Cargando…

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

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 instrumenta...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shanmugaraj, Ajaykumar, Sakha, Seaher, Tejpal, Tushar, Leroux, Timothy, Kirsch, Jacob M, Khan, Moin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8753542/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35082560
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15563316211030606
_version_ 1784632116390133760
author Shanmugaraj, Ajaykumar
Sakha, Seaher
Tejpal, Tushar
Leroux, Timothy
Kirsch, Jacob M
Khan, Moin
author_facet Shanmugaraj, Ajaykumar
Sakha, Seaher
Tejpal, Tushar
Leroux, Timothy
Kirsch, Jacob M
Khan, Moin
author_sort Shanmugaraj, Ajaykumar
collection PubMed
description 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.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8753542
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87535422022-01-25 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 Shanmugaraj, Ajaykumar Sakha, Seaher Tejpal, Tushar Leroux, Timothy Kirsch, Jacob M Khan, Moin HSS J Review Articles 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. SAGE Publications 2021-07-23 2022-02 /pmc/articles/PMC8753542/ /pubmed/35082560 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15563316211030606 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Review Articles
Shanmugaraj, Ajaykumar
Sakha, Seaher
Tejpal, Tushar
Leroux, Timothy
Kirsch, Jacob M
Khan, Moin
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
title 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
title_full 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
title_fullStr 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
title_full_unstemmed 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
title_short 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
title_sort 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
topic Review Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8753542/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35082560
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/15563316211030606
work_keys_str_mv AT shanmugarajajaykumar revisionarthroscopicbankartrepairforanteriorshoulderinstabilityafterafailedarthroscopicsofttissuerepairyieldscomparablefailureratestoprimarybankartrepairasystematicreview
AT sakhaseaher revisionarthroscopicbankartrepairforanteriorshoulderinstabilityafterafailedarthroscopicsofttissuerepairyieldscomparablefailureratestoprimarybankartrepairasystematicreview
AT tejpaltushar revisionarthroscopicbankartrepairforanteriorshoulderinstabilityafterafailedarthroscopicsofttissuerepairyieldscomparablefailureratestoprimarybankartrepairasystematicreview
AT lerouxtimothy revisionarthroscopicbankartrepairforanteriorshoulderinstabilityafterafailedarthroscopicsofttissuerepairyieldscomparablefailureratestoprimarybankartrepairasystematicreview
AT kirschjacobm revisionarthroscopicbankartrepairforanteriorshoulderinstabilityafterafailedarthroscopicsofttissuerepairyieldscomparablefailureratestoprimarybankartrepairasystematicreview
AT khanmoin revisionarthroscopicbankartrepairforanteriorshoulderinstabilityafterafailedarthroscopicsofttissuerepairyieldscomparablefailureratestoprimarybankartrepairasystematicreview