Arthroscopic suture bridge fixation for acute bony Bankart with anterior glenohumeral instability: a case report and narrative review.

Background and Objective: Anterior shoulder dislocations can result in acute glenoid rim fractures that compromise the bony stability of the glenohumeral joint. Adequate fixation of these fractures is required to restore stability, decrease shoulder pain, and facilitate return to activity. The double-row suture bridge is a relatively novel fixation technique, first described in 2009, that accomplishes internal fixation with sufficient stability using an all-arthroscopic technique to restore the glenoid footprint. A 40-year-old female with recurrent anterior shoulder instability in the setting of seizure disorder was found to have a bony Bankart lesion of 25% to 30% with a concomitant superior labral tear. The patient was treated with a double-row bony Bankart bridge and labral repair. At six months follow-up, she has progressed to a full recovery with no recurrence. Methods: A search was conducted in May 2023 in PubMed, EMBASE, and CINAHL with the search terms bony Bankart, bone Bankart, osseous Bankart, acute, bridge, suture bridge, double row. Key Content and Findings: Double-row suture bridge repairs result in improvement in shoulder function as determined by ASES (93.5), QuickDASH (4.5), SANE (95.9), and SF-12 (55.6). The overall recurrence rate of anterior instability after a bony Bankart bridge repair is 8%. When examining the return to prior level of function, 81.4% of patients were able to do so with only 7.9% of patients reporting significant modifications to their activity level. In mid-term results, double row suture bridge demonstrates similar outcomes to other all-arthroscopic fixation methods of bony Bankart injuries. Importantly, bony Bankart bridge remains a viable option for critical glenoid lesions over the 20% cutoff used in other all arthroscopic techniques. Biomechanically, the double-row suture bridge offers distinct benefits over its single-row counterpart including increased compression, reduced displacement, and reduced step-off. Conclusions: Although there is limited data, the studies discussed and the demonstrative case show the potential benefit of all-arthroscopic double-row suture bridge fixation including increased compression, decreased displacement, and a lower complication rate in patients with large bony Bankart lesions traditionally requiring bony augmentation. However, more robust studies are necessary to determine the long-term success of the double-row suture bridge.

Rates and predictors of reimplantation of matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation following first stage cartilage harvest: A cohort study.

PURPOSE: To assess the reimplantation rate and predictors of patients requiring second-staged matrix-induced autologous chondrocyte implantation (MACI) reimplantation after initial first stage cartilage biopsy. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed from 2018 to 2022 among patients who underwent only phase I MACI biopsy procedure (biopsy group) or both phase I with transition to phase II implantation of chondrocytes (implantation group) at a single tertiary center. Demographic, qualitative, and quantitative measurements were recorded, and univariate and multivariate regression analysis was performed to assess predictors of ultimately requiring second stage MACI implantation. RESULTS: A total of 71 patients (51% female, age 27.7 ± 10.6 years (range 12-50)) were included in this study. Eventually, 25 of 71 patients (35.2%) experienced persistence of symptoms after initial MACI biopsy and other concomitant procedures, requiring second-stage implantation. Univariate analysis showed the implantation group compared to the biopsy group had a greater lesion size (5.2 cm2 ± 3.3 vs. 3.3 cm2 ± 1.4, p = 0.024), a higher proportion patients ≥ 26 years of age (76% vs. 43%, p = 0.009), a medial femoral condyle lesion more commonly (33% vs 11%, p = 0.005), were more often female (72% vs. 39%, p = 0.008), and had less often soft tissue repair at time of biopsy (32% vs. 61%, p = 0.020). Backward multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that size of the lesion (OR 1.43, p = 0.031) and age ≥ 26 years old at time of biopsy (OR 3.55, p = 0.042) were independent predictors of not responding to initial surgery and requiring implantation surgery. CONCLUSION: This study found that 35% of patients undergoing MACI phase I biopsy harvest eventually required autologous implantation. Independent risk factors for progressing to implantation after failed initial surgery were larger defect size and older age. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, Cohort Study.

Batter's Shoulder: All-Knotless Posterior Labral Repair With Retensionable Anchors for Treatment of Batter's Shoulder.

Batter's Shoulder is a unique injury that may be associated with recurrent microtrauma followed by acute subluxation of the humeral head on the posterior glenoid edge, leading to posterior labral tears. Early identification of this injury is critical, as it may be treated with conservative nonsurgical treatments prior to labral tear onset. If conservative treatment fails and pain persists, surgical options include arthroscopic fixation to reapproximate the posterior labrum to the glenoid and restore capsular tension. Previous studies have shown the benefit of using knotless suture anchors in arthroscopic shoulder fixation. This technical note demonstrates that Batter's Shoulder is a unique injury associated with posterior labral tears of the shoulder and provides a contemporary method of arthroscopic fixation of a posterior labral tear using retensionable knotless all-suture anchors.

An Expedited Sling Immobilization Protocol After Isolated Biceps Tenodesis Results in Clinical and Patient-Reported Postoperative Outcomes Equivalent to a Standard Rehabilitation Protocol.

Purpose: To characterize clinical and patient-reported outcomes for patients after isolated biceps tenodesis (BT) who underwent either standard or expedited sling immobilization protocols following surgery. Methods: This retrospective cohort study compared patients who were assigned to use a sling for either 4 to 6 weeks (standard) or 0 to 2 weeks (expedited) following an isolated BT. Primary endpoint included rate of re-rupture, surgical revision, loss of fixation, and Popeye deformity. Secondary endpoints included shoulder range of motion (ROM) as well as pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of pain and function. Missing data were managed via multiple imputation with chained equations. Complication prevalence 95% confidence intervals were calculated using the Clopper Pearson method and a series of hierarchical mixed effects linear regressions were performed to assess differences between sling interventions in PROs and ROM. Results: The average age of the standard cohort (n = 66) was 49 years (±14 years), and the average age of the expedited cohort (n = 69) was 47 years (±14 years). The expedited and standardized cohorts demonstrated 0.4 and 0.3 complications per 10,000 exposure days, respectively, with no significant difference between groups (1.4 [95% confidence interval 0.2-10.0], P = .727). There was no demonstrated difference in forward flexion, abduction, or external ROM. The expedited group had less improvement in visual analog scale for pain scores that was not clinically significant and there were no differences in PROs of function. Conclusions: No statistically significant difference in the rate of re-rupture, surgical revision, loss of fixation, or Popeye deformity was noted between protocols after isolated BT. Furthermore, there were no clinically significant differences in ROM or PROs identified between protocols after isolated BT. This study suggests that patients who have undergone isolated BT may safely discontinue sling use within 2 weeks after surgery. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative study.

Low Recurrence of Instability and Satisfying Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Various Surgical Treatments of Reverse Hill-Sachs Lesions in the Setting of Posterior Instability: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To systematically review the literature and report the outcomes of various surgical treatments for reverse Hill-Sachs lesions (RHSL) in the setting of posterior shoulder instability. METHODS: Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. All studies assessing outcomes of surgical treatment of RHSL from inception to January 2023 were identified in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library. Inclusion criteria consisted of studies reporting outcomes, minimum mean 1-year follow-up, and minimum Level IV evidence. Outcomes were assessed using Forest plots with random effects models using R software. RESULTS: A total of 29 studies consisting of 291 patients were included with a mean age of 42 years (range 16-88 years), 87% male gender, and mean follow-up of 4.5 years. The mean size of impacted or affected cartilage was 35%, and time from injury to surgery was mean 15 weeks. Nearly all studies were Level IV evidence, and quality of studies was low. Random effect models were performed, and data are presented as range. A low incidence of instability was noted for all surgical techniques with good patient-reported outcome measures. Most studies reported outcomes of the modified McLaughlin procedure (13 studies, 126 patients) with overall Constant-Murley Score of 65 to 92. Trends were seen towards better Constant-Murley Score and external rotation with a shorter delay between injury, and when arthroscopic and joint preserving treatments were performed. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review showed low rates of instability recurrence, reproducible range of motion, and favorable patient-reported outcome measures were reported following all treatments for RHSLs with posterior instability. There was a significant association between better outcomes and a shorter delay between injury and surgery. The level of evidence is limited, given the small and retrospective studies which can be explained by the rarity of these injuries. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV; systematic review of Level IV or better investigations.