Arthroscopic Bankart Repair With Remplissage in Comparison to Bone Block Augmentation for Anterior Shoulder Instability With Bipolar Bone Loss: A Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kyle Gouveia ◽  
Syed Kumail Abidi ◽  
Saif Shamshoon ◽  
Chetan Gohal ◽  
Kim Madden ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bone Loss ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bone Block ◽  
Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

scholarly journals Revision Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Arthroscopic Latarjet for Failed Primary Arthroscopic Stabilization With Subcritical Bone Loss

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 232596712110018
Author(s):  
Emilio Calvo ◽  
Gonzalo Luengo ◽  
Diana Morcillo ◽  
Antonio M. Foruria ◽  
María Valencia
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Bone Loss ◽  
Revision Surgery ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Activity Level ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Arthroscopic Bankart Repair ◽  
Functional Scores ◽  
Arthroscopic Latarjet

Background: Limited evidence is available regarding the recommended technique of revision surgery for recurrent shoulder instability. Only 1 previous study has compared the results of soft tissue repair and the Latarjet technique in patients with persistent shoulder instability after primary surgical stabilization. Purpose/Hypothesis: To evaluate the results of revision surgery in patients with previous surgical stabilization failure and subcritical glenoid bone defects, comparing repeated Bankart repair versus arthroscopic Latarjet technique. The hypothesis was that Latarjet would be superior to soft tissue procedures in terms of objective and subjective functional scores, recurrence rates, and range of movement. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Included were 45 patients (mean age, 29.1 ± 8.9 years) with subcritical bone loss (<15% of articular surface) who had undergone revision anterior shoulder instability repair after failed Bankart repair. Of these, 17 patients had arthroscopic Bankart repair and 28 had arthroscopic Latarjet surgery. Patients were evaluated at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively with the Rowe score, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index, and Subjective Shoulder Value. Subluxation or dislocation episodes were considered failures. Results: No statistically significant differences were found between groups in age, sex, sporting activity, preoperative Rowe score, or the presence of hyperlaxity or bony lesions. At revision arthroscopy, 20 shoulders showed a persistent Bankart lesion, 13 a medially healed labrum, and 6 a bony Bankart. In 6 patients, no abnormalities were present that could explain postoperative recurrence. In the Bankart repair group, 7 patients underwent isolated Bankart procedures; in the remaining 10 cases, a capsular shift was added. No significant differences were found between the Bankart and Latarjet groups in outcome scores, recurrence rate (11.8% vs 17.9%, respectively), or postoperative athletic activity level. The mean loss of passive external rotation at 0° and 90° of abduction was similar between groups. Conclusion: Arthroscopic Latarjet did not lead to superior results compared with repeated Bankart repair in patients with subcritical glenoid bone loss and recurrent anterior shoulder instability after Bankart repair.

scholarly journals Revision Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Anterior Shoulder Instability After a Failed Arthroscopic Soft-Tissue Repair Yields Comparable Failure Rates to Primary Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 155633162110306
Author(s):  
Ajaykumar Shanmugaraj ◽  
Seaher Sakha ◽  
Tushar Tejpal ◽  
Timothy Leroux ◽  
Jacob M Kirsch ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Failure Rates ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

Background: The management of recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair remains challenging. Of the various treatment options, arthroscopic revision repairs are of increasing interest due to improved visualization of pathology and advancements in arthroscopic techniques and instrumentation. Purpose: We sought to assess the indications, techniques, outcomes, and complications for patients undergoing revision arthroscopic Bankart repair after a failed index arthroscopic soft-tissue stabilization for anterior shoulder instability. Methods: We performed a systematic review of studies identified by a search of Medline, Embase, and PubMed. Our search range was from data inception to April 29, 2020. Outcomes include clinical outcomes and rates of complication and revision. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) was used to assess study quality. Data are presented descriptively. Results: Twelve studies were identified, comprising 279 patients (281 shoulders) with a mean age of 26.1 ± 3.8 years and a mean follow-up of 55.7 ± 24.3 months. Patients had improvements in postoperative outcomes (eg, pain and function). The overall complication rate was 29.5%, the most common being recurrent instability (19.9%). Conclusion: With significant improvements postoperatively and comparable recurrent instability rates, there exists a potential role in the use of revision arthroscopic Bankart repair where the glenoid bone loss is less than 20%. Clinicians should consider patient history and imaging findings to determine whether a more rigorous stabilization procedure is warranted. Large prospective cohorts with long-term follow-up and improved documentation are required to determine more accurate failure rates.

Management of Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability With Bipolar Bone Loss: A Systematic Review to Assess Critical Bone Loss Amounts

2018 ◽  
Vol 47 (10) ◽  
pp. 2484-2493 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anirudh K. Gowd ◽  
Joseph N. Liu ◽  
Brandon C. Cabarcas ◽  
Grant H. Garcia ◽  
Gregory L. Cvetanovich ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bone Loss ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Operative Management ◽  
Glenoid Bone Loss ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bone Block ◽  
Recurrence Rates ◽  
The Mean

Background: There is increasing evidence to suggest that the amount of glenoid bone loss to indicate bone block procedures may be lower than previously thought, particularly in the presence of a Hill-Sachs defect. Purpose: To better establish treatment recommendations for anterior shoulder instability among patients with bipolar bone lesions. Study Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed with PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Studies evaluating outcomes of operative management in anterior shoulder instability that also reported glenoid bone loss in the presence of Hill-Sachs defects were included. Recurrence rates, glenoid bone loss, and humeral bone loss were pooled and analyzed with forest plots stratified by surgical procedure. Methods of quantification were analyzed for each article qualitatively. Results: Thirteen articles were included in the final analysis, with a total of 778 patients. The mean ± SD age was 24.9 ± 8.6 years. The mean follow-up was 30.1 months (range, 11-240 months). Only 13 of 408 (3.2%) reviewed bipolar bone loss articles quantified humeral and/or glenoid bone loss. Latarjet procedures had the greatest glenoid bone loss (21.7%; 95% CI, 14.8%-28.6%), followed by Bankart repairs (13.1%; 95% CI, 9.0%-17.2%), and remplissage (11.7%; 95% CI, 5.5%-18.0%). Humeral bone loss was primarily reported as percentage bone loss (22.2%; 95% CI, 13.1%-31.3% in Bankart repairs and 31.7%; 95% CI, 21.6%-41.1% in Latarjet) or as volumetric defects (439.1 mm3; 95% CI, 336.3-541.9 mm3 in Bankart repairs and 366.0 mm3; 95% CI, 258.4-475.4 mm3 in remplissage). Recurrence rates were as follows: Bankart repairs, 19.5% (95% CI, 14.5%-25.8%); remplissage, 4.4% (95% CI, 1.3%-14.0%); and Latarjet, 8.7% (95% CI, 5.0%-14.7%). Bankart repairs were associated with significantly greater recurrence of instability in included articles ( P = .013). Conclusion: There exists a need for universal and consistent preoperative measurement of humeral-sided bone loss. The presence of concomitant Hill-Sachs defects with glenoid pathology should warrant more aggressive operative management through use of bone block procedures. Previously established values of critical glenoid bone loss are not equally relevant in the presence of bipolar bone loss.

scholarly journals State of the art for treatment of bony defects around anterior shoulder instability—the American perspective

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rafael Kakazu ◽  
Matthew R. LeVasseur ◽  
Robert A. Arciero ◽  
Augustus D. Mazzocca
Keyword(s):  
Patient Outcome ◽  
Bone Loss ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Distal Tibia ◽  
Glenoid Bone Loss ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Index Procedure ◽  
American Perspective ◽  
Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

AbstractWhile arthroscopic Bankart repair yields high success rates, bone loss on the glenoid or humeral head can portend a poor outcome. The authors recommend a thorough evaluation including computed tomography (CT) scanning to best evaluate the amount of bone loss. Multiple studies have shown that the outcomes of revision stabilization procedures are inferior to the respective primary procedure; thus, it is of paramount importance to select the correct index procedure to optimize patient outcome. The authors present the American perspective on treating shoulder instability. For patients with a small on-track Hill Sachs lesion and less than 10 % glenoid bone loss, an isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair is appropriate. This procedure is also recommended for bony Bankart lesions, as well as in overhead throwing athletes. With an engaging Hill Sachs lesion and less than 15 % glenoid bone loss, the authors recommend the addition of a remplissage to the arthroscopic Bankart repair. For patients with up to 15 % bone loss or following a failed previous arthroscopic repair, the authors advocate for open Bankart repair. They recommend Latarjet in patients with a non-engaging Hill Sachs lesion greater than 15 % bone loss. Patients with bone loss over 30 % would benefit from bone grafting with iliac crest autograft or distal tibia allograft for stabilization. In summary, the authors believe that the index procedure provides an opportunity to optimize patient outcome and careful consideration of the treatment options is warranted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document