Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2018 Dec;26(12):3788-3796.
doi: 10.1007/s00167-018-4922-6. Epub 2018 Apr 9.

The arthroscopic Bankart repair procedure enables complete quantitative labrum restoration in long-term assessments

Affiliations

The arthroscopic Bankart repair procedure enables complete quantitative labrum restoration in long-term assessments

J Bock et al. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2018 Dec.

Abstract

Purpose: The restoration of the labrum complex and the influence on secondary osteoarthritis after arthroscopic Bankart repair on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) remain unclear.

Methods: Twenty-one patients were retrospectively followed after unilateral primary arthroscopic Bankart repair with knot-tying suture anchors (8.8 ± 2.5 years after surgery, age 25.3 ± 6.3 years). Bilateral structural MRI was performed to assess labrum-glenoid restoration by measurements of the labrum slope angle, height index, and labrum interior morphology according to the Randelli classification. Osteoarthritic status was bilaterally assessed by a modified assessment based on the Samilson-Prieto classification.

Results: MRI assessment revealed full labrum-glenoid complex restoration with equivalent parameters for anterior slope angle (mean ± SD: 21.3° ± 2.6° after Bankart repair vs. 21.9° ± 2.6° control) and height index (2.34 ± 0.4 vs. 2.44 ± 0.4), as well as the inferior slope angle (23.1° ± 2.9° vs. 23.3° ± 2.1°) and height index (2.21 ± 0.3 vs. 2.21 ± 0.3) (all n.s.). The labrum morphology showed only for the anterior labrum significant alterations (1.4 ± 0.9 vs. 0.6 ± 0.7, p < 0.05), the inferior labrum occurred similarly (1.3 ± 0.8 vs. 0.8 ± 0.5, n.s.). Osteoarthritic changes were significantly increased after Bankart repair compared to the uninjured shoulder (4.8 ± 5.1 mm vs. 2.5 ± 1.0 mm; p < 0.05), with a significant correlation of osteoarthritis status between both shoulders (p < 0.05). Scores generally decreased after Bankart repair (constant 84.6 ± 9.5 vs. 94.5 ± 4.9 control, p < 0.05; Rowe 84.5 ± 6.5 vs. 96.2 ± 4.2, p < 0.05; Walch-Duplay 82.4 ± 7.0 vs. 94.3 ± 4.0, p < 0.05) with a strong correlation with osteoarthritis status (p < 0.05).

Conclusions: Arthroscopic Bankart repair enabled good clinical outcomes and complete quantitative labrum restoration parameters. Next to several well-known parameters, secondary osteoarthritis after arthroscopic Bankart repair significantly correlated with osteoarthritic status of the uninjured contralateral shoulder but was not influenced by quantitative labrum restoration. The recommendation for arthroscopic Bankart repair should be based on clinical parameters and not on prevention of secondary osteoarthritis.

Study design: Case series.

Level of evidence: IV.

Keywords: Bankart repair; Knotless anchor; Labrum restoration; Longterm; Shoulder stabilization.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999 Jan-Feb;8(1):66-74 - PubMed
    1. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1978 Jan;60(1):1-16 - PubMed
    1. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2000 Apr;(373):135-40 - PubMed
    1. Am J Sports Med. 2007 Nov;35(11):1859-64 - PubMed
    1. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2016 Feb;24(2):398-405 - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources