Meniscal repair of tears associated with tibial plateau fractures has good results. All patients had good or excellent clinical results. Second-look arthroscopy confirmed complete healing in 92% of meniscal tears when performed.

Purpose To evaluate the eicacy of the Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) in predicting an increased recurrence risk after an arthroscopic Bankart repair. Methods Retrospective review of a cohort of patients operated in three diferent centres. The inclusion criteria (recurrent anterior instability [dislocation or subluxation] with or without hyperlaxity, arthroscopic Bankart repair) and the exclusion criteria (concomitant rotator cuf lesion, acute irst-time dislocation, surgery after a previous anterior stabilization, surgery for an unstable shoulder without true dislocation or subluxation; multidirectional instability) were those used in the study that deined the ISIS score. The medical records and a telephone interview were used to identify the six variables that deine the ISIS and identify recurrences. Results One hundred and sixty-three shoulders met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 140 subjects (22 females/118 males; mean age 35.5 ± 7.9) with 142 (89.0%) shoulders were available for follow-up after 5.3 (1.1) (range 3.1-7.4) years. There were 20 recurrences (14.1%). The mean (SD) preoperative ISIS was 1.8 (1.6) in the patients without recurrence and 1.8 (1.9) in the patients with recurrence (n.s.). In the 117 subjects with ISIS between 0 and 3 the recurrence rate was 12.8%; in the 25 with ISIS 4 to 6 the rate was 20% (n.s.). Conclusion For subjects with anterior shoulder instability in which an arthroscopic Bankart repair is being considered, the use of the ISIS, when the values obtained are ≤ 6 was not useful to predict an increased recurrence risk in the midterm in this retrospectively evaluated case series. The eicacy of the ISIS score in deining a group of subjects with a preoperative increased risk of recurrence after an arthroscopic Bankart instability repair is limited in lower risk populations (with ISIS scores ≤ 6). Level of evidence Retrospective case series, Level IV.

Background:The glenohumeral joint is a ball-and-socket joint that is inherently unstable and thus, susceptible to dislocation. The traditional and most common anatomic finding is the Bankart lesion (anterior-inferior capsule labral complex avulsion), but there is a wide variety of anatomic alterations that can cause shoulder instability or may be present as a concomitant injury or in combination, including bone loss (glenoid or humeral head), complex capsule-labral tears, rotator cuff tears, Kim´s lesions (injuries to the posterior-inferior labrum) and rotator interval pathology.Methods:A review of articles related to shoulder anatomy and soft tissue procedures that are performed during shoulder instability arthroscopic management was conducted by querying the Pubmed database and conclusions and controversies regarding this injury were exposed.Results:Due to the complex anatomy of the shoulder and the large range of movement of this joint, a wide variety of anatomic injuries and conditions can lead to shoulder instability, specially present in young population. Recognizing and treating all of them including Bankart repair, capsule-labral plicatures, SLAP repair, circumferential approach to pan-labral lesions, rotator interval closure, rotator cuff injuries and HAGL lesion repair is crucial to achieve the goal of a stable, full range of movement and not painful joint.Conclusion:Physicians must be familiarized with all the lesions involved in shoulder instability, and should be able to recognize and subsequently treat them to achieve the goal of a stable non-painful shoulder. Unrecognized or not treated lesions may result in recurrence of instability episodes and pain while overuse of some of the techniques previously described can lead to stiffness, thus the importance of an accurate diagnosis and treatment when facing a shoulder instability.

Background:There is a low incidence of posterior instability which is present in only 2% to 10% of all unstable shoulders. The posterior instable shoulder includes different manifestations like fixed dislocation, recurrent subluxation or dislocation.Methods:Research and online content related to posterior instability is reviewed. Natural history, clinical evaluation and imaging are described.Results:An awareness of the disorder, together with a thoughtful evaluation, beginning with the clinical history, usually leads to proper diagnosis. An appropriate physical exam, taking in account hyperlaxity and specific tests for posterior instability should be done.Conclusion:Posterior shoulder instability is an uncommon condition and is challenging to diagnose. There is not a single injury that is responsible for all cases of recurrent shoulder dislocation or subluxation, and the presence of soft tissue lesions or bone alterations should be evaluated, with the use of adequate simple radiology and multiplanar imaging.

Background:Traditionally, initial management of first anterior shoulder dislocations consists of reduction of the glenohumeral joint followed by a period of immobilization and subsequent physical therapy to recover shoulder range of motion and strength. This traditional approach in management is now controversial due to the high rate of recurrence. The aim of this paper is to review and discuss the literature about the global management of patients presenting with first-time traumatic anterior glenohumeral dislocation, analyzing the factors that affect shoulder instability after the first episode of dislocation. Methods:Scientific publications about the management of first-time shoulder dislocations are reviewed. Pubmed is used for that and no limit in the year of publication are stablished. These papers and their conclusions are discussed. Results:Younger patients, patient´s activities and the kind of injury are the most important factors related to the shoulder instability after a first time traumatic dislocation. Authors that recommend surgical treatment after the first episode of dislocation argue that the possibilities of recurrence are high and therefore surgery should be performed before its occurrence. Other authors, however, argue that surgical treatment is demanding, and keep in mind that complications, such as recurrence, stiffness and pain after surgery, are still present. Conclusion:Currently, there is still no consensus in the literature with regard to the management of first episode of shoulder dislocation. It is necessary to analyze carefully every individual case to manage them more or less aggressive to obtain the best result in our practice.