TY - JOUR
T1 - Glenoid Radius of Curvature and Humeral Head Volume Are Associated With Postoperative Dislocation After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair
AU - Vaswani, Ravi
AU - Como, Christopher
AU - Fourman, Mitch
AU - Wilmot, Andrew
AU - Borrero, Camilo
AU - Vyas, Dharmesh
AU - Lin, Albert
N1 - Funding Information:
The authors report the following potential conflicts of interest or sources of funding: D.V. is on the editorial board of American Journal of Sports Medicine. A.L. is a paid consultant for Arthrex and Wright Medical/Tornier. Full ICMJE author disclosure forms are available for this article online, as supplementary material.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Arthroscopy Association of North America
PY - 2021/4
Y1 - 2021/4
N2 - Purpose: To measure bony morphologic parameters and identify their association with arthroscopic Bankart repair failure. Methods: This was a retrospective comparative study. The inclusion criteria were primary arthroscopic Bankart repair, no prior shoulder surgery, traumatic cause, and had a Bankart (soft tissue and bony) lesion evident on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The exclusion criteria were posterior labral pathology, multidirectional instability, connective tissue disorder, rotator cuff pathology, and those who underwent concomitant shoulder procedures. Patients who had a postoperative redislocation (unstable group) were compared with matched patients who did not (stable group). Data were obtained by chart review and from preoperative MRI. Comparisons were made using the Student t test, Fisher exact test, or χ2 test. Statistical significance was defined as P < .05. Inter-rater reliability was measured between reviewers. Results: A total of 45 patients experienced a postoperative dislocation and were matched to 90 patients without a postoperative dislocation. There were no differences in demographic and radiographic variables. The radius of curvature (ROC) of the glenoid was larger (shallower) in the unstable group (23.6 mm vs 22.6 mm, P = .05). The humeral head volume (HHV) trended higher in the unstable group (68.9 mL vs 62.9 mL, P = .06). The glenoid volume was not significantly different. A greater percentage of patients with a glenoid ROC of 24.5 mm or greater (62.1% vs 26.4%, P = .0003) and an HHV of 80 mm3 or greater (60.8% vs 28.9%, P = .003) experienced a redislocation compared with patients without these factors. Patients with a glenoid ROC of 24.5 mm or more and an HHV of 80 mm3 or more had greater than 4 times the odds of redislocation (odds ratio, 4.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-14.43; P = .0098). Strong inter-rater reliability was found for the HHV, glenoid volume, glenoid ROC, and humeral head ROC measurements (r = 0.94, r = 0.88, r = 0.89, and r = 0.95, respectively). Conclusions: This study shows that large ROC (shallow) glenoids in conjunction with large humeral heads may predispose patients to failure after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative trial.
AB - Purpose: To measure bony morphologic parameters and identify their association with arthroscopic Bankart repair failure. Methods: This was a retrospective comparative study. The inclusion criteria were primary arthroscopic Bankart repair, no prior shoulder surgery, traumatic cause, and had a Bankart (soft tissue and bony) lesion evident on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). The exclusion criteria were posterior labral pathology, multidirectional instability, connective tissue disorder, rotator cuff pathology, and those who underwent concomitant shoulder procedures. Patients who had a postoperative redislocation (unstable group) were compared with matched patients who did not (stable group). Data were obtained by chart review and from preoperative MRI. Comparisons were made using the Student t test, Fisher exact test, or χ2 test. Statistical significance was defined as P < .05. Inter-rater reliability was measured between reviewers. Results: A total of 45 patients experienced a postoperative dislocation and were matched to 90 patients without a postoperative dislocation. There were no differences in demographic and radiographic variables. The radius of curvature (ROC) of the glenoid was larger (shallower) in the unstable group (23.6 mm vs 22.6 mm, P = .05). The humeral head volume (HHV) trended higher in the unstable group (68.9 mL vs 62.9 mL, P = .06). The glenoid volume was not significantly different. A greater percentage of patients with a glenoid ROC of 24.5 mm or greater (62.1% vs 26.4%, P = .0003) and an HHV of 80 mm3 or greater (60.8% vs 28.9%, P = .003) experienced a redislocation compared with patients without these factors. Patients with a glenoid ROC of 24.5 mm or more and an HHV of 80 mm3 or more had greater than 4 times the odds of redislocation (odds ratio, 4.56; 95% confidence interval, 1.44-14.43; P = .0098). Strong inter-rater reliability was found for the HHV, glenoid volume, glenoid ROC, and humeral head ROC measurements (r = 0.94, r = 0.88, r = 0.89, and r = 0.95, respectively). Conclusions: This study shows that large ROC (shallow) glenoids in conjunction with large humeral heads may predispose patients to failure after arthroscopic Bankart repair. Level of Evidence: Level III, retrospective comparative trial.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85113934603&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85113934603&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.asmr.2020.12.010
DO - 10.1016/j.asmr.2020.12.010
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85113934603
SN - 2666-061X
VL - 3
SP - e565-e571
JO - Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation
JF - Arthroscopy, Sports Medicine, and Rehabilitation
IS - 2
ER -
