Redislocation risk after an arthroscopic Bankart procedure in collision athletes: a systematic review

Alkaduhimi, Hassanin; Linde, Just A. van der; Willigenburg, Nienke W.; Pereira, Nuno Rui Paulino; Deurzen, Derek F.P. van; Bekerom, Michel P.J. van den

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2016.05.002

Cited by 51 publications

(39 citation statements)

References 44 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding recurrences, several previous authors have reported a high risk of recurrences associated with Bankart repair in contact athletes. 11 , 18 , 19 Alkaduhimi et al. 19 in a recent systematic review evaluated the redislocation risk after arthroscopic Bankart repair in collision athletes.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Variability in Functional Outcomes and Recurrences Between Contact Sports After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Comparative Study of 351 Patients With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up

Rossi

Tanoira

Gorodischer

et al. 2020

Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To compare return to sports, functional outcomes, and complications of a consecutive series of contact athletes with anterior glenohumeral instability treated with isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair for isolated anterior instability. Methods Between January 2008 and December 2016, 351 competitive athletes who participated in contact or collision sports underwent isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair at our institution (rugby n = 105, soccer n = 90, martial arts n = 36 boxing n = 28, field hockey n = 30, handball n = 31, and basketball n = 31). Return to sports, the Rowe score, and the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS) score were used to assess functional outcomes. Complications also were evaluated. Results The mean follow-up period was 66.7 months (range, 36-148 months) and the mean age of the 351 patients was 21.3 years (range, 17-30 years).Overall, 309 patients (88%) were able to return to sports, and 284 (81%) returned at the same level as before the injury. The mean time to return to sports was 5.3 months. The rate of return to sports, the level achieved by the patients, and time to return to sports varied significantly between sports. The Rowe and ASOSS scores showed statistical improvement after operation ( P < .001). The ASOSS score varied significantly between sports ( P < .001). There were 40 recurrences (11.3%), 7 complications (2%) and 21 patients (6%) underwent revision surgery. There was a significant difference in the rate of recurrences and revisions between the different contact sports. Conclusions In athletes with glenohumeral instability who undergo isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair for isolated anterior instability, there is great variability in the rate of return to sport at the same level, in shoulder performance after returning to competition, and in the postoperative recurrence rates. Due to the high variability found in our study, results after arthroscopic Bankart repair in contact athletes should not be reported globally by including the different sports under the “collision or contact sports” label. Level of Evidence Retrospective Case Series; Level of evidence, 4.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

High Variability in Functional Outcomes and Recurrences Between Contact Sports After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Comparative Study of 351 Patients With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up

Rossi

Tanoira

Gorodischer

et al. 2020

Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Surgical intervention should be completed as quickly as practical once decided upon as the proper course of treatment. Benefits of using an arthroscopic Bankart repair technique include a lower complication rate, smaller incisions, less blood loss, shorter operative times, greater range of shoulder motion postoperatively, less postoperative pain, better cosmesis, less postoperative shoulder stiffness, and fewer wound infections [4,29].…”

Section: Indications/contraindicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From 2003 to 2005, 71.2% of repairs were performed arthroscopically, compared with 87.7% from 2006 to 2008 [2]. With an increase in literature revealing similar clinical outcomes between patients undergoing open versus arthroscopic repair [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10], there has been a recent shift towards arthroscopic stabilization as the first-line in surgical management of shoulder instability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for the Management of Anterior Shoulder Instability: Indications and Outcomes

DeFroda

Bokshan

Stern

et al. 2017

Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of Review Arthroscopic Bankart repair is commonly utilized for shoulder stabilization in patients with anterior shoulder instability with minimum glenoid bone loss. The purpose of this review is to provide the indications, surgical technique, complications, and recent outcomes in arthroscopic Bankart repair for shoulder instability. Recent Findings Improvements in arthroscopic techniques have led to better patient outcomes, as well as an improved understanding of the pathoanatomy of instability. More recent studies have shown that one of the potential failures of primary arthroscopic repair may be due to unaddressed bone loss. This underscores the importance of evaluating glenoid bone loss and proper patient selection for this procedure to ensure successful outcome. Summary When indicated, arthroscopic stabilization is the treatment of choice for many surgeons due to its lower morbidity and low overall complication rate. Future work must focus on longer-term outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair, as well as the clinical outcomes of new fixation techniques, augmentation techniques, and the effect of glenoid bone loss in outcome.

show abstract

“…The open trans-glenoid Bankart reinsertion was considered for years the “gold standard” for treating recurrent instability and has given excellent results, with a recurrence rate of 1%. However, broad use of this technique, arthroscopically assisted using anchors and popularized as the Bankart repair, remains more controversial because of the relatively high number of recurrences of 20% to 64%, especially if associated with glenoid bone defects (Alkaduhimi et al, 2016 ; Burkhart & De Beer, 2000 ; Cole & Warner, 2000 ; Field et al, 1999 ; Morrey & Janes, 1976 ; Bankart, 1938 ). This clinical survey was supported by the biomechanical and clinical retrospective studies (Arciero et al, 2015 ; Longo et al, 2014 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Arthroscopic bone graft procedure combined with arthroscopic subscapularis augmentation (ASA) for recurrent anterior instability with glenoid bone defect: a cadaver study

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundGlenoid bone loss and capsular deficiency represent critical points of arthroscopic Bankart repair failures. The purpose of this study was to evaluate an all-arthroscopic bone block procedure associated with arthroscopic subscapularis augmentation (ASA) for treating gleno-humeral instability with glenoid bone loss (GBL) and anterior capsulo-labral deficiency. Our hypothesis was that these two procedures could be combined arthroscopically. The feasibility of this technique and its reproducibility, and potential neurovascular complications were evaluated.MethodsA tricortical bone graft was harvested from the cadaveric clavicle, and in one case a Xenograft was used. An anterior-inferior GBL of about 25% was created. Two glenoid tunnels were set up from the posterior to the anterior side using a dedicated bone block guide, and four buttons were used to fix the graft to the glenoid. The subscapularis tenodesis was performed using a suture tape anchor. Afterwards, the shoulder was dissected to study the relationship between all portals and nerves. The size of the bone block, its position on the glenoid and the relationship with the subscapularis tendon were investigated.ResultsIn all seven specimens (five left and two right shoulders), the bone block was flush with the cartilage and fixed to the anterior-inferior part of the glenoid. No lesions of the surrounding neurovascular structures were observed. No interference was found between the two bone block tunnels and the anchor tunnel used for the tenodesis.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated the feasibility and reproducibility of this combined arthroscopic technique (bone block associated with ASA) in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability associated with anterior bone loss and anterior capsular deficiency.

show abstract

Redislocation risk after an arthroscopic Bankart procedure in collision athletes: a systematic review

Cited by 51 publications

References 44 publications

High Variability in Functional Outcomes and Recurrences Between Contact Sports After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Comparative Study of 351 Patients With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up

High Variability in Functional Outcomes and Recurrences Between Contact Sports After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Comparative Study of 351 Patients With a Minimum 3-Year Follow-Up

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for the Management of Anterior Shoulder Instability: Indications and Outcomes

Arthroscopic bone graft procedure combined with arthroscopic subscapularis augmentation (ASA) for recurrent anterior instability with glenoid bone defect: a cadaver study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About