperative complications. At a median follow-up of nine years (IQR 2 to 18), recurrence was observed in 12 patients in the Bankart group (35.3%) and one patient in the Latarjet group (5.9%) (p = 0.023). Satisfactory postoperative outcomes were obtained, with mean Rowe, WOSI, and SANE scores noted at 95 (10 to 100), 325 (25 to 1,975), and 87.5 (10 to 100), respectively. Most patients (29 in the Bankart group (85.3%) and 16 in the Latarjet group (94.1%)) were able to return to sport (p = 0.452). Conclusion. The ABR and AL procedures both obtain satisfactory clinical and functional outcomes in the treatment of anterior glenohumeral instability in adolescents with a low complication rate. However, the ABR is associated with a significantly higher recurrence rate. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(11):1041–1048

Aims

Extensive literature exists relating to the management of shoulder instability, with a more recent focus on glenoid and humeral bone loss. However, the optimal timing for surgery following a dislocation remains unclear. There is concern that recurrent dislocations may worsen subsequent surgical outcomes, with some advocating stabilization after the first dislocation. The aim of this study was to determine if the recurrence of instability following arthroscopic stabilization in patients without significant glenoid bone loss was influenced by the number of dislocations prior to surgery.

Bone defects are frequently observed in anterior shoulder instability. Over the last decade, knowledge of the association of bone loss with increased failure rates of soft-tissue repair has shifted the surgical management of chronic shoulder instability. On the glenoid side, there is no controversy about the critical glenoid bone loss being 20%. However, poor outcomes have been described even with a subcritical glenoid bone defect as low as 13.5%. On the humeral side, the Hill-Sachs lesion should be evaluated concomitantly with the glenoid defect as the two sides of the same bipolar lesion which interact in the instability process, as described by the glenoid track concept. We advocate adding remplissage to every Bankart repair in patients with a Hill-Sachs lesion, regardless of the glenoid bone loss. When critical or subcritical glenoid bone loss occurs in active patients (> 15%) or bipolar off-track lesions, we should consider anterior glenoid bone reconstructions. The techniques have evolved significantly over the last two decades, moving from open procedures to arthroscopic, and from screw fixation to metal-free fixation. The new arthroscopic techniques of glenoid bone reconstruction procedures allow precise positioning of the graft, identification, and treatment of concomitant injuries with low morbidity and faster recovery. Given the problems associated with bone resorption and metal hardware protrusion, the new metal-free techniques for Latarjet or free bone block procedures seem a good solution to avoid these complications, although no long-term data are yet available.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1100–1110.

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

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 open Latarjet procedure is a widely used treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Although satisfactory outcomes are reported, factors which influence a patient’s experience are poorly quantified. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a range of demographic factors and measures of the severity of instability on patient-reported outcome measures in patients who underwent an open Latarjet procedure at a minimum follow-up of two years.

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

Aims

Patients with recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder commonly have an anterior osseous defect of the glenoid. Once the defect reaches a critical size, stability may be restored by bone grafting. The critical size of this defect under non-physiological loading conditions has previously been identified as 20% of the length of the glenoid. As the stability of the shoulder is load-dependent, with higher joint forces leading to a loss of stability, the aim of this study was to determine the critical size of an osseous defect that leads to further anterior instability of the shoulder under physiological loading despite a Bankart repair.

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

The August 2015 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Clavicular fractures are being fixed – but how?; Propionibacterium acnes: a pain in the shoulder?; Bacteria, armpits and arthroplasty; Living longer, but unhappy: the woes of shoulder arthroplasty in the under 50s; Recurrent dislocations in the adolescent population; Splinting for elbow stiffness; Revision Bankart repair