Determining the Minimal Clinically Important Difference on the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score in Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Shoulder Instability

Background: The literature on minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) for patient-reported outcome measures assessing shoulder instability is limited, with none addressing the Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (OSIS). The OSIS was developed to provide a standardized method for assessing shoulder function after surgery for shoulder instability, and previous studies have demonstrated its high reliability, low interrater variability, and ease of administration. Purpose: To identify the MCID for the OSIS after arthroscopic Bankart repair for recurrent shoulder instability. Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. Methods: A longitudinally maintained institutional registry was queried for patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair from 2010 to 2016 for recurrent shoulder instability secondary to a Bankart lesion without significant glenoid bone loss. The OSIS was completed preoperatively and at 1 year postoperatively. Patients were categorized into “expectations met” and “expectations unmet” groups using a questionnaire evaluating expectation fulfilment. The MCID of the OSIS at 1 year was calculated using 3 anchor-based approaches and a distribution-based approach. The 3 anchor-based approaches comprised (1) simple linear regression analysis, (2) receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, and (3) calculation of mean differences in change for the OSIS between the “expectations met” and “expectations unmet” groups. Results: The study cohort comprised 68 men and 11 women aged 29.9 ± 12.7 years (mean ± SD). Duration of follow-up for all patients exceeded 1 year. The MCIDs for the OSIS based on the 4 calculation approaches yielded a narrow range of values, ranging from 7.7 to 8.5 for the anchor-based methods and 8.6 for the distribution-based method. Conclusion: Study results indicated that patients with recurrent shoulder instability without significant bone loss who undergo primary arthroscopic Bankart repair and have at least 8.6 points of improvement on their OSIS experience a clinically significant change at 1 year postoperatively.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes

Background: In athletes with recurrent shoulder instability, arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the open Latarjet procedure (OL) are commonly indicated to restore stability and allow them to return to play (RTP). Purpose: To compare the outcomes of ABR and OL in athletes with recurrent shoulder instability. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients with recurrent shoulder instability who underwent ABR and OL and had a minimum 24-month follow-up. Indications for OL over ABR in this population were those considered at high risk for recurrence, including patients with glenohumeral bone loss. The patients were pair-matched in a 1:1 ratio (OL and ABR) by age, sex, sport, and level of preoperative play. We evaluated the rate, level, and timing of RTP, and the Shoulder Instability–Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score between procedures. Additionally we compared the recurrence rate, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Rowe score, satisfaction, and whether patients would undergo the same surgery again. Results: Participants included 62 athletes who underwent ABR and 62 who underwent OL, with a mean follow-up of 47.7 months. There was no significant difference between ABR and OL in rate of RTP, return to preinjury level, time to return, SIRSI score, VAS score, SSV, or patient satisfaction. OL resulted in a significantly lower recurrence rate (1.6% vs 16.1% for ABR; P = .009) and a significantly higher Rowe score (mean ± SD, 90.5 ± 12.2 vs 82.2 ± 20.8 for ABR; P = .008). In collision athletes, there was no significant difference between ABR and OL regarding RTP rate (89.1% vs 94.5%; P = .489) or SIRSI score (70.4 ± 24.8 vs 73.8 ± 19.6; P = .426), but OL resulted in a lower recurrence rate (14.5% vs 1.8%; P = .031). Conclusion: ABR and OL resulted in excellent clinical outcomes, with high rates of RTP in athletes. However, lower recurrence rates were seen with OL.

Open Capsulorrhaphy for Recurrent Multidirectional Instability of the Shoulder

Background: The management of multidirectional instability (MDI) of the shoulder remains challenging, especially in athletes who participate in sports and may require multiple surgical procedures to achieve shoulder stabilization. Open or arthroscopic procedures can be performed to address shoulder MDI. Indications: Open capsulorrhaphy is preferred in patients with underlying tissue hyperlaxity and who had 1 or more, previously failed, arthroscopic shoulder stabilization procedures. Technique Description: With the patient in the beach-chair position (45°), tissue dissection is performed to the level of subscapularis tendon via the deltopectoral approach. The subscapularis tenotomy is performed in an L-shaped fashion, and the subscapularis tendon is tagged with multiple sutures and mobilized. Careful separation of the subscapularis tendon from the underlying capsular tissue is critical. Capsulotomy is performed, consisting of a vertical limb and an inferior limb that extends to the 5 o’clock position on the humeral neck (right shoulder). After evaluating the integrity of the labrum, the capsule is shifted superiorly and laterally, and repaired using 4 to 5 suture anchors. The redundant capsule is excised, and the subscapularis tendon is repaired in a side-to-side fashion, augmented by transosseous equivalent repair using the capsular sutures. Results: Adequate shoulder stabilization was achieved following open capsulorrhaphy in a young female athlete with tissue hyperlaxity and history of a previously failed arthroscopic soft tissue stabilization surgery of the shoulder. The athlete returned to sport at 6 months postoperatively and did not experience recurrent shoulder instability episodes at midterm follow-up. Discussion/Conclusion: Based on the existing literature, 82% to 97% of patients who underwent open capsulorrhaphy for MDI had no recurrent shoulder instability episodes at midterm follow-up. One study reported 64% return-to-sport rate following open capsulorrhaphy in 15 adolescent athletes with Ehlers-Danlos syndrome, but more research is necessary to better define the indications and outcomes of this procedure in physically active patients.