The New Double-row Bankart Repair Recovered Shoulder Stability without Excessive Motion Limitation: A Case–Control Study with Single-row Bankart Repair

Xu Cheng, Hangle Wang, Yanfang Jiang, Zhenxing Shao, Guoqing Cui

PDF
Orthopaedic Surgery ›› 2024, Vol. 16 ›› Issue (5) : 1073-1078. DOI: 10.1111/os.14032
CLINICAL ARTICLE

The New Double-row Bankart Repair Recovered Shoulder Stability without Excessive Motion Limitation: A Case–Control Study with Single-row Bankart Repair

Author information +
History +

Abstract

Objectives: Bankart lesion is one of the most common lesions of the glenohumeral joint. Several double-row suture methods were reported for Bankart repair, which could provide more stability, yet more motion limitation and complications. Therefore, we introduced a new double-row Bankart repair technique, key point double-row suture which used one anchor in the medial line. The purpose of this article is to investigate the clinical outcomes of this new method and to compare it with single-row suture.

Methods: Seventy-eight patients receiving key point double-row suture or single-row suture from October 2010 to June 2014 were collected retrospectively. The basic information including gender, age, dominant arm, and number of episodes of instability was collected. Before surgery, the glenoid bone loss was measured from the CT scan. The visual analogue scale, American shoulder and elbow surgeons, the University of California at Los Angeles shoulder scale, and subjective shoulder value were valued before surgery and at the last follow-up.

Results: Forty-four patients (24 patients receiving single-row suture and 20 patients receiving key point double-row suture) were followed up successfully. The follow-up period was 9.2 ± 1.1 years (range, 7.8–11.4 years). At the last follow-up, no significant differences were detected for any of the clinical scores. The recurrence rate was 12.5% for the single-row group and 10% for the double-row group, respectively (p = 0.795) 14 patients (31.8%) in the single-row group and nine patients (26.5%) in the double-row group were tested for active range of motion. A statistically significant difference was found only for the internal rotation at 90° abduction (48.9° for single-row and 76.7° for key point double-row, p = 0.033).

Conclusion: The key point double-row sutures for Bankart lesions could achieve similar long-term outcomes compared with single-row suture, and one medial anchor did not result in a limited range of motion. The low recurrence rate and previous biomechanical results also indicate the key point double-row suture is a reliable method.

Keywords

Anterior shoulder instability / Bankart repair / Double-row / Single-row / Surgical technique

Cite this article

Download citation ▾
Xu Cheng, Hangle Wang, Yanfang Jiang, Zhenxing Shao, Guoqing Cui. The New Double-row Bankart Repair Recovered Shoulder Stability without Excessive Motion Limitation: A Case–Control Study with Single-row Bankart Repair. Orthopaedic Surgery, 2024, 16(5): 1073‒1078 https://doi.org/10.1111/os.14032

References

[1]
BankartASB. The pathology and treatment of recurrent dislocation of the shoulder-joint. Br J Surg. 1938;26(101):23–29.
[2]
SpieglUJ, SmithSD, ToddJN, Coatney GA, WijdicksCA, MillettPJ. Biomechanical comparison of arthroscopic single- and double-row repair techniques for acute bony Bankart lesions. Am J Sports Med. 2014;42(8):1939–1946.
[3]
PorcelliniG, CampiF, PaladiniP. Arthroscopic approach to acute bony Bankart lesion. Art Ther. 2002;18(7):764–769.
[4]
LafosseL, BaierGP, JostB. Footprint fixation for arthroscopic reconstruction in anterior shoulder instability: the Cassiopeia double-row technique. Art Ther. 2006;22(2):231 e1–e6.
[5]
AhmadCS, GalanoGJ, VorysGC, Covey AS, GardnerTR, LevineWN. Evaluation of glenoid capsulolabral complex insertional anatomy and restoration with single- and double-row capsulolabral repairs. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009;18(6):948–954.
[6]
KimDS, YoonYS, ChungHJ. Single-row versus double-row capsulolabral repair: a comparative evaluation of contact pressure and surface area in the capsulolabral complex-glenoid bone interface. Am J Sports Med. 2011;39(7):1500–1506.
[7]
McDonaldLS, Thompson M, AltchekDW, McGarryMH, LeeTQ, RocchiVJ, et al. Double-row Capsulolabral repair increases load to failure and decreases excessive motion. Art Ther. 2016;32(11):2218–2225.
[8]
MiniaciA, GishMW. Management of Anterior Glenohumeral instability associated with large Hill–Sachs defects. 2004;5(3):170–175.
[9]
ItoigawaY, UeharaH, KogaA, Morikawa D, KawasakiT, ShiotaY, et al. Arthroscopic Bankart repair with additional footprint fixation using the double-row technique at the 4 o'clock position anatomically restored the capsulolabral complex and showed good clinical results. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2022;30(11):3827–3834.
[10]
ItoigawaY, ItoiE, SakomaY, Yamamoto N, SanoH, KanekoK. Attachment of the anteroinferior glenohumeral ligament-labrum complex to the glenoid: an anatomic study. Art Ther. 2012;28(11):1628–1633.
[11]
ItoigawaY, HookeAW, SperlingJW, Steinmann SP, ZhaoKD, ItoiE, et al. The effect of subscapularis muscle contraction on coaptation of anteroinferior glenohumeral ligament-labrum complex after Bankart repair. J Biomech. 2019;85:134–140.
[12]
RandelliP, RagoneV, CarminatiS, Cabitza P. Risk factors for recurrence after Bankart repair a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2012;20(11):2129–2138.
[13]
BokshanSL, DeFroda SF, GilJA, BadidaR, CriscoJJ, OwensBD. The 6-O'clock anchor increases labral repair strength in a biomechanical shoulder instability model. Art Ther. 2019;35(10):2795–2800.
[14]
PlathJE, Aboalata M, SeppelG, JuretzkoJ, WaldtS, VogtS, et al. Prevalence of and risk factors for dislocation arthropathy: radiological long-term outcome of arthroscopic Bankart repair in 100 shoulders at an average 13-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2015;43(5):1084–1090.
[15]
AboalataM, PlathJE, SeppelG, Juretzko J, VogtS, ImhoffAB. Results of arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior-inferior shoulder instability at 13-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(4):782–787.
[16]
CastagnaA, Markopoulos N, ContiM, Delle RoseG, Papadakou E, GarofaloR. Arthroscopic bankart suture-anchor repair: radiological and clinical outcome at minimum 10 years of follow-up. Am J Sports Med. 2010;38(10):2012–2016.
[17]
KomnosGA, BaniosK, LiantsisA, Alexiou K, VaritimidisS, BarekaM, et al. Results of arthroscopic Bankart repair in recreational athletes and laborers: a retrospective study with 5 to 14 years of follow-up. Orthop J Sports Med. 2019;7(11):2325967119881648.
[18]
OnoY, Dávalos Herrera DA, WoodmassJM, LemmexDB, Carroll MJ, YamashitaS, et al. Long-term outcomes following isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair: a 9- to 12-year follow-up. JSES Open Access. 2019;3(3):189–193.
[19]
JudsonCH, VossA, ObopilweE, Dyrna F, ArcieroRA, SheaKP. An anatomic and biomechanical comparison of Bankart repair configurations. Am J Sports Med. 2017;45(13):3004–3009.

RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS

2024 2024 The Authors. Orthopaedic Surgery published by Tianjin Hospital and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.
PDF

Accesses

Citations

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/