Cargando…

Paper 71: Remplissage reduces the risk of postoperative recurrent instability versus Bankart repair alone: Medium-term results from a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: Based on findings from our multi-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing arthroscopic Bankart repair with/without remplissage for the treatment of traumatic recurrent shoulder instability there is a greater risk of postoperative recurrent instability in patients with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: MacDonald, Peter, McRae, Sheila, Lapner, Peter, Old, Jason, Marsh, Jon, Dubberley, James, Stranges, Gregory, Woodmass, Jarret, Kamikovski, Ivan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9339824/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967121S00634
_version_ 1784760256703758336
author MacDonald, Peter
McRae, Sheila
Lapner, Peter
Old, Jason
Marsh, Jon
Dubberley, James
Stranges, Gregory
Woodmass, Jarret
Kamikovski, Ivan
author_facet MacDonald, Peter
McRae, Sheila
Lapner, Peter
Old, Jason
Marsh, Jon
Dubberley, James
Stranges, Gregory
Woodmass, Jarret
Kamikovski, Ivan
author_sort MacDonald, Peter
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVES: Based on findings from our multi-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing arthroscopic Bankart repair with/without remplissage for the treatment of traumatic recurrent shoulder instability there is a greater risk of postoperative recurrent instability in patients without a remplissage at two years follow-up. The objective of the current study is to determine whether our short-term findings change with medium-term follow-up. METHODS: This was a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial with two 1:1 parallel groups conducted at two sites. Patients were randomized intra-operatively to an arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage (REMP) or isolated Bankart repair (NO REMP) between 2011 and 2017. Inclusion criteria were patients 14 years or older diagnosed with traumatic anterior shoulder instability with a glenoid defect >15% and the presence of a Hill-Sachs defect (of any size). Patients were contacted by telephone (Spring 2020) and asked standardized questions to determine whether any additional information regarding subluxations, dislocation or additional surgery occurred since their two-year follow-up. “Recurrent instability” was defined as patient-reported dislocation, or two or more episodes of subluxation. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed to assess survival distribution between groups. For the time factor in the survival analysis, the number of months from time of surgery to outcome (either failure or no failure) was based on the time of the long-term follow-up phone call, or from the time of last reported outcome based on clinical or study follow-ups, whichever was the greatest. These were conducted for: 1) recurrent instability and 2) dislocations. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were also calculated. RESULTS: Study groups were similar at baseline with respect to age, gender and BMI. Fifty-four patients were randomized to each study group at the time of the original study. , with 52 REMP and 50 NO REMP included in the analyses up to 24-months post-operative. Of those, 36 from each group were available for mid-term follow-up. Mean months (mean) from surgery to last follow-up was 53.8 for REMP and 49.3 for NO REMP. The rate of postoperative recurrent instability at medium term follow-up was 10% (5/52) in the REMP group at an average of 24 months and 30% (15/50) in NO REMP at an average of 19.5 months (p=0.010). The odds ratio of recurrent instability in the NO REMP group relative to the REMP group was 4.029 (1.337-12.135; p=0.010) and the survival curve was significantly different favouring REMP (χ(2) = 6.958, P=0.008; Figure 1). With respect to dislocations only, the odds ratio in the NO REMP group relative to REMP was 3.385 (0.999-11.463; p=0.041) and the survival curve was also significantly different favouring the REMP (χ(2) = 4.412, p=0.036; Figure 2). CONCLUSIONS: At medium-term follow-up, patients undergoing a Bankart repair with remplissage have a better rate of survival than those with an isolated Bankart repair.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9339824
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-93398242022-08-02 Paper 71: Remplissage reduces the risk of postoperative recurrent instability versus Bankart repair alone: Medium-term results from a randomized controlled trial MacDonald, Peter McRae, Sheila Lapner, Peter Old, Jason Marsh, Jon Dubberley, James Stranges, Gregory Woodmass, Jarret Kamikovski, Ivan Orthop J Sports Med Article OBJECTIVES: Based on findings from our multi-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing arthroscopic Bankart repair with/without remplissage for the treatment of traumatic recurrent shoulder instability there is a greater risk of postoperative recurrent instability in patients without a remplissage at two years follow-up. The objective of the current study is to determine whether our short-term findings change with medium-term follow-up. METHODS: This was a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial with two 1:1 parallel groups conducted at two sites. Patients were randomized intra-operatively to an arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage (REMP) or isolated Bankart repair (NO REMP) between 2011 and 2017. Inclusion criteria were patients 14 years or older diagnosed with traumatic anterior shoulder instability with a glenoid defect >15% and the presence of a Hill-Sachs defect (of any size). Patients were contacted by telephone (Spring 2020) and asked standardized questions to determine whether any additional information regarding subluxations, dislocation or additional surgery occurred since their two-year follow-up. “Recurrent instability” was defined as patient-reported dislocation, or two or more episodes of subluxation. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed to assess survival distribution between groups. For the time factor in the survival analysis, the number of months from time of surgery to outcome (either failure or no failure) was based on the time of the long-term follow-up phone call, or from the time of last reported outcome based on clinical or study follow-ups, whichever was the greatest. These were conducted for: 1) recurrent instability and 2) dislocations. Odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals were also calculated. RESULTS: Study groups were similar at baseline with respect to age, gender and BMI. Fifty-four patients were randomized to each study group at the time of the original study. , with 52 REMP and 50 NO REMP included in the analyses up to 24-months post-operative. Of those, 36 from each group were available for mid-term follow-up. Mean months (mean) from surgery to last follow-up was 53.8 for REMP and 49.3 for NO REMP. The rate of postoperative recurrent instability at medium term follow-up was 10% (5/52) in the REMP group at an average of 24 months and 30% (15/50) in NO REMP at an average of 19.5 months (p=0.010). The odds ratio of recurrent instability in the NO REMP group relative to the REMP group was 4.029 (1.337-12.135; p=0.010) and the survival curve was significantly different favouring REMP (χ(2) = 6.958, P=0.008; Figure 1). With respect to dislocations only, the odds ratio in the NO REMP group relative to REMP was 3.385 (0.999-11.463; p=0.041) and the survival curve was also significantly different favouring the REMP (χ(2) = 4.412, p=0.036; Figure 2). CONCLUSIONS: At medium-term follow-up, patients undergoing a Bankart repair with remplissage have a better rate of survival than those with an isolated Bankart repair. SAGE Publications 2022-07-28 /pmc/articles/PMC9339824/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967121S00634 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This open-access article is published and distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution - NonCommercial - No Derivatives License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/), which permits the noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction of the article in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. You may not alter, transform, or build upon this article without the permission of the Author(s). For article reuse guidelines, please visit SAGE’s website at http://www.sagepub.com/journals-permissions.
spellingShingle Article
MacDonald, Peter
McRae, Sheila
Lapner, Peter
Old, Jason
Marsh, Jon
Dubberley, James
Stranges, Gregory
Woodmass, Jarret
Kamikovski, Ivan
Paper 71: Remplissage reduces the risk of postoperative recurrent instability versus Bankart repair alone: Medium-term results from a randomized controlled trial
title Paper 71: Remplissage reduces the risk of postoperative recurrent instability versus Bankart repair alone: Medium-term results from a randomized controlled trial
title_full Paper 71: Remplissage reduces the risk of postoperative recurrent instability versus Bankart repair alone: Medium-term results from a randomized controlled trial
title_fullStr Paper 71: Remplissage reduces the risk of postoperative recurrent instability versus Bankart repair alone: Medium-term results from a randomized controlled trial
title_full_unstemmed Paper 71: Remplissage reduces the risk of postoperative recurrent instability versus Bankart repair alone: Medium-term results from a randomized controlled trial
title_short Paper 71: Remplissage reduces the risk of postoperative recurrent instability versus Bankart repair alone: Medium-term results from a randomized controlled trial
title_sort paper 71: remplissage reduces the risk of postoperative recurrent instability versus bankart repair alone: medium-term results from a randomized controlled trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9339824/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967121S00634
work_keys_str_mv AT macdonaldpeter paper71remplissagereducestheriskofpostoperativerecurrentinstabilityversusbankartrepairalonemediumtermresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT mcraesheila paper71remplissagereducestheriskofpostoperativerecurrentinstabilityversusbankartrepairalonemediumtermresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT lapnerpeter paper71remplissagereducestheriskofpostoperativerecurrentinstabilityversusbankartrepairalonemediumtermresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT oldjason paper71remplissagereducestheriskofpostoperativerecurrentinstabilityversusbankartrepairalonemediumtermresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT marshjon paper71remplissagereducestheriskofpostoperativerecurrentinstabilityversusbankartrepairalonemediumtermresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT dubberleyjames paper71remplissagereducestheriskofpostoperativerecurrentinstabilityversusbankartrepairalonemediumtermresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT strangesgregory paper71remplissagereducestheriskofpostoperativerecurrentinstabilityversusbankartrepairalonemediumtermresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT woodmassjarret paper71remplissagereducestheriskofpostoperativerecurrentinstabilityversusbankartrepairalonemediumtermresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial
AT kamikovskiivan paper71remplissagereducestheriskofpostoperativerecurrentinstabilityversusbankartrepairalonemediumtermresultsfromarandomizedcontrolledtrial