Functional Rehabilitation and Return to Play After Arthroscopic Surgical Stabilization for Anterior Shoulder Instability

2021 ◽  
pp. 194173812110628
Author(s):  
Timothy D. Kelley ◽  
Stephanie Clegg ◽  
Paul Rodenhouse ◽  
Jon Hinz ◽  
Brian D. Busconi

Background: There exists limited objective functional return-to-play criteria after surgical stabilization for anterior shoulder instability in the competitive athlete. Hypothesis: The proposed functional rehabilitation program and psychological evaluation after arthroscopic Bankart repair will help athletes return to sport with a decreased redislocation rate on return. Study Design: Case series. Level of Evidence: Level 4. Methods: Participants were contact or overhead athletes at the high school or collegiate level. Each underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair after a single dislocation event, with less than 10% glenoid bone loss. Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) scores, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) scores, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores were evaluated pre- and postoperatively. Athletes were only allowed to return to competition after completing the proposed functional and psychological rehabilitation protocol. Results: A total of 62 participants were enrolled (52 male, 10 female; average age, 18.7 years (range 16-24 years); mean Instability Severity Index Score, 5.63 ± 0.55). All returned to sport for 1 full season and completed a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. The average time to pass functional testing was 6.2 ± 0.7 months, psychological testing was 5.2 ± 0.5 months, and return to sport was 6.5 ± 0.7 months. SANE scores improved from 44.3 to 90.0, ASES from 45.5 to 89.3, and WOSI from 1578.0 to 178.9 (all P < 0.001). Redislocation rate was 6.5% (4 of 62). Conclusion: The proposed functional rehabilitation and psychological assessment protocol is safe and effective in returning athletes to sport after arthroscopic surgical intervention for anterior shoulder instability. This demonstrated a low redislocation rate after 2-year follow-up. Clinical Relevance: Most return-to-play protocols after arthroscopic Bankart repair are centered on recovery time alone, with limited focus on functional rehabilitation, psychological assessment, and return-to-play testing parameters. To our knowledge, this is the first study to propose a dedicated rehabilitation program incorporating functional testing, psychological readiness, and return-to-play criteria for competitive athletes recovering from arthroscopic shoulder stabilization.

Author(s):  
Madan Ballal ◽  
Tarun Jayakumar

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> The objective of the study was to evaluate the functional outcome of arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability to assess whether the number and position of suture anchors plays a role in determining the functional outcome.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> This was a prospective study on 32 patients operated with arthroscopic Bankart repair between December 2017 to April 2019. Pre-op and regular follow-up scores were measured at 1 month, 3 months and 6 months post-op using Rowe score and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score to assess functional outcome.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> Mean age of the study group was 24.5±6.9 years. Functional outcome as determined by Rowe score and ASES score at 6 months follow-up were found to be 90.5±7.2 and 85.9±14.1 respectively when compared to the pre-op scores of 23.2±8.2 and 47.9±5.7 respectively; all of which showed highly significant functional improvement with highly significant reduction in visual analog scale (VAS) pain score. Patients had no recurrent dislocations with mean external rotation limitation of 5<sup>o</sup>. 25 (78.1%) patients had two suture anchors inserted and 7 (21.9%) patients had multiple (&gt;2) anchors; and when analysis was done, there was no statistically significant difference between number of suture anchors used with respect to the functional scores.</p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> We conclude that arthroscopic Bankart repair is a useful and successful procedure. Patient identification and selection remains the key in determining the success of repair. Meticulous surgical technique and correct positioning of suture anchors may help in reducing the number of anchors without compromising on the final functional outcome, thereby reducing the economic burden on patients.</p>


2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
pp. 232596712094136
Author(s):  
Eran Maman ◽  
Oleg Dolkart ◽  
Rafael Krespi ◽  
Assaf Kadar ◽  
Gabriel Mozes ◽  
...  

Background: Arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the Latarjet procedure are surgical techniques commonly used to treat anterior shoulder instability. There is no consensus among shoulder surgeons regarding the indications for choosing one over the other. Purpose: To compare the results of the Latarjet procedure with those of ABR for the treatment of anterior shoulder instability. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Data on all patients who were treated surgically for recurrent anterior shoulder instability between 2006 and 2011 were retrospectively collected at 4 medical centers. The minimum follow-up was 5 years. Data were retrieved from medical charts, and patients were interviewed to assess their level of satisfaction (range, 0-100), functional outcomes (using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons shoulder score; the Subjective Shoulder Value; and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score), and quality of life (using the 12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12]). Information on return to sports activities and postoperative level of activity compared with that of the preinjury state, complications, reoperations, and recurrent instability were recorded and evaluated. Results: A total of 242 patients were included. The Latarjet procedure was performed in 27 shoulders, and ABR was performed in 215 shoulders. Patients in the ABR group had significantly higher rates of redislocation (18.5%; P = .05) and subluxation (21.4%; P = .43) but a lower rate of self-reported apprehension (43.0%; P = .05) compared with patients in the Latarjet group (3.7%, 14.8%, and 63.0%, respectively). There were 5 patients in the ABR group who underwent reoperation with the Latarjet procedure because of recurrent instability. The functional scores in the Latarjet group were better than those in the ABR group. The SF-12 physical score was significantly better in the Latarjet group than in the ABR group (98.1 vs 93.9, respectively; P = .01). Patient satisfaction and subjective scores were similar in both groups. Conclusion: These results support recently published data on the Latarjet procedure that showed its superiority over ABR in midterm stability (dislocations or subluxations). The contribution of self-reported apprehension to the broad definition of stability is not clear, and apprehension rates were not correlated with satisfaction scores or the recurrence of dislocation or subluxation.


2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (5_suppl3) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0020
Author(s):  
Jean-David Werthel ◽  
Vincent Sabatier ◽  
Lior Amsallem ◽  
Marie Vigan ◽  
Alexandre Hardy

Objectives The two most common surgical interventions for recurrent anterior shoulder instability include arthroscopic Bankart repair and the Latarjet procedure. However, indications for each procedure remain debated between surgeons with 90% of surgeons (except French surgeons) preferring soft tissue Bankart repair initially. It remains unclear whether the results of a Latarjet procedure performed after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair differ from those performed for primary cases. The purpose of our study was to compare the postoperative outcomes of patients who had undergone a Latarjet as a primary surgery versus those who had had a Latarjet as revision surgery for a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair Methods Patients who had undergone open or arthroscopic Latarjet procedure between 2003 and 2015 in 5 fellowship-trained surgical practices were included. Charts were retrospectively reviewed to identify patients who had undergone a primary Latarjet or those who had had a Bankart repair prior to the Latarjet. Age, ISIS score, BMI, sports activity, hyperlaxity and delay before surgery were retrospectively collected. Outcome measures were prospectively collected, including range of motion, SSV, Walch-Duplay, scores, recurrence of instability, apprehension or new surgery. Results A total of 311 patients were included. 28% of the patients were lost to follow-up and the mean follow-up was 3.4 years +/-0.8. There were 21 patients who had had a Bankart repair prior to the Latarjet procedure. Both populations were comparable regarding preoperative data. The postoperative instability rate was 3% in the overall population; 4.8% in the “primary Latarjet” group and 2.3% in the ”Latarjet for failed Bankart” group. This difference was not significant (p=0.50). However, the mean Walch-Duplay score was significantly lower and the pain scores significantly higher in patients who had had a prior Bankart repair: 51.9 +/- 25 versus 72.1 +/- 25.2 and 2.5/10 versus 1.2/10 respectively. The Simple Shoulder Test was comparable in both groups. Conclusion The study confirms that the Latarjet is an effective procedure to treat primary chronic anterior instability and also to stabilize a shoulder after a failed Bankart repair. However, the thought that a Bankart repair does not “burn any bridges” appears to be incorrect relative to postoperative pain and functional scores in the setting of future Latarjet procedure.


2021 ◽  
pp. 155633162110306
Author(s):  
Ajaykumar Shanmugaraj ◽  
Seaher Sakha ◽  
Tushar Tejpal ◽  
Timothy Leroux ◽  
Jacob M Kirsch ◽  
...  

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.


2019 ◽  
Vol 48 (1) ◽  
pp. 27-32 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jean-David Werthel ◽  
Vincent Sabatier ◽  
Bradley Schoch ◽  
Lior Amsallem ◽  
Geoffroy Nourissat ◽  
...  

Background: It remains unclear whether results differ between a Latarjet procedure performed after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair and one performed as the primary operation. Purpose: To compare the postoperative outcomes of the Latarjet procedure when performed as primary surgery and as revision for a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A multicenter retrospective comparative case-cohort analysis was performed for all patients undergoing a Latarjet procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Patients were separated into 2 groups depending on if the Latarjet procedure was performed after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair (group 1) or as the first operation (group 2). Outcome measures included recurrent instability, reoperation rates, complications, pain, Walch-Duplay scores, and Simple Shoulder Test. Results: A total of 308 patients were eligible for participation in the study; 72 (23.4%) did not answer and were considered lost to follow-up, leaving 236 patients available for analysis. Mean follow-up was 3.4 ± 0.8 years. There were 20 patients in group 1 and 216 in group 2. Despite similar rates of recurrent instability (5.0% in group 1 vs 2.3% in group 2; P = .5) and revision surgery (0% in group 1 vs 6.5% in group 2; P = .3), group 1 demonstrated significantly worse pain scores (2.56 ± 2.7 vs 1.2 ± 1.7; P = .01) and patient-reported outcomes (Walch-Duplay: 52 ± 25.1 vs 72.2 ± 25.0; P = .0007; Simple Shoulder Test: 9.3 ± 2.4 vs 10.7 ± 1.9; P = .001) when compared with those patients undergoing primary Latarjet procedures. Conclusion: Functional outcome scores and postoperative pain are significantly worse in patients undergoing a Latarjet procedure after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair when compared with patients undergoing primary Latarjet. The assumption that a failed a Bankart repair can be revised by a Latarjet with a similar result to a primary Latarjet appears to be incorrect. Surgeons should consider these findings when deciding on the optimal surgical procedure for recurrent shoulder instability.


2018 ◽  
Vol 46 (9) ◽  
pp. 2170-2176 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yoon Sang Jeon ◽  
Ho Yeon Jeong ◽  
Dong Ki Lee ◽  
Yong Girl Rhee

Background: The optimal procedure for anterior shoulder instability with a borderline (15%-20%) bone defect on the anterior rim of the glenoid is still controversial. Purpose: To compare the clinical outcome and recurrence rate between the arthroscopic Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure among patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability and a borderline glenoid bone defect. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The authors retrospectively reviewed cases of arthroscopic Bankart repair and the Latarjet procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability with a borderline (15%-20%) glenoid bone defect. Enrollment comprised 149 patients (Bankart group, n = 118; Latarjet group, n = 31). The mean follow-up and age at operation were 28.9 ± 7.3 months (range, 24-73 months) and 26 ± 5 years (range, 16-46 years), respectively. Results: Rowe and UCLA (University of California, Los Angeles) shoulder scores significantly improved from 42.0 ± 14.3 and 22.9 ± 3.2 preoperatively to 90.9 ± 15.4 and 32.5 ± 3.3 postoperatively in the Bankart group ( P < .001) and from 41.0 ± 17.9 and 22.3 ± 3.4 to 91.1 ± 16.1 and 32.3 ± 3.4 in the Latarjet group ( P < .001), respectively. There were no significant between-group differences in Rowe ( P = .920) or UCLA ( P = .715) scores at the final follow-up. Mean postoperative loss of motion during forward flexion, external rotation in abduction, and internal rotation to the posterior was 3.0° ± 6.2°, 11.6° ± 10.2°, and 0.6 spinal segment in the Bankart group and 3.7° ± 9.8°, 10.3° ± 12.8°, and 0.9 spinal segment in the Latarjet group, respectively. These differences were not significant. However, the loss of external rotation at the side was significantly greater in the Bankart group (13.3° ± 12.9°) than in the Latarjet group (7.3° ± 18.1°, P = .034). The overall recurrence rate was significantly higher in the Bankart group (22.9%) than in the Latarjet group (6.5%), ( P = .040). Conclusion: The Latarjet procedure and arthroscopic Bankart repair both provided satisfactory clinical outcome scores and pain relief for anterior shoulder instability with a borderline glenoid bone defect. However, the Latarjet procedure resulted in significantly lower recurrences and less external rotation limitation than the arthroscopic Bankart repair. Therefore, the Latarjet procedure could be a more reliable surgical option in anterior recurrent instability with a borderline glenoid bone defect.


2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (10_suppl5) ◽  
pp. 2325967121S0034
Author(s):  
Matthew Shirley ◽  
Richard Nauert ◽  
Ryan Wilbur ◽  
Matthew LaPrade ◽  
Christopher Bernard ◽  
...  

Objectives: There is a paucity of literature regarding outcomes of anterior shoulder instability (ASI) in throwers and overhead athletes (OHA). The purpose of this study was to report the pathology, treatment strategies, and outcomes of ASI in throwers and overhead athletes utilizing an established US geographic population-based cohort. Methods: An established geographic database of more than 500,000 patients was used to identify athletes <40 years of age with ASI between 1994 and 2016. Medical records were reviewed to obtain demographics, type of sport, surgical details, and clinical outcomes. Patients were contacted after final clinical follow-up for patient reported outcomes (PRO). The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) score, return to sport at previous level of performance (RPP), rate of return to play (RTP) and time to RTP were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed comparing throwers to non-throwers and OHA to non-overhead athletes (NOHA). Results: The study population consisted of 171 patients, 114 NOHA and 57 OHA. Of the OHA, 40 were throwers. The mean follow-up was 14.7 ± 5.6 years for PRO’s and 11.7 ± 7.3 years for last clinical evaluation. No difference in overall instability events was seen in either group. Throwers were more likely to present with subluxations while non-throwers were more likely to present with frank dislocations. NOHA and non-throwers were more likely than OHA and throwers to have a history of trauma related to ASI, respectively ( P = <.001, P = .002). Throwers were more likely to undergo an open surgical procedure (45%) than non-throwers (15%) ( P = .038). The rate of recurrent instability between groups was similar. Throwers returned to sport at a lower rate than non-throwers, however this did not reach significance (64% vs 83%, P = .100). Throwers and OHA reported similar WOSI scores, RPP and time to RTP grouped by surgical or conservative management compared to non-throwers and NOHA, respectively. Conclusions: In a US cohort of patients, throwers and OHA had a similar number of instability events compared to non-throwers and NOHA, respectively. Non-throwers and NOHA were more likely to present with frank dislocation which is supported by the significantly higher rates of trauma in both groups. Notably, the WOSI score, RPP, rate of RTP and time to RTP showed no difference between throwers and OHA when compared to their non-throwing and NOHA counterparts.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document