Jason J Shin1, Randy Mascarenhas2, Anish V Patel3, Adam B Yanke3, Gregory P Nicholson3, Brian J Cole3, Anthony A Romeo3, Nikhil N Verma3. 1. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, SK, Canada. jasonjwshin@gmail.com. 2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, TX, USA. 3. Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, Chicago, IL, USA.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Traditionally surgeons have treated failed shoulder instability with open capsulolabral repair. Despite improved instrumentation, technique and familiarity in shoulder arthroscopy, few studies have reported the outcomes of arthroscopic revision shoulder instability repair. The purpose of this study was to assess clinical outcomes in patients following revision shoulder arthroscopic anterior capsulolabral stabilization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients (63 shoulders) with failure of primary instability repairs were treated with revision arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization at a mean follow-up of 46.9 ± 16.8 months (range 18-78). Clinical outcomes were evaluated using validated patient-reported outcome questionnaires including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test, visual analog pain scale and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index. In addition, patients were queried for recurrent instability events (subluxation or dislocation) or revision surgery. RESULTS: At final follow-up, the mean postoperative Western Ontario Shoulder Instability normalized score was 80.1 ± 18.7 (range 15.0-100). There were clinically significant improvements in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, Simple Shoulder Test scores and ten-point visual analog scale for pain (P < 0.001). Recurrent instability occurred in 12 shoulders (19.0 %), with number of prior surgeries and hyperlaxity found to be significant risk factor for failure (P < 0.001 and P = 0.04, respectively). CONCLUSION: Revision arthroscopic anterior stabilization of the shoulder can result in satisfactory outcomes in appropriately selected patients who have failed previous capsulolabral repair. An increased number of prior surgeries and hyperlaxity are predictive of poor outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Case series, LOE IV.
INTRODUCTION: Traditionally surgeons have treated failed shoulder instability with open capsulolabral repair. Despite improved instrumentation, technique and familiarity in shoulder arthroscopy, few studies have reported the outcomes of arthroscopic revision shoulder instability repair. The purpose of this study was to assess clinical outcomes in patients following revision shoulder arthroscopic anterior capsulolabral stabilization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty-two patients (63 shoulders) with failure of primary instability repairs were treated with revision arthroscopic anterior shoulder stabilization at a mean follow-up of 46.9 ± 16.8 months (range 18-78). Clinical outcomes were evaluated using validated patient-reported outcome questionnaires including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test, visual analog pain scale and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index. In addition, patients were queried for recurrent instability events (subluxation or dislocation) or revision surgery. RESULTS: At final follow-up, the mean postoperative Western Ontario Shoulder Instability normalized score was 80.1 ± 18.7 (range 15.0-100). There were clinically significant improvements in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, Simple Shoulder Test scores and ten-point visual analog scale for pain (P < 0.001). Recurrent instability occurred in 12 shoulders (19.0 %), with number of prior surgeries and hyperlaxity found to be significant risk factor for failure (P < 0.001 and P = 0.04, respectively). CONCLUSION: Revision arthroscopic anterior stabilization of the shoulder can result in satisfactory outcomes in appropriately selected patients who have failed previous capsulolabral repair. An increased number of prior surgeries and hyperlaxity are predictive of poor outcome. STUDY DESIGN: Case series, LOE IV.
Authors: Steffen Löw; Christian K Spies; Frank Unglaub; Jörg van Schoonhoven; Karl-Josef Prommersberger; Marion Mühldorfer-Fodor Journal: J Wrist Surg Date: 2016-06-01
Authors: Brian C Lau; Tyler R Johnston; Bonnie P Gregory; Lorena Bejarano Pineda; Mark Wu; Amanda N Fletcher; Jessica H Hu; Leila Ledbetter; Jonathan C Riboh Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2020-05-29
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