Search

Background: The influence of bony morphology on the development of posterior shoulder instability is not well known., Purpose: To determine if acromial morphology, as measured on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), is associated with posterior or anterior shoulder instability., Design: Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: MRI measurements of posterior acromial coverage (PAC), posterior acromial height (PAH), posterior acromial tilt (PAT), and anterior acromial coverage (AAC) were completed for 3 separate matched groups who underwent surgical intervention: posterior instability, anterior instability, and a comparison group of patients who underwent arthroscopic surgery for snapping scapula. Inclusion criteria were patients with recurrent instability <40 years of age without multidirectional instability, glenoid bone loss >13.5%, or glenoid retroversion >10%., Results: Overall, 37 patients were included in each group. PAC was significantly less in the posterior instability group than in the anterior instability and comparison groups (68.3° vs 88.7° vs 81.7°; P < .001). PAH was significantly greater in the posterior group than in the anterior instability group (11.0 mm vs -0.1 mm; P < .001) and comparison group (0.7 mm; P < .001). There was no difference between the posterior and anterior groups in terms of PAT or AAC ( P = .45 and P = .05, respectively). PAT was significantly smaller in the posterior instability group than the comparison group (55.2° vs 62.2°; P = .026). The anterior and comparison groups were not significantly different in PAH or PAT ( P = .874 and P = .067, respectively) but were significantly different in AAC ( P = .026)., Conclusion: A higher and flatter posterior acromion, as measured on preoperative MRI, appears to be associated with patients who require arthroscopic capsulolabral repair due to posterior shoulder instability. This information may help clinicians to both diagnose and predict the need for operative intervention for patients with posterior labral tears., Competing Interests: One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: J.W.A. has received research support from Arthrex and DJO and hospitality payments from Mid-Atlantic Surgical Systems and Smith & Nephew. P.-C.N. has received support for education from Arthrex. M.T.P. has received consulting fees and royalties from Arthrex, consulting fees and honoraria from Joint Restoration Foundation Inc, consulting fees from Zimmer Biomet Holdings, honoraria from Flexion Therapeutics Inc, and royalties or license from Arthrosurface Inc and Anika Therapeutics. J.P.B. has received royalties and consulting fees from Arthrex and DJO. P.J.M. has received consulting fees and royalties from Arthrex. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.

Treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability has gained significant interest in recent years and involves evaluation of both glenoid and humeral sided bone loss. Decision making is more complex in patients with significant humeral or glenoid bone defects or in those who underwent previous instability surgery. Appropriate assessment of the glenoid track is necessary as "off track" lesions typically require treatments beyond arthroscopic labral repair alone. In those with significant humeral or glenoid sided bone loss, the authors recommend three-dimensional computed tomography in addition to magnetic resonance imaging for accurate evaluation. The Glenoid Track Instability Management Score is a useful guide to help direct treatment by using the glenoid track as well as other known risk factors for recurrence. In circumstances with significant glenoid bone loss, typically over 20%, a coracoid transfer such as the Latarjet is recommended. In patients that previously failed a coracoid transfer, the authors recommend a distal tibia allograft; however, distal clavicle and iliac crest autograft have also been reported to have high success rates. In those with large Hill-Sachs lesions, remplissage or bone grafting are recommended. An estimation of the postoperative glenoid track after glenoid bone augmentation is required for appropriate Hill-Sachs lesion treatment. The authors typically recommend against revision instability surgical treatment with arthroscopic repair alone., (Copyright © 2022 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) lesions can occur in recurrent anterior shoulder instability, which may lead to the labrum scarring medially to the glenoid. ALPSA lesions have also been associated with greater preoperative dislocations, larger Hill-Sachs lesions, and greater degrees of glenoid bone loss. Therefore, patients with these lesions have historically had a higher failure rate after repair, with nearly double the recurrent instability rate compared with those undergoing standard arthroscopic Bankart repair., Purpose: To compare minimum 2-year outcomes of arthroscopic mobilization and anatomic repair of ALPSA lesions with those after standard arthroscopic Bankart repair., Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: Consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic repair of ALPSA lesions were matched in a 1-to-3 fashion to patients who underwent standard Bankart repair by age, sex, number of previous ipsilateral shoulder instability surgical procedures, and number of anchors used. Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores were compared preoperatively and postoperatively (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES]; 12-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-12] Physical Component Summary [PCS]; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation [SANE]; shortened version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand; and satisfaction). Recurrent instability, on- versus off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, and reoperation rates were analyzed., Results: A total of 100 shoulders (25 ALPSA and 75 Bankart) with an overall mean age of 25.7 years were evaluated. Patients in the ALPSA group demonstrated significant improvements in the ASES (preoperative, 74.8; postoperative, 89.7; P = .041) and SF-12 PCS (preoperative, 46.9; postoperative, 53.4; P = .021) scores but not the SANE score (preoperative, 65.2; postoperative, 75.3; P = .311). Patients in the Bankart group had significant improvements in all outcome scores at final follow-up: ASES (preoperative, 67.1; postoperative, 90.3), SANE (preoperative, 58.0; postoperative, 85.7), and SF-12 PCS (preoperative, 45.3; postoperative, 52.9) (all P < .001). There were no significant differences in PRO scores between the groups preoperatively or postoperatively ( P > .05). The median satisfaction for the ALPSA group was 10 of 10 and for the Bankart group it was 9 of 10 ( P = .094). There was a significantly higher rate of recurrent dislocation in the ALPSA group (8/25 [32.0%]) compared with the Bankart group (10/75 [13.3%]) ( P = .040). Additionally, 5 patients (20.0%) in the ALPSA group underwent revision surgery at a mean of 5.6 years, and 8 patients (10.7%) in the Bankart group underwent revision surgery at a mean of 4.4 years ( P = .311)., Conclusion: Despite improvements in the recognition of and surgical techniques for ALPSA lesions, they still lead to significantly higher postoperative dislocation rates; however, no differences in PRO scores were found. These findings highlight the importance of early surgical interventions in anterior shoulder instability with the hope of lessening recurrent instability and the risk of developing an ALPSA lesion, as well as careful assessment of the quality of soft tissues and other risk factors for recurrence when considering what type of shoulder stabilization procedure to perform.

Glenohumeral arthritis is a challenging problem, especially in the young, active patient. After nonoperative treatment, including activity modification, anti-inflammatory medications, physical therapy, and injections, is exhausted, surgical treatment ranging from simple debridement to arthroplasty is commonly offered. Given concerns regarding arthroplasty implant longevity, there is an interest in joint-preserving procedures. In this difficult population, the authors recommend a systematic, inclusive approach to the array of pathologies encountered in the setting of early glenohumeral arthritis: the Comprehensive Arthroscopic Management (CAM) procedure. CAM consists of the combination of arthroscopy, glenohumeral chondroplasty, synovectomy, loose body removal, microfracture, capsular release, humeral osteoplasty, axillary nerve neurolysis, subacromial decompression, and biceps tenodesis. Key perioperative care includes the use of regional nerve blocks to allow immediate physical therapy with the goal of restoring range of motion by 4 to 6 weeks with strengthening beginning at 6 to 12 weeks and return to full activities at 4 to 6 months. Although this is still considered a bridging procedure, the literature has reported 92% survival at 1 year, 85% survival at 2 years, 77% survival at 5 years, and 63% survival at 10 years. Predictors of failure of the CAM procedure include joint space <2 mm, flattening of the humeral head, and abnormal posterior glenoid morphology. Patient selection and education is therefore essential for optimizing outcomes., (Copyright © 2022 Arthroscopy Association of North America. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The pathoanatomy of glenoid labral articular disruption (GLAD) lesions has been inconsistently and poorly defined in the literature., Purpose/hypothesis: The purpose was to characterize GLAD lesions as they pertain to the pathoanatomy of labrum, cartilage, and bony structures, and to correlate findings with patient-reported outcomes (PROs). We hypothesized that greater degrees of bony and cartilaginous involvement would correlate with worse outcomes., Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4., Methods: All patients with a diagnosis of a GLAD lesion or a reverse GLAD (RGLAD) lesion at the time of diagnostic arthroscopy (January 2006-February 2019) were included in this study. Patients with ≥13.5% bone loss or previous ipsilateral shoulder surgery were excluded. Patient charts and operative reports/photos were used to identify the location of injury, extent of injury (labral, chondral, and bony), associated injuries, demographic factors, and treatment performed. Three injury patterns were identified: small (type 1), with no chondral defect after labral repair; large (type 2), with residual chondral defect after labral repair; and bony (type 3), with associated glenoid bone loss amenable to labral repair. Characterizations were cross-referenced to PROs at a mean follow-up of 5.5 years (range, 2.6-10.5 years): American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, shortened version of Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand, and patient satisfaction., Results: In total, 50 patients were included, with 40 having GLAD and 10 having RGLAD lesions (mean age, 34.7 and 33.2 years, respectively). There were 14 (35%) type 1, 22 (55%) type 2, and 4 (10%) type 3 GLAD injuries. All PROs improved without any differences in the 3 subgroups postoperatively (ASES, 95.1 vs 91.3 vs 98.8, type 1, 2, and 3, respectively). RGLAD injuries were majority type 2 (7/10; 70%) with the remainder being type 1 (3/10; 30%)., Conclusion: With GLAD and RGLAD injuries, 3 distinct injury patterns can be observed correlating with the presence/absence of chondral loss after labral repair or the presence of associated bone loss. This descriptive characterization can facilitate arthroscopic treatment decisions. Future large studies are needed to determine if this is prognostic in nature.

Purpose: To report clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients undergoing revision surgery after diagnosis of anchor-induced arthropathy., Methods: Patients who underwent revision arthroscopic shoulder surgery and were diagnosed with post-instability glenohumeral arthropathy performed from January 2006 to May 2018 were included in the current study. Patients were excluded if they underwent prior open shoulder procedures, if glenoid bone loss was present, or if prerevision imaging and records were incomplete or not available. Data included initial diagnosis and index procedure performed, presenting arthropathy symptoms including duration, exam findings before revision surgery, and surgical intervention. PROMs were prospectively collected before surgery and at minimum 2-year follow-up., Results: Fourteen patients were included with a mean (± standard deviation) age at presentation of 35.2 ± 12.1 years (range 16 to 59). The follow-up rate was 86%, with a mean follow-up of 3.8 years (range 1.1 to 10.6). Mean time to development of arthropathy symptoms was 48.2 months (range <1 month to 13.8 years), all presenting with pain and decreased range of motion on exam. At time of revision surgery, all patients underwent either open or arthroscopic removal of previous implants, including anchors and suture material. Six patients underwent additional revision stabilization procedures, 1 underwent total shoulder arthroplasty, and 7 underwent arthroscopic intraarticular debridement, capsular release, and chondroplasty with or without microfracture. Pain significantly improved in 79% of patients (P = .05). Significant improvements in all PROMs were observed, including 12-item Short Form (43.8 to 54.8, P < .01); Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, shortened version (31.8 to 8.4, P < .01); Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (47.0 to 84.5, P < .05); and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (61.6 to 92.1, P < .01). Average external rotation significantly improved, from 31° ± 22° to 52° ± 24° (P = .02)., Conclusion: Rapid intervention after diagnosis, through either revision arthroscopic or open debridement and stabilization, can lead to significant improvement in range of motion, pain, and overall patient function and satisfaction., Level of Evidence: IV, retrospective case series., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To describe the key clinical, imaging, and arthroscopic characteristics of anchor arthropathy after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization procedures and, secondarily, to define risk factors for the development of anchor-induced arthropathy., Methods: A total of 23 patients who underwent revision arthroscopic shoulder surgery and were diagnosed with glenohumeral arthropathy were retrospectively identified from prospectively collected data registries between January 2000 and May 2018. Data included initial diagnosis and index procedure performed, presenting arthropathy symptoms including duration, and examination findings before revision surgery. Pre-revision imaging was used to assess presence of glenohumeral osteoarthritis and chondromalacia, anchors/sutures, loose bodies, and labral pathology. The same parameters were recorded intraoperatively during revision surgery. Descriptive statistics were performed for demographic data and means with standard deviations were calculated for continuous data. A McNemar-Bowker test was used to analyze marginal homogeneity between preoperative imaging and intraoperative findings., Results: Mean age at presentation was 33.4 ± 11.7 years (range 16-59, 17 male patients; 6 female patients). More than one half (13/23) developed symptoms within 10 months after index arthroscopic procedure (mean 32.2 ± 59.9 months, range <1 to 165.2 months) with 87% presenting with pain and 100% presenting with loss of motion on examination. Plain radiographs demonstrated humeral osteoarthritis in 57% (13/23) of patients, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) revealed recurrent labral pathology in 19 of 23 (83%) patients, potential proud implants in 12 of 23 (52%), and loose bodies in 12 of 23 (52%). Intraoperatively, all had evidence of osteoarthritis; 22 of 23 (96%) had prominent implants. Humeral head chondromalacia was present in 21 of 23 patients (91%), the majority of which was linear stripe wear, and 6 of 23 (26%) had severe global glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Statistical analysis revealed a 54.5% (95% confidence interval 0.327-0.749) sensitivity of MRI identification of proud implants with a specificity of 100% (95% confidence interval 0.055-1). The ability of MRI to accurately assess chondromalacia of the humeral head (P = .342) or glenoid (P = .685) was not statistically significant., Conclusions: Anchor arthropathy is characterized by symptoms of pain and stiffness on examination and in many cases develops early after stabilization surgery (<10 months). Implants were implicated in the majority of cases of humeral head chondromalacia. MRI scans may produce false-negative identification of proud implants and can be a poor predictor of the severity of chondromalacia and intra-articular pathology; thus, a high index of clinical suspicion is necessary in patients with motion loss and pain postoperatively., Level of Evidence: Level IV, case series., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Background: Although critical bone loss for anterior instability is well defined, a clinically significant threshold of posterior bone loss has not been elucidated., Hypothesis: Patients with failed arthroscopic posterior shoulder capsulolabral repair will have increased posterior glenoid bone loss with a defined critical threshold., Study Design: Case control study; Level of evidence, 3., Methods: Athletes older than 18 years with unidirectional posterior instability treated with arthroscopic repair were evaluated at 2-year minimum follow-up. Failure was defined as revision surgery, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score of <60, or subjective stability score of >5. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) measurements from 19 patients with failed arthroscopic posterior shoulder capsulolabral repair were compared with 56 patients whose surgery was successful. MRI measures included glenoid version, labral version, glenoid width, labral width, percentage bone loss using the circle technique, labral height, percent subluxation, and recently described measures of defect slope, bone loss angle, and defect length. The P value threshold was set at .05, and a multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed for evaluation of risk of surgical failure., Results: Smaller glenoid width and greater percentage glenoid bone loss (25.5 ± 0.68 mm vs 28.8 ± 0.47 mm; P < .001; 6.8% ± 0.64% vs 4.6% ± 0.43%; P = .008) were seen in those patients with failed surgery. There was no difference in glenoid version or other measurements between the failures and nonfailures. A cutoff of 11% glenoid bone loss resulted in a 10.4 times statistically higher surgical failure rate, while a 15% bone loss resulted in a 24.4 times statistically higher failure rate. Six patients had >11% bone loss (range, 11.1 to 19.3) and 1 patient had >15% bone loss., Conclusion: Risk factors for failure of arthroscopic posterior shoulder capsulolabral repair include smaller glenoid bone width and greater percentage of glenoid bone loss. A threshold of 11% posterior glenoid bone loss implicated a 10 times higher surgical failure rate, while a threshold of 15% led to a 25 times higher surgical failure rate. Surgical failure of posterior capsulolabral repair, however, is relatively rare as it is an overall successful intervention.

Hypothesis: The aims of this study were to determine patient satisfaction and to identify predictors of satisfaction after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). We hypothesized that the majority of patients would be satisfied after RSA and that patients with worse preoperative mental and physical health would be less satisfied., Methods: Satisfaction was assessed 2 years after primary RSA with domains for pain, work, activities, quality of life, and overall satisfaction. Preoperative and postoperative patient-reported factors were measured using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder score, Shoulder Activity Scale score, Short Form 12 (SF-12) mental and physical component summary scores, and visual analog scale (VAS) pain, fatigue, and general health scores. Pearson correlations were used to determine the relationship between patient-reported factors and satisfaction. Multivariate regression was performed to control for potential confounding variables., Results: A total of 161 patients were evaluated at 2 years postoperatively. Patients were "very satisfied" in an average of 3.3 of the 5 domains. Improvements in ASES, Shoulder Activity Scale, VAS pain, and SF-12 physical component summary scores were associated with higher satisfaction, with correlation coefficients ranging from 0.27 to 0.49. On multivariate analysis, patients with higher preoperative ASES scores were less satisfied after surgery (P = .005). In addition, patients with worse VAS fatigue (P = .011) and SF-12 mental (P = .034) and physical (0.011) component summary scores preoperatively had lower satisfaction., Conclusion: Improvements in pain and outcome scores are associated with increased satisfaction. Patients with higher shoulder function, worse physical health, and worse mental health prior to surgery are more likely to have lower satisfaction after RSA., (Copyright © 2019 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)