Studies on Bankart Repair for Anterior Shoulder Instability Show Poor Reporting of Data and Reflect Low Level of Evidence: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To assess the quality and level of evidence of studies reporting on Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability. METHODS: A search was performed using the PubMed/Medline database for all studies that reported clinical outcomes on Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability. The search term "Bankart repair" with all results were analyzed via strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Two independent investigators scored each included study based on the 10 criteria of the Modified Coleman Methodology Score (CMS) out of 100 and gave each study a score out of 25 based on the Anterior Shoulder Instability (ASI) Methodology criteria. RESULTS: Two hundred sixty-six studies were included in the analysis and encompassed a total of 19,156 patients and 19,317 surgical procedures for Bankart repair for shoulder instability. Overall, 81.6% of studies were Level III or IV evidence. The mean CMS score for the studies was 55.3 out of 100, and the mean ASI Methodology score for the studies was 12.1 out of 25. Weaknesses in the studies were identified in sample size, description of preoperative investigations and diagnoses, reporting of mean glenoid bone loss, nonsubjective clinical outcome reporting, and description of associated pathologies. CONCLUSIONS: A large proportion of studies reporting the clinical outcomes of Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability are of low methodological quality and have a low level of evidence. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study emphasizes need for greater reporting of many variables such as body mass index, mean glenoid bone loss, and patient-reported outcomes and provides a framework for future studies reporting.

Young Collision Athletes Have High Rate of Return to Play and Good Clinical Outcomes Following Open Latarjet Procedure.

PURPOSE: To evaluate return to play (RTP), clinical outcomes, and recurrence rates in collision athletes 20 years of age and younger who underwent open Latarjet for anterior shoulder instability. METHODS: A retrospective review of collision athletes 20 years of age and younger, who underwent an open Latarjet procedure by a single surgeon between the years of 2010-2020 was carried out. Inclusion criteria were 1) collision athlete, 2) underwent open Latarjet procedure, 3) 16-20 years old, and 4) minimum 24-month follow-up. Exclusion criteria were 1) other pathology of the ipsilateral shoulder and 2) noncollision athlete. Rate of RTP, time to RTP, rate of return to preinjury level, the Shoulder Instability Return to Sport after Injury score (SIRSI) score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, and recurrence events were recorded. Quantitative statistical analysis was carried out. RESULTS: The study included 105 male collision athletes with a mean age of 18.6 ± 1.0 years (range: 17-20). The mean follow-up for patients was 36 ± 26.2 months. A total of 93 (88.6%) RTP at a mean time of 6.3 ± 2.2 months, with 73 (69.5%) returning to their preinjury level of participation. The mean SIRSI score was 69.2 ± 21.8, the mean VAS score was 2.3 ± 2.1, and the mean SSV score was 84.1 ± 16.8. Five patients (4.8%) redislocated their shoulder, with 4 of these requiring a further surgery (3.8%). Two patients (1.9%) reported incidents of subluxation. CONCLUSIONS: The open Latarjet procedure in young collision athletes results in high rates of RTP, excellent functional outcomes and low recurrence rates at mid-term follow-up. Additionally, complication rates are low in this cohort. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

Glenohumeral morphological predictors of recurrent shoulder instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate glenohumeral morphological features on a magnetic resonance arthrogram (MRA) to determine risk factors for recurrence of anterior shoulder instability following arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR). METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent ABR between 2012 and 2017 was performed to identify patients who had recurrence of instability following stabilisation (Group 1). These were pair-matched in a 2:1 ratio for age, gender and sport with a control (Group 2) who underwent ABR without recurrence. Preoperative MRAs were evaluated for risk factors for recurrence, with glenoid bone loss and Hill-Sachs lesions also measured. Multilinear and multilogistic regression models were used to evaluate factors affecting recurrence. RESULTS: Overall, 72 patients were included in this study, including 48 patients without recurrence and 24 patients with recurrent instability. There was a significant difference between the two groups in mean glenoid bone loss (Group 1: 7.3% vs. Group 2: 5.7%, p < 0.0001) and the rate of off-track Hill-Sachs lesions (Group 1: 20.8% vs. Group 2: 0%, p = 0.0003). Of the variables analysed in logistic regression, increased glenoid anteversion (p = 0.02), acromioclavicular (AC) degeneration (p = 0.03) and increased Hill-Sachs width were associated with increased risk of failure. Increased chondral version (p = 0.01) and humeral head diameter in the anteriorposterior view were found to be protective and associated with a greater likelihood of success. CONCLUSION: Glenoid anteversion was a risk factor for recurrent instability, whereas increased chondral version and humeral head diameter were associated with higher rates of success following ABR. Glenoid bone loss, presence of an off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, increased Hill-Sachs width and AC degeneration were also associated with failure. These findings should be used by surgeons to stratify risk for recurrence following ABR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair Results in Improved Clinical Outcomes and Low Revision Rates at 10-Year Follow-Up: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To study the literature to evaluate the functional outcomes, radiologic outcomes, and revision rates following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) at a minimum of 10-years follow-up. METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed a literature search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Only studies reporting on outcomes of ARCR with a minimum 10-year follow-up were considered for inclusion. Patient demographics, satisfaction, and clinical, radiologic, and surgical outcomes were evaluated. RESULTS: Our search found 9 studies including 455 shoulders in 448 patients (51.6% male patients), with age at time of surgery ranging from 45 to 90 years met our inclusion criteria. Overall follow-up ranged from 10 to 18 years. At final follow-up, the ranges of American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeons, age- and sex-adjusted Constant-Morley, and University of California Los Angeles scores were reported in 5, 6, and 3 studies, respectively, as 79.4 to 93.2, 73.2 to 94, and 26.5 to 33, respectively. Of the included studies, satisfaction rates varied in 6 studies from 85.7% to 100% in the long-term. Additionally, the overall radiologic retear rate ranged from 9.5% to 63.2%. The overall surgical revision rates ranged in 6 studies from 3.8% to 15.4%, with from 0% to 6.7% requiring revision ARCR and from 1.0% to 3.6% requiring revision subacromial decompression in 6 and 2 studies, respectively, at minimum 10-years' follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found that ARCR results in high rates of patient satisfaction, satisfactory clinical outcomes with respect to patient-reported functional outcomes and range of motion, and low revision rates at minimum 10-years' follow-up. However, an overall 30% retear rate was observed in asymptomatic patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

Anterior Shoulder Instability Part III-Revision Surgery, Rehabilitation and Return to Play, and Clinical Follow-Up-An International Consensus Statement.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a modified Delphi process on revision surgery, rehabilitation and return to play, and clinical follow-up for anterior shoulder instability. METHODS: A consensus process on the treatment using a modified Delphi technique was conducted, with 65 shoulder surgeons from 14 countries across 5 continents participating. Experts were assigned to one of 9 working groups defined by specific subtopics of interest within anterior shoulder instability. RESULTS: The primary relative indications for revision surgery include symptomatic apprehension or recurrent instability, additional intra-articular pathologies, and symptomatic hardware failure. In revision cases, the differentiating factors that dictate treatment are the degree of glenohumeral bone loss and rotator cuff function/integrity. The minimum amount of time before allowing athletes to return to play is unknown, but other factors should be considered, including restoration of strength, range of motion and proprioception, and resolved pain and apprehension, as these are prognostic factors of reinjury. Additionally, psychological factors should be considered in the rehabilitation process. Patients should be clinically followed up for a minimum of 12 months or until a return to full, premorbid function/activities. Finally, the following factors should be included in anterior shoulder instability-specific, patient-reported outcome measures: function/limitations impact on activities of daily living, return to sport/activity, instability symptoms, confidence in shoulder, and satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Overall, 92% of statements reached unanimous or strong consensus. The statements that reached unanimous consensus were indications and factors affecting decisions for revision surgery, as well as how prior surgeries impact procedure choice. Furthermore, there was unanimous consensus on the role of psychological factors in the return to play, considerations for allowing return to play, as well as prognostic factors. Finally, there was a lack of unanimous consensus on recommended timing and methods for clinical follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.

Anterior Shoulder Instability Part II-Latarjet, Remplissage, and Glenoid Bone-Grafting-An International Consensus Statement.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a modified Delphi process on the Latarjet procedure, remplissage, and glenoid-bone grafting for anterior shoulder instability. METHODS: A consensus process on the treatment utilizing a modified Delphi technique was conducted, with 65 shoulder surgeons from 14 countries across 5 continents participating. Experts were assigned to one of 9 working groups defined by specific subtopics of interest within anterior shoulder instability. RESULTS: The technical approaches identified in the statements on the Latarjet procedure and glenoid bone-graft were that a subscapularis split approach should be utilized, and that it is unclear whether a capsular repair is routinely required. Furthermore, despite similar indications, glenoid bone-grafting may be preferred over the Latarjet in patients with bone-loss greater than can be treated with a coracoid graft, and in cases of surgeon preference, failed prior Latarjet or glenoid bone-grafting procedure, and epilepsy. In contrast, the primary indications for a remplissage procedure was either an off-track or engaging Hill-Sachs lesion without severe glenoid bone loss. Additionally, in contrast to the bone-block procedure, complications following remplissage are rare, and loss of shoulder external rotation can be minimized by performing the tenodesis via the safe-zone and not over medializing the fixation. CONCLUSION: Overall, 89% of statements reached unanimous or strong consensus. The statements that reached unanimous consensus were the prognostic factors that are important to consider in those undergoing a glenoid bone-grafting procedure including age, activity level, Hill-Sachs Lesion, extent of glenoid bone-loss, hyperlaxity, prior surgeries, and arthritic changes. Furthermore, there was unanimous agreement that it is unclear whether a capsular repair is routinely required with a glenoid bone graft, but it may be beneficial in some cases. There was no unanimous agreement on any aspect related to the Latarjet procedure or Remplissage. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.

Anterior Shoulder Instability Part I-Diagnosis, Nonoperative Management, and Bankart Repair-An International Consensus Statement.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements via a modified Delphi process on the diagnosis, nonoperative management, and Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability. METHODS: A consensus process on the treatment using a modified Delphi technique was conducted, with 65 shoulder surgeons from 14 countries across 5 continents participating. Experts were assigned to one of 9 working groups defined by specific subtopics of interest within anterior shoulder instability. RESULTS: The independent factors identified in the 2 statements that reached unanimous agreement in diagnosis and nonoperative management were age, gender, mechanism of injury, number of instability events, whether reduction was required, occupation, sport/position/level played, collision sport, glenoid or humeral bone-loss, and hyperlaxity. Of the 3 total statements reaching unanimous agreement in Bankart repair, additional factors included overhead sport participation, prior shoulder surgery, patient expectations, and ability to comply with postoperative rehabilitation. Additionally, there was unanimous agreement that complications are rare following Bankart repair and that recurrence rates can be diminished by a well-defined rehabilitation protocol, inferior anchor placement (5-8 mm apart), multiple small-anchor fixation points, treatment of concomitant pathologies, careful capsulolabral debridement/reattachment, and appropriate indications/assessment of risk factors. CONCLUSION: Overall, 77% of statements reached unanimous or strong consensus. The statements that reached unanimous consensus were the aspects of patient history that should be evaluated in those with acute instability, the prognostic factors for nonoperative management, and Bankart repair. Furthermore, there was unanimous consensus on the steps to minimize complications for Bankart repair, and the placement of anchors 5-8 mm apart. Finally, there was no consensus on the optimal position for shoulder immobilization. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.

Evaluation of factors associated with successful 5-year outcomes following arthroscopic Bankart repair in athletes.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of athletes 5-years post-operatively following arthroscopic Bankart repair, and to evaluate factors associated with satisfaction and shoulder function, as defined by subjective shoulder value. METHODS: A retrospective review of athletes who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair, with a minimum of 5-year follow-up was performed. Recurrence, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), satisfaction, and whether they would undergo the same surgery again, and rate, level and timing of return to play, and Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score were evaluated. Multi-linear regression models were used to evaluate factors affecting postoperative Satisfaction, and SSV level. RESULTS: Overall, 144 athletes who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair were included, with a mean age of 26.9 years (SD: 8.1), 132 (91.7%) were males, and mean follow-up of 75.7 months. At final follow up, 82.6% were satisfied/very satisfied, and the mean SSV was 85.8 (SD: 14.4). Overall, the rate of return to play was 80.5%, with 63.9% returning at the same level at a mean of 6.2 months (SD: 2.7). Overall, there was 18 (12.5%) had recurrent instability, and a further procedure was performed in 15 (10.4%) patients. Linear regression revealed that the SIRSI score (p < 0.0001), SSV (p < 0.0001), VAS (p < 0.0031), no sleep trouble (p = 0.0129) was associated with satisfaction. Logistic regression revealed whether a patient required revision surgery (p = 0.0029), or had re-dislocation (p = 0.0031) was also associated with satisfaction. Linear regression revealed that the SIRSI score (p < 0.0001), VAS score (p < 0.0001), and no sleep trouble (p < 0.0001), were associated with SSV score. CONCLUSION: There was a high rate of satisfaction at 5-year follow-up, with excellent patient-reported outcomes and a high rate of return to play among athletes. However, there was a moderate rate of recurrent instability and further revision surgery. This study identified that the SIRSI score, VAS score, no sleep trouble and ability to return to play at the same level were associated with both satisfaction and SSV score. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Analysis of patients unable to return to play following arthroscopic Bankart repair.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to analyze patients that did not return to play (RTP) following arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) compared to those who did RTP, and analyze factors associated with not returning to play. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent ABR, and subsequently did not RTP after a minimum of 24-month follow-up was performed. Additionally, these were pair matched in a 3:1 ratio for age, gender, sport and level of pre-operative play with a control group who RTP. Patients were evaluated for their psychological readiness to return to sport using the SIRSI score. Multivariate regression models were used to evaluate factors affecting RTP. RESULTS: The study included a total of 52 patients who were unable to RTP and 156 who returned to play. Ten patients (19.2 %) who did not RTP passed the SIRSI benchmark of 56 with a mean overall score of 39.8 ± 24.6, in those who returned 73.0 % passed the SIRSI benchmark of 56 with a mean overall score of 68.9 ± 22.0 (p < 0.0001 for both). The most common primary reasons for not returning were 27 felt physically unable to return, whilst 21 felt it was a natural end to their career or their lifestyle had changed. Multi-logistic regression revealed that 4 of the 12 components of the SIRSI score (p < 0.05 for all) and SSV (p = 0.0049), were the factors that were associated with RTP. CONCLUSION: Following ABR, those that do not return to play exhibit poor psychological readiness to return to play, with multi-linear regression revealing the SIRSI questions associated with fear of re-injury were associated with a lower rate of RTP. Additionally, functional limitations were found to be associated with a lower rate of RTP. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III; Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study.

Subscapularis management during open Latarjet procedure: does subscapularis split versus tenotomy matter? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature to ascertain the clinical outcomes of the open Latarjet (OL) procedure using either a subscapularis-split (SS) or subscapularis tenotomy (ST) via a deltopectoral (DP) approach. METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed a literature search using the PubMed, Embase, and Scopus databases according to PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Only studies reporting on outcomes of the OL procedure via a DP approach comparing both SS and ST were considered for inclusion. Meta-analysis to compare clinical outcomes was performed using RevMan software. RESULTS: Our search found 5 studies that met our inclusion criteria, including 615 shoulders (80.8% male patients), with an average age of 27.8 ± 12.6 years (range, 15-79 years) and mean follow-up period of 50.1 ± 29.4 months (range, 12-180 months). A total of 410 shoulders and 205 shoulders underwent the OL procedure via a DP approach using the ST technique and the SS technique, respectively, with both techniques resulting in significant increases in the Rowe score postoperatively (P < .0001 for both). Additionally, significantly higher postoperative Constant scores were observed in patients who underwent the OL procedure via an SS technique vs. those in the ST group (91.8 ± 7.2 vs. 79.6 ± 16.1, P < .0001). However, meta-analysis showed nonsignificantly higher postoperative Rowe and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores in patients who underwent the OL procedure via an SS technique vs. those in the ST group (96.1 ± 2.6 vs. 86.4 ± 7.6 [P = .57] and 91.6 ± 1.3 vs. 80.6 ± 25.5 [P = .47], respectively). Furthermore, meta-analysis showed that significantly more patients in the ST group had positive lift-off test results (10.0%) when compared with the SS group at final follow-up (2.7%, P = .01). However, meta-analysis indicated that the rate of recurrent instability was trending toward significance in favor of the SS group (0% vs. 11.7%, P = .07). CONCLUSION: Our systematic review established that in cases of OL procedures being carried out via a DP approach, the SS technique results in significantly better functional outcome measures and significantly lower rates of subscapularis insufficiency when compared with an L-shaped ST technique at medium-term follow-up. Furthermore, there were lower rates of recurrent instability that were trending toward significance in favor of the SS technique.

Athletes with primary glenohumeral instability demonstrate lower rates of bone loss than those with recurrent instability and failed prior stabilization.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the preoperative magnetic resonance arthrography findings in patients who underwent glenohumeral stabilization with a history of primary instability, recurrent instability, or failed stabilization. METHODS: All patients who presented with glenohumeral instability and underwent stabilization performed by a single surgeon in our institution between 2008 and 2020 were considered for inclusion in this study. The magnetic resonance arthrography findings of all patients were recorded. Imaging findings were compared between patients with primary instability, those with recurrent instability, and those with failed prior stabilization. P < .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Overall, 871 patients were included, of whom 814 (93.5%) were male patients; the mean age was 23.1 years (range, 13-57 years). There were 200 patients with primary instability, 571 with recurrent instability, and 100 who required revision stabilization surgery, with no significant differences in demographic characteristics between the groups. A significantly higher amount of glenoid bone loss was noted in patients with recurrent instability (43.4%) and failed prior stabilization (56%) than in those with primary instability (26.5%) (P < .0001). Additionally, a significantly higher number of Hill-Sachs lesions were observed in patients with recurrent instability (70.1%) and failed prior stabilization (89%) than in those with primary instability (67.5%) (P < .0001). We found no significant differences between the groups regarding articular cartilage damage, glenolabral articular disruption, anterior labral periosteal sleeve avulsion, humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligaments, or superior labral anterior-posterior tears (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Patients presenting for stabilization with recurrent instability or following a failed stabilization procedure have higher rates of glenohumeral bone loss than those with primary instability. Therefore, stabilization of primary instability, particularly in high-functioning athletes with a view to preventing recurrence, may reduce the overall progression of glenohumeral bone loss and potential subsequent inferior clinical outcomes.

Return to play following open Bankart repair in collision athletes aged 18 years or less.

HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to evaluate clinical outcomes, return to play (RTP), and recurrence rates in patients aged 18 years or less who underwent open Bankart repair (OBR) for anterior shoulder instability. METHODS: A retrospective review of collision athletes under 18 years old who underwent OBR by 2 surgeons between the years 2010 and 2019 was carried out. An OBR using a subscapularis split was performed in all patients. Recurrent instability, rate of RTP, and time to RTP were recorded. The Shoulder Instability Return to Sport after Injury score, Subjective Shoulder Value score, and visual analog scale scores were also evaluated. RESULTS: The study included 34 male collision athletes with a mean age of 16.5 ± 1.3 years (range, 15-18 years). The mean follow-up for patients was 49.5 ± 30.7 months. A total of 30 patients (88.2%) returned to full sport at a mean time of 5.8 ± 2.2 months, with 27 (90%) managing to return at their preinjury level of participation. The mean Subjective Shoulder Value score for patients at the final follow-up was 86.8 ± 17.5, the mean Shoulder Instability Return to Sport after Injury score was 86.3 ± 22.6, and the mean visual analog scale score was 1.6 ± 1.8. Eight patients (23.5%) re-dislocated their shoulder, with 4 of them requiring a further surgery. Two patients (5.8%) reported having incidents of subluxation that did not require reduction. CONCLUSION: This study found high rates of patient-reported satisfaction, excellent functional outcomes, and high rates of RTP in the medium term among young collision athletes aged 18 years or less who underwent OBR for anterior shoulder instability. However, there were high rates of recurrence with moderate rates of revision surgical stabilization in the medium term.

Open Latarjet Procedure in Athletes Following Failed Prior Instability Surgery Results in Lower Rates of Return to Play.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of open Latarjet (OL) in competitive athletes with primary shoulder instability versus those with recurrent instability versus those undergoing OL for failed prior instability surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent OL with a minimum of 24-month follow-up was performed. Additionally, these were pair-matched in a 1:2:1 ratio for age, gender, sport, level of preoperative play, and follow-up length for primary instability, recurrent instability and failed prior instability surgery. Return to sport, the level of return and the timing of return were assessed. Additionally, recurrence, Visual Analogue Scale for pain (VAS), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Rowe score, Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score, satisfaction, and whether they would undergo the same surgery again were compared. RESULTS: After pair-matching, a total of 200 patients were included, with a mean age of 22.7 years and a mean follow-up of 38.8 months. Overall, there was no significant difference in any of the clinical outcome scores (VAS, Rowe, SIRSI, SSV) used for the 3 groups (P > 0.05 for all). However, there was a significantly lower rate of return to play for those undergoing OL because of failed prior instability surgery (88% vs 91% vs 64%, P < 0.0001) and for return at the same or a higher level (66% vs 78% vs 56%, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in the rate of recurrent instability among the 3 groups (6% vs 5% vs 6%, P = 0.95). CONCLUSION: OL results in excellent clinical outcomes and low recurrence rates for those with primary shoulder instability, those with recurrent instability and those undergoing OL for failed prior instability surgery. However, in those undergoing OL for failed prior stabilization surgery, there was a lower rate of return to play. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III: Retrospective Comparative Study.

Type V superior labral anterior-posterior tears results in lower rates of return to play.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rate of return to play (RTP) in patients who underwent Type V superior labrum anterior-posterior (SLAP) repair compared to patients who underwent isolated Bankart repair in the setting of traumatic anterior shoulder instability. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair and SLAP repair by a single surgeon between 2012 and 2017 was performed. Additionally, these were pair-matched in a 1:2 ratio for age, sex, sport and level of pre-operative play, with those undergoing isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair alone as a control group. RTP, level of RTP and the timing of RTP were assessed. RESULTS: The study included a total of 96 patients, with 32 in the study group and 64 in the control group, and a mean follow-up of 59 months. Overall, there was no significant difference in the overall rate of return to play (26/32 (81.3%) vs 56/64 (87.5%), n.s), but there was a significantly higher rate of RTP at the same/higher level in the control group (14/32 (43.6%) vs 43/64 (67.2%), p = 0.0463). There was no significant difference in timing of RTP between the groups (n.s). There was no significant difference in recurrent instability (6/32 (18.8%) vs 5/64 (7.8%), n.s) but there was a significant difference in revision rates (5/32 (15.6%) vs. 2/64 (3.1%), p = 0.0392) between the Type V SLAP repair group and the control group. CONCLUSION: Following arthroscopic repair, patients with Type V SLAP tears had a similar overall rate of RTP when compared directly to a control group of patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair alone. However, those who underwent Type V SLAP repair reported significantly lower rates of RTP at the same or higher level compared to the control group. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Low rate of recurrent instability following the open Latarjet procedure as a revision procedure for failed prior stabilization surgery.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to systematically review the literature to ascertain functional outcomes, recurrence rates and subsequent revision rates following the open Latarjet procedure when performed as a revision procedure. METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on PRISMA guidelines, utilizing the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library Databases. Studies where the Latarjet procedure was performed as a revision procedure were included. Clinical outcomes analyzed were: (1) functional outcomes, (2) recurrent instability, (3) revisions, and (4) complications. RESULTS: The review found 16 studies with 713 shoulders that met the inclusion criteria. 605 of the patients were male (84.9%), with an average age of 28.2 years (15-62) and follow-up of 47.7 months. The most commonly reported functional outcome measure was the Rowe score, with a weighted mean of 92.7. 86/95 patients had good-excellent outcomes (90.4%). 136/143 patients reported return to play (95.1%). 141/161 patients returned to the same level of competition (87.6%). 50 patients experienced recurrence (8.4%). Five patients experienced redislocation (0.9%) and 37 patients experienced subluxation (6.7%). There were 29 revisions (5.1%), with 12 revisions due to recurrence (2.1%). There were 68 total complications, not including recurrence (11%). The most common complications were 13 cases of nerve damage and infection respectively (2.1%). There was 17 cases of new instability arthropathy (6.5%), and 31 cases of residual pain (6.7%). CONCLUSION: This review shows that the revision Latarjet provides excellent functional outcomes, low rates of recurrence and complications, and a high rate of return to sport among athletes. This results from study can be used to explain the expected outcomes associated with the Latarjet procedure performed as a revision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Current practices in the management of anterior glenohumeral instability in rugby union players.

BACKGROUND: Rugby has the highest incidence of traumatic injuries of any sport, and glenohumeral injuries result in the lengthy delay in return to play. The purpose of this study is to survey surgeons from the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and the British Elbow and Shoulder Society (BESS) to evaluate the current state of management of anterior glenohumeral instability, and compare the differences in practices. METHODS: A survey of surgeons from ASES and BESS was conducted. Treatment options were proposed in a variety of clinical scenarios of glenohumeral instability. The time of immobilization post-operatively, return to play, and attitudes on current contact regulations. Results were compared using the chi-square test or t-test. RESULTS: Ninety-seven surgeons responded to the survey. There was a significant difference in treatment between ASES and BESS surgeons in the setting of primary dislocation (p < 0.05), but not recurrent dislocation (p > 0.05). The period of immobilization following injury and surgery was different between both treating groups. There was a significant difference in return to play between ASES and BESS surgeons with arthroscopic stabilization and open Bankart repair (p < 0.05), but not following conservative treatment or the Latarjet procedure (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: There remains wide variance on the management of glenohumeral instability in rugby union players among surgeons. While immobilization times post-operatively were similar, the BESS surgeons were more confident in allowing earlier return to play. There is also a significant concern that contact levels should be regulated to protect player safety. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4 (case series).

Long-term outcomes of total elbow arthroplasty: a systematic review of studies at 10-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature to evaluate the functional outcomes, dislocation, and revision rates following total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) at a minimum 10 years' mean follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed a literature search using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Studies were only included if they focused on outcomes post-TEA at a minimum 10 years' mean follow-up. RESULTS: Our search found 23 studies including 1429 elbows (60.4% linked TEA) that met our inclusion criteria. There were 1276 patients (79.0% female), with an average age of 64.7 years (19-93) and a mean follow-up of 137.2 months (120-216). At final follow-up, the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score, Oxford Elbow Score, and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores were 89.1 (35-100), 64.4 (16-48), and 39.2 (3-93), respectively, and 63.3% of patients reported having no pain. The rates of aseptic loosening, infection, implant dislocation, and nerve injury were 12.9%, 3.3%, 4.2%, and 2.1%, respectively. The overall complication and revision rates were 16.3% and 14.6%, respectively. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Our systematic review established that TEA offers patients satisfactory clinical outcomes at long-term follow-up, with relatively stable revision and complication rates compared to short and medium term.

Return to sport following reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to systematically review the evidence in the literature to ascertain the rate and timing of return to sport following reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). METHODS: A systematic literature search based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, using the Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library Databases. Eligible for inclusion were clinical studies reporting on return to sport following RSA. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS. RESULTS: Overall, 8 studies including 455 patients (464 shoulders) met our inclusion criteria. The majority of patients were female (77.7%), with an average age of 74.2 years. The overall rate of return to sport was 79.1%; with 66.7% of golfers, 74.3% of swimmers, 50.0%, of tennis players, 94.4% of joggers, and 69.7% of cyclists returning. In addition, 71.4% of patients returned to the same level of sporting activity. The average time to return to sport was 3.4 months with a mean follow-up of 34.0 months. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: The results from our systematic review show that the majority of patients are able to return to sport following RSA, with a large number returning to the same level of sport. However, results were modest in overhead athletes, with a concerning number unable to return to tennis post-RSA.

Long-term outcomes of radial head arthroplasty for radial head fractures-a systematic review at minimum 8-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to systematically review the literature to evaluate the functional outcomes, radiologic outcomes, and revision rates following radial head arthroplasty (RHA) at a minimum of 8 years follow-up. METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed a literature search using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science databases. Only studies reporting on outcomes of RHA with a minimum of mean 8 years' follow-up were considered for inclusion. RESULTS: Our search found 10 studies including 432 elbows (51% males), with average age of 50 years (15-93) and mean follow-up of 117 months (98-145) met our inclusion criteria. At final follow-up, the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire score were 83 (45-100) and 17 (0-63) respectively, and 86% of patients reported having no or minimal pain. The overall dislocation, subluxation, ulnar neuritis, and infection rates were 2%, 4%, 3%, and 3%, respectively. The rates of radiologic loosening, radiolucency, degenerative change, and heterotopic ossification were 9%, 46%, 27%, and 38%, respectively. The overall surgical revision rates were 20%, with 3%, 15%, and 5% requiring RHA implant revision, removal of metal or implants, and arthrolysis, respectively. CONCLUSION: Our systematic review established that RHA results in satisfactory clinical outcomes and modest complication and revision rates at long-term follow-up, despite high levels of radiologic degenerative changes over the same period.

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Conservative Management for First-Time Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: To perform a meta-analysis of the current evidence in the literature comparing arthroscopic Bankart repair versus conservative management for first-time anterior shoulder dislocation. METHODS: A literature search of the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was performed based on the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Prospective studies comparing arthroscopic Bankart repair versus conservative management as treatment for first-time anterior shoulder dislocation were included. Recurrence, further treatment, and return to play were compared, with all statistical analysis performed using Review Manager, version 5.3. P < .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Ten prospective studies with 569 patients were included. Arthroscopic Bankart repair resulted in a lower rate of total recurrent instability (9.7% vs 67.4, I2 = 0, P < .0001) and further surgical treatment for anterior shoulder instability (5.9% vs 46.7%, I2 = 0, P < .0001). Additionally, arthroscopic Bankart repair resulted in a higher rate of return to play (92.8% vs 80.8%, I2 = 0, P = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic Bankart repair resulted in a 7-fold lower recurrence rate and a higher rate of return to play than conservative management. Thus, arthroscopic Bankart repair may be advisable to perform routinely in patients with first-time dislocation who participate in sports. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, systematic review of Level I and II studies.