Recurrence in traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations increases the prevalence of Hill–Sachs and Bankart lesions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose The extent of shoulder instability and the indication for surgery may be determined by the prevalence or size of associated lesions. However, a varying prevalence is reported and the actual values are therefore unclear. In addition, it is unclear whether these lesions are present after the first dislocation and whether or not these lesions increase in size after recurrence. The aim of this systematic review was (1) to determine the prevalence of lesions associated with traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations, (2) to determine if the prevalence is higher following recurrent dislocations compared to first-time dislocations and (3) to determine if the prevalence is higher following complete dislocations compared to subluxations. Methods PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane and Web of Science were searched. Studies examining shoulders after traumatic anterior dislocations during arthroscopy or with MRI/MRA or CT published after 1999 were included. A total of 22 studies (1920 shoulders) were included. Results The proportion of Hill–Sachs and Bankart lesions was higher in recurrent dislocations (85%; 66%) compared to first-time dislocations (71%; 59%) and this was statistically significant (P < 0.01; P = 0.05). No significant difference between recurrent and first-time dislocations was observed for SLAP lesions, rotator-cuff tears, bony Bankart lesions, HAGL lesions and ALPSA lesions. The proportion of Hill–Sachs lesions was significantly higher in complete dislocations (82%) compared to subluxations (54%; P < 0.01). Conclusion Higher proportions of Hill–Sachs and Bankart were observed in recurrent dislocations compared to first-time dislocations. No difference was observed for bony Bankart, HAGL, SLAP, rotator-cuff tear and ALPSA. Especially when a Hill–Sachs or Bankart is present after first-time dislocation, early surgical stabilization may need to be considered as other lesions may not be expected after recurrence and to limit lesion growth. However, results should be interpreted with caution due to substantial heterogeneity and large variance. Level of evidence IV.

“Double-Pulley” Dual-Row Technique for Arthroscopic Fixation of Large Bony Bankart Lesion: Minimum 2-Year Follow-up With CT Evaluation

Background: A “double-pulley” dual-row technique had been applied for arthroscopic fixation of large bony Bankart lesion in which the fragment has a wide base. Purpose: To investigate clinical outcomes and glenoid healing after arthroscopic fixation of bony Bankart lesion using the double-pulley dual-row technique. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A total of 25 patients were included in this retrospective study. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, and range of motion of the affected shoulder were assessed. Radiographs and computed tomography (CT) scans (preoperatively, immediately after surgery, and at 1 year postoperatively) were performed to evaluate arthritic changes (Samilson-Prieto classification) and glenoid size. The intraobserver reliability of the CT measurements was analyzed. Results: At a mean follow-up of 3.4 years, the mean ASES and VAS scores were 94.87 ± 5.02 and 0.48 ± 0.59, respectively. Active forward elevation, external rotation with the arm at the side, and internal rotation were 165.80° ± 11.70°, 33.20° ± 8.02°, and T9 (range, T6-S1), respectively. No patient reported a history of redislocation or instability. The intraobserver reliability of the CT measurements was moderate to excellent. The mean preoperative size of the bony fragment was measured as 23.4% ± 7.8% of the glenoid articular surface. The quality of the reduction was judged to be excellent in 13 (52%) cases, good in 8 (32%), and fair in 4 (16%). The mean immediate postoperative glenoid size was 96.8% ± 4.3%, and bone union was found in all cases. There were no significant differences between reconstructed and immediate postoperative glenoid size or between preoperative and final Samilson-Prieto grades. Conclusion: The arthroscopic double-pulley method was a reliable technique for the fixation of large bony Bankart lesions with a wide base. Satisfactory results can be expected regarding the restoration of the glenoid morphology and stability of the shoulder. High healing rate and good shoulder function can be achieved. No radiological evidence of cartilage damage caused by suture abrasion was found at 2- to 5-year follow-up.

Chondral Damage After Arthroscopic Repair Techniques for Acute Bony Bankart Lesions: A Biomechanical Study

Background: Bony Bankart lesions can be encountered during treatment of shoulder instability. Current arthroscopic bony Bankart repair techniques involve intra-articular suture placement, but the effect of these repair techniques on the integrity of the humeral head articular surface warrants further investigation. Purpose: To quantify the degree of humeral head articular cartilage damage secondary to current arthroscopic bony Bankart repair techniques in a cadaveric model. Study Design: Controlled laboratory study. Methods: Testing was performed in 13 matched pairs of cadaveric glenoids with simulated bony Bankart fractures, with a defect width of 25% of the glenoid diameter. Half of the fractures were repaired with a double-row technique, while the contralateral glenoids were repaired with a single-row technique. Samples were subjected to 20,000 cycles of internal-external rotation across a 90° arc at 2 Hz after a compressive load of 750 N, or 90% body weight (whichever was less) was applied to simulate wear. Cartilage defects on the humeral head were quantified through a custom MATLAB script. Mean cartilage cutout differences were analyzed by the Wilcoxon rank-sum test. Results: Both single- and double-row repairs showed macroscopic damage. The histomorphometric analysis demonstrated that the double-row technique resulted in a significantly ( P = .036) more chondral damage (mean, 57,489.1 µm2; SD, 61,262.2 µm2) than the single-row repair (mean, 28,763.5 µm2; SD, 24,4990.2 µm2). Conclusion: Both single-row and double-row arthroscopic bony Bankart fixation techniques resulted in damage to the humeral head articular cartilage in the concavity-compression model utilized in this study. The double-row fixation technique resulted in a significantly increased cutout to the humeral head cartilage after simulated wear in this cadaveric model. Clinical Relevance: This study provides data demonstrating that placement of intra-articular suture during arthroscopic bony Bankart repair techniques may harm the humeral head cartilage. While the double-row repair of bony Bankart lesions is more stable, it results in increased cartilage damage. These findings suggest that alternative, cartilage-sparing arthroscopic techniques for bony Bankart repair should be investigated.