Publications

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare rates of recurrent dislocation and postsurgical outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability immediately after a first-time traumatic anterior dislocation versus patients who sustained a second dislocation event after initial nonoperative management.

METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed of patients undergoing primary arthroscopic stabilization for anterior shoulder instability without concomitant procedures and minimum 2-year clinical follow-up. Primary outcome was documentation of a recurrent shoulder dislocation. Secondary clinical outcomes included range of motion, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (ASES), and Shoulder Activity Scale (SAS).

RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients (mean age 21.3 years ± 7.3 years) met inclusion criteria. Sixty-three shoulders underwent surgical stabilization after a single shoulder dislocation, and 14 underwent surgery after 2 dislocations. Average follow-up was 35.9 months. The rate of recurrent dislocation was significantly higher in the 2-dislocation group compared to single dislocations (42.8% vs 14.2%, P = .03). No significant difference was present in range of motion, VAS, ASES, and SAS scores. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was 1.4 for VAS and 1.8 for SAS scores. The MCID was met or exceeded in the primary dislocation group in 31/38 (81.6%) patients for VAS, 23/31 (74.1%) for ASES, and 24/31 for SES (77.4%) scores. For the second dislocation cohort, MCID was met or exceeded in 7/9 (77.8%) for VAS, 4/7 (57.1%) for ASES, and 5/7 for SES (71.4%) scores.

CONCLUSION: Immediate arthroscopic surgical stabilization after a first-time anterior shoulder dislocation significantly decreases the risk of recurrent dislocation in comparison to those who undergo surgery after 2 dislocation events, with comparable clinical outcome scores. These findings suggest that patients who return to activities after a primary anterior shoulder dislocation and sustain just 1 additional dislocation event are at increased risk of a failing arthroscopic repair.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective comparative study; Level of evidence, 3.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare recurrent instability and return to play (RTP) in young athletes who underwent clearance to full activity based on a validated return-to-sport (RTS) test to those who underwent time-based clearance following primary posterior labral repair.

METHODS: This was a retrospective review of athletes with posterior shoulder instability who underwent primary arthroscopic posterior labral repair from 2012 to 2021 with minimum 1-year follow-up. Patients who underwent RTS testing at a minimum of 5 months postoperatively were compared to a historic control cohort of patients who underwent time-based clearance.

RESULTS: There were 30 patients in the RTS cohort and 67 patients in the control cohort (mean follow-up 32.1 and 38.6 months, respectively). Of the 30 patients who underwent RTS testing, 11 passed without failing any sections, 10 passed while failing 1 section, and 9 failed the RTS test by failing 2+ sections. No differences were found between the RTS and control cohort in the incidence of recurrent instability (6.7% vs. 9.0%), overall RTP (94.7% vs. 94.3%), RTP at the same level as before injury (84.2% vs. 80.0%), recurrent pain/weakness (23.3% vs. 25.4%), or revision surgery (0% vs. 3.0%), respectively.

DISCUSSION: While RTS testing in young athletes after posterior labral repair did not reduce recurrence or improve return to play compared to time-based clearance, two-thirds of athletes who underwent testing failed at least 1 section, indicating some functional deficit. Thus, RTS testing may help guide postoperative rehabilitation following posterior stabilization.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare recurrent instability rates between patients with on-track Hill-Sachs lesions who underwent arthroscopic labral repair (ALR) alone and those who underwent ALR with remplissage (ALR-R). Our hypothesis was that ALR-R would decrease the rate of recurrent instability, especially among patients at high risk of recurrent instability after ALR, such as contact athletes with near-track Hill-Sachs lesions.

METHODS: We performed a multicenter, retrospective analysis of patients aged 14-50 years with on-track Hill-Sachs lesions who underwent ALR-R or ALR without remplissage between January 2014 and December 2019 with minimum 2-year follow-up. The exclusion criteria included prior ipsilateral shoulder surgery, >15% glenoid bone loss (GBL), off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, concomitant shoulder procedure, and connective tissue disorder. Age, sex, follow-up, and contact sports participation were recorded. GBL, Hills-Sachs interval (HSI), glenoid track, and distance to dislocation (DTD) were determined from preoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans. Affected-shoulder range of motion, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index scores, Subjective Shoulder Value scores, and recurrent dislocation and/or revision surgery status were also collected. A subgroup analysis was performed on "high-risk" patients (defined as participants in contact sports with DTD <10 mm) from each cohort.

RESULTS: The ALR-R cohort included 56 patients, and the ALR cohort included 127. ALR-R patients had greater GBL (P = .004) and a greater HSI (P < .001). In the ALR-R cohort, only 1 patient (1.8%) had a recurrent dislocation and there were no revision operations. In comparison, in the ALR cohort, 14 patients (11.0%) had recurrent dislocations (P = .040) and 8 (6.3%) underwent revision operations (P = .11). Univariate analysis showed that remplissage protected against recurrent dislocation (P = .040) whereas younger age (P = .004), contact sports participation (P = .001), and increased GBL (P = .048) were associated with recurrent dislocation. Multivariate analysis showed that HSI (P = .001) and contact sports participation (P = .002) predicted recurrent dislocation. Among high-risk patients, only 1 patient (4.2%) in the ALR-R group had a recurrent instability event vs. 6 (66.7%) in the ALR group (P < .001). The high-risk ALR-R subgroup also had significantly better final Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (P = .008) and Subjective Shoulder Value (P = .001) scores than the high-risk ALR subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS: Anterior shoulder instability patients with on-track Hill-Sachs lesions have lower recurrent dislocation rates after ALR plus remplissage when compared with ALR alone. This is especially true for high-risk patients, such as contact athletes with a DTD <10 mm.

PURPOSE: To compare failure rates and outcomes after transosseous equivalent (TOE) double row (DR) knotted suture bridge versus knotless suture tape bridge repair techniques for rotator cuff tears.

METHODS: A consecutive series of 272 shoulders in 256 patients who underwent arthroscopic, double row, TOE repair for full-thickness tears of the supraspinatus tendon were reviewed. Eighty-four shoulders were repaired using knotted suture bridge (KSB) technique, and 188 shoulders were repaired using all knotless suture tape bridge (KTB) technique. Revision procedures and concomitant subscapularis tendon repairs were excluded from analysis. The minimum follow-up was 12 months. Primary outcome was failure of surgical repair, defined as either confirmed retear on MRI and/or need for revision surgery. Secondary clinical outcome measures were assessed including range of motion, strength, visual analog scale (VAS), operative time, subjective shoulder value (SSV), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) mental and physical health, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (ASES), Brophy shoulder activity scores, and need for manipulation under anesthesia (MUA).

RESULTS: A total of 127 shoulders (38 KSB and 89 KTB) met inclusion criteria for the study. No significant difference in demographic variables were present between the groups at baseline. Supraspinatus tear size and average follow-up time did not differ significantly between groups. Failure rates were similar between the KSB and KTB repairs (13.1 vs 7.9%, n.s.). There was no significant difference in functional outcomes including strength, range of motion in forward flexion and external rotation, as well as patient reported outcomes including VAS, SSV, PROMIS, ASES, and Brophy scores between the groups. There was also no difference in post-operative stiffness requiring MUA.

CONCLUSION: Both KSB and KTB repair techniques demonstrate low retear rates with excellent functional outcomes when compared to pre-operative examination. Both KSB and KTB techniques are viable options for achieving a successful rotator cuff repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III.

BACKGROUND: Multiple rehabilitation protocols after shoulder surgery have been proposed. The coronavirus pandemic adds an extra layer of complexity to postoperative rehabilitation after shoulder surgery.

HYPOTHESIS: The combined use of a home-based rehabilitation system, the Shoulder Strengthening and Stabilization System (SSS), and telehealth visits will lead to acceptable patient self-reported outcomes and satisfaction after shoulder surgery.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective observational cohort.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4.

METHODS: A total of 132 patients were prescribed SSS after shoulder surgery. A virtual clinical specialist monitored patients through telehealth visits as prescribed by the treating physician. Data were collected prospectively during each telehealth visit. Patients completed an exit survey during their last telehealth visit.

RESULTS: The use of SSS with telehealth revealed a positive impact on postoperative shoulder rehabilitation (96%), pain (71%), and stiffness (92%) as reported by patients. Both pain scores and pain medication use decreased from the 1st to 8th postoperative telehealth session (P < 0.01). Nearly all (93%) patients recommended SSS after shoulder surgery upon completing the SSS protocol.

CONCLUSION: Postoperative management of shoulder surgery with SSS combined with telehealth results in a reduction in patient pain levels in the early postoperative period. Patients reported high levels of improvement with SSS in shoulder rehabilitation, pain, and stiffness. The overwhelming majority (93%) of patients recommended SSS for postoperative shoulder rehabilitation and SSS yielded high patient satisfaction scores. Elucidating the impact of SSS on clinical outcomes and function in comparison with traditional rehabilitation protocols is warranted.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: SSS in combination with telehealth was tolerated well by patients and may represent an alternative or adjunct to traditional rehabilitation protocols.

BACKGROUND: Shoulder instability attributed to glenoid labral tears is common among National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) football players. Certain repetitive activities by player position may contribute to instability.

PURPOSE: To compare the location of labral tears among player positions in NCAA Division I football.

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional study.

METHODS: We conducted a review of football players who underwent shoulder labral repair between 2000 and 2020 at a single institution. Inclusion criteria were NCAA Division I level, diagnosis of shoulder instability, and labral tear requiring arthroscopic repair. Exclusion criteria were prior surgery on injured shoulder and incomplete medical records. Players were divided into 3 groups: line players (offensive and defensive linemen, defensive end), skill players (defensive back, wide receiver, running back, and quarterback), and hybrid players (linebacker and tight end). Labral tear location and size were recorded using the clockface method and categorized into 6 zones: superior, anterosuperior, anteroinferior, inferior, posteroinferior, and posterosuperior. Comparison of variables was performed using chi-square test or Fisher exact test (categorical) and 1-way analysis of variance or Kruskal-Wallis H test (continuous). The Spearman rank-order correlation was used to assess relationships between continuous data.

RESULTS: Of the 53 included players, 37 (70%) were offensive linemen, defensive linemen, and linebackers. There were 29 line players, 11 skill players, and 13 hybrid players. Line players represented 55% of included players and had the most total labral tears as compared with all groups. Hybrid players had a significantly higher percentage of posterosuperior tears than line players (92% vs 52%; P = .015) and skill players (92% vs 27%; P = .002). Skill players had a significantly higher percentage of anterior tears at 3:00-4:00 and 5:00-6:00 when compared with hybrid players (82% vs 15%, P = .003; 82% vs 31%, P = .012, respectively). There was a positive correlation between labral tear size and number of suture anchors (0; P = .010).

CONCLUSION: In this study of NCAA Division I football players, skill players had a higher proportion of anteroinferior labral tears, and hybrid players had a higher proportion of posterosuperior labral tears.

The purpose of this study was to determine how implant characteristics affect in vivo shoulder kinematics after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Kinematics of the affected upper limb were measured in 32 participants during five motions (scapular plane abduction, hand-to-head, hand-to-back, internal/external rotation at 90° abduction, and circumduction) using optical motion capture. Shoulder abduction, plane of elevation, and internal/external rotation range of motion (ROM), peak angles, and continuous kinematics waveforms were calculated for each motion. Multiple regression was used to identify associations between kinematics and implant characteristics of lateralization, humeral retroversion, glenosphere size, glenosphere tilt, glenoid eccentricity, and implant neck-shaft angle (135° or 145°). Less humeral retroversion was associated with greater shoulder rotation ROM (p = 0.036) and greater plane of elevation ROM (p = 0.024) during circumduction, while less eccentricity was associated with more posterior plane of elevation during hand-to-back (p = 0.021). The 145° implant was associated with greater internal/external shoulder rotation ROM (p < 0.001), greater internal shoulder rotation (p = 0.002), and greater plane of elevation ROM (p = 001) during the hand-to-back. The 145° implant was also associated with more internal/external rotation ROM (p = 0.043) during shoulder rotation and more abduction ROM during circumduction (p = 0.043). During the hand-to-back motion, individuals having 135° neck-shaft angle implants were more abducted from 21 to 51% of the motion and were less internally rotated from 70 to 100% of the motion, while more lateralization was associated with less internal rotation from 90 to 100% of the motion. Retroversion and implant neck-shaft angle are the primary implant characteristics associated with in vivo shoulder kinematics during complex motions after RSA.

PURPOSE: To determine whether posterior glenoid bone block augmentation performed for the treatment of recurrent posterior shoulder instability succeeds in restoring stability and is associated with rates of complications or clinical failures comparable to other glenoid bone augmentation procedures.

METHODS: A comprehensive search of PubMed, MEDLINE, and EMBASE databases was performed. Level of evidence studies I to IV pertaining to posterior bone block augmentation reporting on outcomes or complications were included. The search was carried out in accordance with the Preferred Reported Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines.

RESULTS: Screening of titles, abstracts, and manuscripts with application of inclusion and exclusion criteria yielded 17 full-text articles reporting on 269 shoulders undergoing bone block augmentation. Surgical technique varied between studies with regard to graft type (iliac crest, 13 studies; scapular spine, 2; acromion, 1; distal tibia allograft, 1), graft positioning (medial to 1.5 cm lateral to glenoid surface, equatorial to subequatorial), and open versus arthroscopic technique (open, 10 studies; arthroscopic, 4; both, 3). Four of the 8 studies with pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcomes (PROs) showed significant improvements in these outcomes at final follow-up. The postoperative outcomes ranged from 60 to 90 for Rowe scores (n = 7 studies) and 79 to 90 for Walch-Duplay scores (n = 7 studies). Complications were commonly encountered, with high rates of recurrent instability (0% to 73%) and revision procedures (0% to 67%) across different studies.

CONCLUSION: Posterior bone block augmentation for recurrent posterior shoulder instability does not reliably yield substantial improvements in PROs, and complications are frequently observed. The substantial heterogeneity across studies and the small number of patients precludes any substantive judgements as to the superiority of one surgical technique over another.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, systematic review of level III and IV studies.

PURPOSE: To determine the in vivo effects of superior capsule reconstruction (SCR) on glenohumeral kinematics during abduction and to compare those kinematics results with patient-reported outcomes, range of motion, and strength.

METHODS: Dynamic biplane radiography was used to image 10 patients with irreparable rotator cuff tears while performing scapular plane abduction pre- and 1-year post-surgery. Shoulder kinematics were determined by matching subject-specific computed tomography-based bone models to the radiographs using a validated tracking technique.

RESULTS: No change was detected in static acromiohumeral distance (-0.7 ± 2.1 mm; P = .35); however, average dynamic acromiohumeral distance decreased (2.7 ± 1.2 mm to 2.3 ± 1.0 mm; P = .035) from pre- to 1-year post-surgery, respectively. The humeral head position was 0.5 ± 0.5 mm more superior 1-year post-surgery compared with pre-surgery (P = .01). Glenohumeral abduction increased from pre-surgery (150 ± 20°) to 1-year post-surgery (165 ± 10°) (P = .04) and all patient-reported outcomes improved from pre-surgery to 1-year post-surgery (all P < .002). A more posterior shift in humeral head position was associated with improved American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score from pre-surgery to 1-year post-surgery (r = 0.71, P = .02).

CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that SCR may not depress the humeral head during functional abduction, as previously postulated, and postoperative improvements in subjective and clinical outcomes may be affected by mechanisms other than changes in shoulder kinematics.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: In vivo kinematics changes after SCR are small and do not correspond to previously postulated changes.

BACKGROUND: The role of tear etiology in outcomes after rotator cuff repair is not well understood.

PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The purpose of this study was to determine the difference in outcomes after rotator cuff repair based on tear etiology. We hypothesized that traumatic rotator cuff tears will have greater improvements in functional outcome measures and range of motion (ROM) than atraumatic tears.

STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS: We conducted a chart review of 221 consecutive patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair; prospectively collected preoperative and minimum 2-year postoperative data were evaluated. Shoulder ROM, strength, and standard shoulder physical examination findings were recorded pre- and postoperatively. Outcome measures included visual analog scale for pain, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), 10-item Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS-10; physical and mental components), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) form.

RESULTS: Of the 221 patients, 73 had traumatic tears and 148 had atraumatic/degenerative tears. There were no differences in age, body mass index, or Charlson Comorbidity Index between groups. Patients in the atraumatic cohort had significantly longer duration of symptoms before presentation (18 vs 7 months; P < .01). Preoperatively, the traumatic cohort had less motion to forward flexion (mean ± SD; 138° ± 43.7° vs 152° ± 29.8°; P = .02). Postoperatively, both groups experienced significant improvements in visual analog scale and SSV scores (P < .001 each). However, only the traumatic cohort demonstrated improvements in ASES and PROMIS-10 physical component scores. Patients with traumatic rotator cuff tears had lower preoperative SSV and less motion than those with atraumatic tears, but they had greater improvements in SSV (40.6% ± 39.0% vs 29.2% ± 39.7%; P = .005) and forward flexion (21.6° ± 48.6° vs 2.3° ± 48.2°; P < .001), as well as strength in forward flexion, external rotation, and internal rotation (P < .001, P = .003, and P = .002, respectively).

CONCLUSION: Patients with traumatic rotator cuff tears have worse preoperative symptoms and more functional deficits but experience greater improvements in ROM, strength, and perceived shoulder function than those with degenerative/atraumatic tears.