scholarly journals The Instability Severity Index Score Revisited: Evaluation of 217 Consecutive Cases of Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability

2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (7_suppl5) ◽  
pp. 2325967119S0026
Author(s):  
Matthew T. Provencher ◽  
George Sanchez ◽  
Andrew S. Bernhardson ◽  
Liam A. Peebles ◽  
Daniel B. Haber ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Severity Index ◽  
Index Score ◽  
Glenoid Bone Loss ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Arthroscopic Stabilization ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Severity Index Score ◽  
Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability

Objectives: The instability severity index score (ISIS) was designed to predict the risk of recurrence after arthroscopic instability shoulder surgery and to better predict those who would benefit from an open or bone transfer operation. Although this score has been widely disseminated to predict recurrence, there are certain areas in which preoperative assessment is limited, especially in radiographic workup. The objective of this study was to examine the validity of ISIS based on its existing variables, as well as to evaluate additional imaging and patient history variables pertinent to the potential redevelopment of a new score to assess risk of recurrent anterior instability following an arthroscopic Bankart repair. Methods: All consecutive patients were prospectively enrolled with recurrent anterior shoulder instability who subsequently underwent an arthroscopic stabilization with minimum 24 months follow-up. Exclusion criteria included, prior surgery on the shoulder, posterior or multidirectional instability, or a rotator cuff tear. All instability severity index score variables were recorded (age <20, degree and sport type, hyperlaxity, Hill Sachs on AP xray, glenoid loss of contour on AP xray), as well as additional variables: 1. Position of arm at dislocation; 2. Number of instability events; 3. Total time of instability; 4. Glenoid bone loss percent; 5. Amount of attritional glenoid bone loss; 6. Hill Sachs measures (H/W/D and volume), and outcomes (recurrent instability) and scores (WOSI, ASES and SANE). Regression analysis was utilized to determine preoperative variables that predicted outcomes and failures. Results: There were 217 consecutive patients (209 male-96.5%, 8 female-3.5%) who met criteria and were all treated with a primary arthroscopic shoulder stabilization during a 3.5-year period (2007-2011), with mean follow-up of 42 (range, 26-58 mos). The mean age at first instability event was 23.9 (range, 16-48), with 55% right shoulder affected, 60% dominant shoulder. Outcomes were improved from mean scores preoperative (WOSI=1050/2100, ASES=61.0, SANE=52.5) to postoperative (WOSI=305/2100, ASES=93.5, SANE=95.5), and 11.5% (25/217) had evidence or recurrent instability or subluxation. A total of 51/217 were 20 years or under, hyperlaxity in 5, Hill Sachs on internal rotation XR in 77, glenoid contour on AP XR in 41, with an overall mean ISIS score of 3.6. Factors associated with failure were glenoid bone loss greater than 14.5%(p<0.001), total time of instability symptoms >11.5 months(p<0.03), Hill Sachs volume > 1.3 cm3 with H>1.5 cm, W>1.0 cm and D>5 mm(p<0.01), contact sport (p<0.01) and age 20 or under (p<0.01). There was no correlation in outcomes with Hill Sachs on IR or glenoid contour on XR (p>0.45), sports participation, and Instability Severity Score (mean=3.4 success, vs 3.9 failure, p>0.44). Conclusion: At nearly four years of follow-up, there was an 11.5% failure rate of scope stabilization surgery. However, there was no correlation between treatment outcome and the ISIS measure given a mean score of 3.4 with little difference identified in those that failed. However, several important parameters previously unidentified were detected including, glenoid bone loss >14.5%, Hill Sachs volume >1.3 cm3, and time length of instability symptoms. Therefore, the ISIS measure may need to be redesigned in order to incorporate variables that more accurately portray the actual risk of failure following arthroscopic stabilization.

Inconsistencies in Controlling for Risk Factors for Recurrent Shoulder Instability After Primary Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
pp. 036354652110387
Author(s):  
Nicholas A. Trasolini ◽  
Navya Dandu ◽  
Eric N. Azua ◽  
Grant E. Garrigues ◽  
Nikhil N. Verma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Bone Loss ◽  
Full Text ◽  
Severity Index ◽  
Index Score ◽  
Glenoid Bone Loss ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Advanced Imaging ◽  
Severity Index Score

Background: Failure rates after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization are highly variable in the current orthopaedic literature. Predictive factors for risk of failure have been studied to improve patient selection, refine surgical techniques, and define the role of bony procedures. However, significant heterogeneity in the analysis and controlling of risk factors makes evidence-based management decisions challenging. Purpose: The goals of this systematic review were (1) to critically assess the consistency of reported risk factors for recurrent instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair, (2) to identify the existing studies with the most comprehensive inclusion of confounding factors in their analyses, and (3) to give recommendations for which factors should be reported consistently in future clinical studies. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. An initial search yielded 1754 titles, from which 56 full-text articles were screened for inclusion. A total of 29 full-text articles met the following inclusion criteria: (1) clinical studies regarding recurrent anterior shoulder instability; (2) surgical procedures performed including arthroscopic anterior labral repair; (3) reported clinical outcome data including failure rate; and (4) assessment of risk factors for surgical failure. Further subanalyses were performed for 15 studies that included a multivariate analysis, 17 studies that included glenoid bone loss, and 8 studies that analyzed the Instability Severity Index Score. Results: After full-text review, 12 of the most commonly studied risk factors were identified and included in this review. The risk factors that were most consistently significant in multivariate analyses were off-track lesions (100%), glenoid bone loss (78%), Instability Severity Index Score (75%), level of sports participation (67%), number of anchors (67%), and younger age (63%). In studies of bone loss, statistical significance was more likely to be found using advanced imaging, with critical bone loss thresholds of 10% to 15%. Several studies found predictive thresholds of 2 to 4 for Instability Severity Index Score by receiver operating characteristic or multivariate analysis. Conclusion: Studies reporting risk factors for failure of arthroscopic Bankart repair often fail to control for known confounding variables. The factors with the most common statistical significance among 15 multivariate analyses are off-track lesions, glenoid bone loss, Instability Severity Index Score, level of sports participation, number of anchors, and younger age. Studies found significance more commonly with advanced imaging measurements or arthroscopic assessment of glenoid bone loss and with lower thresholds for the Instability Severity Index Score (2-4). Future studies should attempt to control for all relevant factors, use advanced imaging for glenoid bone loss measurements, and consider a lower predictive threshold for the Instability Severity Index Score.

Arthroscopic Stabilization in Patients with an Inverted Pear Glenoid

2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (8) ◽  
pp. 1276-1283 ◽  
Author(s):  
Timothy S. Mologne ◽  
Matthew T. Provencher ◽  
Kyle A. Menzel ◽  
Tyler A. Vachon ◽  
Christopher B. Dewing
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Bony Defect ◽  
Arthroscopic Stabilization ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Bone Deficiency ◽  
Bony Fragment ◽  
The Mean

Background Recent literature has demonstrated that the success rates of arthroscopic stabilization of glenohumeral instability deteriorate in patients with an anteroinferior glenoid bone deficiency, also known as the “inverted pear” glenoid. Purpose This study was conducted to assess the outcomes of arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent anterior shoulder instability in patients with a mean anteroinferior glenoid bone deficiency of 25% (range, 20%-30%). Study Design Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods Twenty-one of 23 patients (91% follow-up) undergoing arthroscopic stabilization surgery and noted to have a bony deficiency of the anteroinferior glenoid of 20% to 30% were reviewed at a mean follow-up of 34 months (range, 26-47). The mean age was 25 years (range, 20-34); 2 patients were female and 19 were male. All patients were treated with a primary anterior arthroscopic stabilization using a mean of 3.2 suture anchors (range, 3-4). Eleven patients had a bony Bankart that was incorporated into the repair; 10 had no bone fragment and were considered attritional bone loss. Outcomes were assessed using the Rowe score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Score, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) Index. Findings of recurrent instability and dislocation events were documented. Results Two patients (9.5%) experienced symptoms of recurrent subluxation, and 1 (4.8%) sustained a recurrent dislocation that required revision open surgery. The mean postoperative outcomes scores were as follows SANE = 88.1 (range, 65-100; standard deviation [SD] 9.0); Rowe = 85.2 (range, 55-100; SD 14.1); ASES Score = 93.1 (range, 78-100; SD 5.3); and WOSI Index = 398 (82% of normal; range, 30-1175; SD 264). No patient with a bony fragment experienced a recurrent subluxation or dislocation, and mean outcomes scores for patients with a bony fragment were better than those with no bony fragment (P = .08). No patient required medical discharge from the military for his or her shoulder condition. Conclusions Arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent instability, even in the presence of a significant bony defect of the glenoid, can yield a stable shoulder; however, outcomes are not as predictable especially in attritional bone loss cases. Longer-term follow-up is needed to see if these results hold up over time.

scholarly journals Clinical Outcomes of Shoulder Stabilization in Females With Glenoid Bone Loss

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 232596712110075
Author(s):  
Rachel M. Frank ◽  
Hytham S. Salem ◽  
Catherine Richardson ◽  
Michael O’Brien ◽  
Jon M. Newgren ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Glenoid Bone Loss ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Latarjet Procedure ◽  
Shoulder Stabilization ◽  
Simple Shoulder Test ◽  
Female Patients

Background: Nearly all studies describing shoulder stabilization focus on male patients. Little is known regarding the clinical outcomes of female patients undergoing shoulder stabilization, and even less is understood about females with glenoid bone loss. Purpose: To assess the clinical outcomes of female patients with recurrent anterior shoulder instability treated with the Latarjet procedure. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: All cases of female patients who had recurrent anterior shoulder instability with ≥15% anterior glenoid bone loss and underwent the Latarjet procedure were analyzed. Patients were evaluated after a minimum 2-year postoperative period with scores of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons form, Simple Shoulder Test, and pain visual analog scale. Results: Of the 22 patients who met our criteria, 5 (22.7%) were lost to follow-up, leaving 17 (77.2%) available for follow-up with a mean ± SD age of 31.7 ± 12.9 years. Among these patients, 16 (94.1%) underwent 1.6 ± 0.73 ipsilateral shoulder operations (range, 1-3) before undergoing the Latarjet procedure. Preoperative indications for surgery included recurrent instability with bone loss in all cases. After a mean follow-up of 40.2 ± 22.9 months, patients experienced significant score improvements in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons form, Simple Shoulder Test, and pain visual analog scale ( P < .05 for all). There were 2 reoperations (11.8%). There were no cases of neurovascular injuries or other complications. Conclusion: Female patients with recurrent shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss can be successfully treated with the Latarjet procedure, with outcomes similar to those of male patients in the previously published literature. This information can be used to counsel female patients with recurrent instability with significant anterior glenoid bone loss.

Long-term, Prospective, Multicenter Study of Isolated Bankart Repair for a Patient Selection Method Based on the Instability Severity Index Score

2019 ◽  
Vol 47 (5) ◽  
pp. 1057-1061 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hervé Thomazeau ◽  
Tristan Langlais ◽  
Alexandre Hardy ◽  
Jonathan Curado ◽  
Olivier Herisson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Recurrence Rate ◽  
Severity Index ◽  
Index Score ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Prospective Multicenter Study ◽  
Severity Index Score ◽  
Bony Lesions ◽  
Long Term Recurrence Rate

Background: An isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair carries a high mid- and long-term risk of recurring instability. Preoperative patient selection based on the Instability Severity Index Score should improve outcomes. Purpose: To report the overall long-term recurrence rate for isolated Bankart repair, investigate the predictive factors for recurrence, analyze time to recurrence, and determine a quantitative cutoff point for recurrence in terms of Instability Severity Index Score. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: This was a prospective multicenter study. Inclusion criteria were recurring anterior instability and an Instability Severity Index Score of 4 or less. Of the 125 patients included, 20 patients had a score of 0, 31 patients scored 1, 29 patients scored 2, 34 patients scored 3, and 11 patients scored 4. All centers used the same arthroscopic technique and rehabilitation protocol. Follow-up data were collected at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months and 3 and 9 years. The primary endpoint was recurrence of instability (total or partial dislocation). The statistical analysis was performed by use of the software package SAS 9.4. Results: We initially identified 328 patients, of whom 125 patients were prospectively included. The main reason for excluding the 202 patients was the presence of bony lesions, which carry 2 points each in the Instability Severity Index Score (humeral head notch and/or glenoid lesion visible on standard radiographs). Of the 125 eligible patients, 73% were athletes and 22.5% competitors; 16% were lost at the last follow-up. At the endpoint, 23% had experienced a recurrence after a mean interval of 35 months (range, 5.5-103 months). No statistical differences were found between patients with and without bony lesions in the overall group of 125 patients or in the subgroup with an Instability Severity Index Score of 3 or 4 points ( P = .4). According to univariate analysis, the only predictive factor for recurrence was age less than 20 years at the time of surgery, with a 42% rate of recurrence in this group ( P = .03). Multivariate analysis showed that the Instability Severity Index Score was the only predictive factor with a quantitative cutoff point (namely, a score of ≤2 points) that was statistically associated with a decreased long term recurrence rate ( P = .02). The recurrence rate was 10% for a preoperative Instability Severity Index Score of 2 or less compared with 35.6% for a score of 3 or 4. The survival curves demonstrated no new dislocations after year 4 for patients with an Instability Severity Index Score of up to 2 points. Conclusion: In a preselected population, mainly without bony lesions, the Instability Severity Index Score cutoff value that provides an acceptable recurrence rate at 9 years after isolated Bankart repair is 2 out of 10.

Mapping of glenoid bone loss in recurrent anterior shoulder instability: is there a particular deficit pattern?

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 1676-1680 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Bockmann ◽  
Arne Johannes Venjakob ◽  
Frank Reichwein ◽  
Marthe Hagenacker ◽  
Wolfgang Nebelung
Keyword(s):  
Bone Loss ◽  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Glenoid Bone Loss ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability

A lower Instability Severity Index score threshold may better predict recurrent anterior shoulder instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review

2021 ◽  
pp. jisakos-2020-000584
Author(s):  
Samuel I Rosenberg ◽  
Simon J Padanilam ◽  
Brandon Alec Pagni ◽  
Vehniah K Tjong ◽  
Ujash Sheth
Keyword(s):  
Shoulder Instability ◽  
Severity Index ◽  
Postoperative Recurrence ◽  
Bankart Repair ◽  
Anterior Shoulder Instability ◽  
Recurrence Rates ◽  
Recurrent Instability ◽  
Arthroscopic Bankart Repair ◽  
Score Threshold ◽  
Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability

ImportanceThe Instability Severity Index (ISI) score was developed to evaluate a patient’s risk of recurrent shoulder instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair. While patients with an ISI score of >6 were originally recommended to undergo an open procedure (ie, Latarjet) to minimise the risk of recurrence, recent literature has called into question the utility of the ISI score.ObjectiveThe purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate the efficacy of the ISI score as a tool to predict postoperative recurrence among patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart procedures.Evidence reviewArticles were included if study participants underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability and reported postoperative recurrence by ISI score at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Methodological study quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria. Pearson’s χ2 test was used to compare recurrence rates among patients above and below an ISI score of 4. Sensitivity, specificity, mean ISI scores and predictive value of individual factors of the ISI score were qualitatively reviewed.FindingsFour studies concluded the ISI score was effective in predicting postoperative recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair; however, these studies found threshold values lower than the previously proposed score of >6 may be more predictive of recurrent instability. A pooled analysis of these studies found patients with an ISI score <4 to experience significantly lower recurrence rates when compared with patients with a score ≥4 (6.3% vs 26.0%, p<0.0001). The mean ISI score among patients who experienced recurrent instability was also significantly higher than those who did not.Conclusions and relevanceThe ISI score as constructed by Balg and Boileau may have clinical utility to help predict recurrent anterior shoulder instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair. However, this review found the threshold values published in their seminal article to be insufficient predictors of recurrent instability. Instead, a lower score threshold may provide as a better predictor of failure. The paucity of level I and II investigations limits the strength of these conclusions, suggesting a need for further large, prospective studies evaluating the predictive ability of the ISI score.Level of evidenceIV.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document