Sung-Jae Kim1, Sung-Hwan Kim1, Byoung-Kyu Park1, Yong-Min Chun2. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Arthroscopy and Joint Research Institute, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Arthroscopy and Joint Research Institute, Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea. Electronic address: min1201@hanmail.net.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the functional outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair for recurrent shoulder instability in the setting of moderate glenoid bone defect ranging from 20% to 30% in patients with moderate to low functional demand. METHODS: This study included 36 patients with unilateral recurrent instability and glenoid bone defects of 20% to 30% treated with arthroscopic stabilization. Glenoid bone loss was estimated on the en-face view of preoperative 3-dimensional computed tomography. Joint laxity was assessed clinically by use of the Beighton and Horan criteria, and patients were divided into 2 groups based on the presence of excessive joint laxity, group L (n = 13), or absence of excessive joint laxity, group N (n = 23). Functional assessments were performed with the patient-reported activity level; subjective shoulder value; Rowe score; and University of California, Los Angeles shoulder score. RESULTS: The mean glenoid defect size was 25.1% (range, 20% to 29%), and the overall functional outcomes improved significantly after surgery. A return to greater than 90% of the premorbid activity level was reported by 72% of patients (26 of 36 patients), and patient satisfaction was 83% (30 of 36 patients). There was no significant difference in functional outcomes between groups L and N (subjective shoulder value, 85.0% for group L v 88.9% for group N, P = .397; Rowe score, 83.5 for group L v 92.8 for group N, P = .537; and University of California, Los Angeles shoulder score, 32.2 for group L v 31.9 for group N, P = .697). Recurrent instability occurred in 4 patients (11%), 3 patients in group L (3 of 13, 23%) and 1 patient in group N (1 of 23, 4%), but this difference was not statistically significant (P = .125). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent shoulder instability in patients with moderate to low functional demand produced satisfactory outcomes despite the presence of moderate glenoid bone defects of 20% to 30%. For patients with excessive joint laxity, however, arthroscopic stabilization may not be reliable, with a recurrence rate of 23%. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the functional outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair for recurrent shoulder instability in the setting of moderate glenoid bone defect ranging from 20% to 30% in patients with moderate to low functional demand. METHODS: This study included 36 patients with unilateral recurrent instability and glenoid bone defects of 20% to 30% treated with arthroscopic stabilization. Glenoid bone loss was estimated on the en-face view of preoperative 3-dimensional computed tomography. Joint laxity was assessed clinically by use of the Beighton and Horan criteria, and patients were divided into 2 groups based on the presence of excessive joint laxity, group L (n = 13), or absence of excessive joint laxity, group N (n = 23). Functional assessments were performed with the patient-reported activity level; subjective shoulder value; Rowe score; and University of California, Los Angeles shoulder score. RESULTS: The mean glenoid defect size was 25.1% (range, 20% to 29%), and the overall functional outcomes improved significantly after surgery. A return to greater than 90% of the premorbid activity level was reported by 72% of patients (26 of 36 patients), and patient satisfaction was 83% (30 of 36 patients). There was no significant difference in functional outcomes between groups L and N (subjective shoulder value, 85.0% for group L v 88.9% for group N, P = .397; Rowe score, 83.5 for group L v 92.8 for group N, P = .537; and University of California, Los Angeles shoulder score, 32.2 for group L v 31.9 for group N, P = .697). Recurrent instability occurred in 4 patients (11%), 3 patients in group L (3 of 13, 23%) and 1 patient in group N (1 of 23, 4%), but this difference was not statistically significant (P = .125). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent shoulder instability in patients with moderate to low functional demand produced satisfactory outcomes despite the presence of moderate glenoid bone defects of 20% to 30%. For patients with excessive joint laxity, however, arthroscopic stabilization may not be reliable, with a recurrence rate of 23%. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.
Authors: Alexandre Tadeu do Nascimento; Gustavo Kogake Claudio; Pedro Bellei Rocha; Juan Pablo Zumárraga; Olavo Pires de Camargo Journal: Acta Ortop Bras Date: 2018 Impact factor: 0.513
Authors: Hassanin Alkaduhimi; James W Connelly; Derek F P van Deurzen; Denise Eygendaal; Michel P J van den Bekerom Journal: Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil Date: 2021-04-06