TY - JOUR
T1 - Does creating a trough on the anterior glenoid rim make a difference in Arthroscopic Bankart repair using suture anchors? A mid-term follow-up retrospective study
AU - Shim, Seung Bo
AU - Jeong, Jeung Yeol
AU - Keum, Dong Ho
AU - Yoo, Jae Chul
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2018 The Japanese Orthopaedic Association
PY - 2019/3
Y1 - 2019/3
N2 - Purpose: Creating a trough on the anterior glenoid rim is one of the methods used for arthroscopic Bankart repair with suture anchors. The purpose of this study was to analyze clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair with suture anchors; to compare between the outcomes of surgical procedures with and without trough. Methods: Clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated for 116 patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair at our institute from 2005 to 2011. The mean follow-up was 5.2 years (range, 2–8.8 years). All data were divided into trough group (n = 62) and non-trough group (n = 71). Clinical and functional outcomes were assessed pre- and postoperatively as range of motion (ROM), pain on the visual analog scale (p-VAS), function on the visual analog scale (f-VAS), and Rowe score. Radiological outcomes were also evaluated. Results: The overall postoperative clinical and functional outcomes improved significantly (P < .001). A total of 8 patients (6.8%) showed recurrent instability. Radiologic findings showed mild arthritis in 27 cases (23.1%), moderate arthritis in 6 cases (5.1%), and no severe arthritis. 32 patients showed anterior apprehension after surgery, and 22 out of those 32 patients were from non-trough group. However, no significant difference between the trough and non-trough groups was found with respect to clinical and functional outcomes (P > .05). Conclusion: The additional procedure of creating a trough did not improve clinical outcomes in terms of frank dislocation; however, at the final follow-up, patients with the trough showed less anterior apprehension. Overall, arthroscopic Bankart repair using suture anchors had relatively good clinical outcome, with a redislocation rate of 6.8%. Level of evidence: Level III, Case series.
AB - Purpose: Creating a trough on the anterior glenoid rim is one of the methods used for arthroscopic Bankart repair with suture anchors. The purpose of this study was to analyze clinical and radiological outcomes of arthroscopic Bankart repair with suture anchors; to compare between the outcomes of surgical procedures with and without trough. Methods: Clinical and radiological outcomes were evaluated for 116 patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair at our institute from 2005 to 2011. The mean follow-up was 5.2 years (range, 2–8.8 years). All data were divided into trough group (n = 62) and non-trough group (n = 71). Clinical and functional outcomes were assessed pre- and postoperatively as range of motion (ROM), pain on the visual analog scale (p-VAS), function on the visual analog scale (f-VAS), and Rowe score. Radiological outcomes were also evaluated. Results: The overall postoperative clinical and functional outcomes improved significantly (P < .001). A total of 8 patients (6.8%) showed recurrent instability. Radiologic findings showed mild arthritis in 27 cases (23.1%), moderate arthritis in 6 cases (5.1%), and no severe arthritis. 32 patients showed anterior apprehension after surgery, and 22 out of those 32 patients were from non-trough group. However, no significant difference between the trough and non-trough groups was found with respect to clinical and functional outcomes (P > .05). Conclusion: The additional procedure of creating a trough did not improve clinical outcomes in terms of frank dislocation; however, at the final follow-up, patients with the trough showed less anterior apprehension. Overall, arthroscopic Bankart repair using suture anchors had relatively good clinical outcome, with a redislocation rate of 6.8%. Level of evidence: Level III, Case series.
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85056473657
U2 - 10.1016/j.jos.2018.09.024
DO - 10.1016/j.jos.2018.09.024
M3 - Article
C2 - 30448074
AN - SCOPUS:85056473657
SN - 0949-2658
VL - 24
SP - 250
EP - 257
JO - Journal of Orthopaedic Science
JF - Journal of Orthopaedic Science
IS - 2
ER -