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
Comparative Study
. 2020 Mar;36(3):660-665.
doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.09.029. Epub 2019 Dec 18.

Revision Arthroscopic Posterior Shoulder Capsulolabral Repair in Contact Athletes: Risk Factors and Outcomes

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Revision Arthroscopic Posterior Shoulder Capsulolabral Repair in Contact Athletes: Risk Factors and Outcomes

James P Bradley et al. Arthroscopy. 2020 Mar.

Abstract

Purpose: To determine risk factors and outcomes of revision arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair in contact athletes.

Methods: Contact athletes with unidirectional posterior instability who underwent arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair from 2000 to 2014 with minimum 4-year follow-up were reviewed. Revision rate was determined and those who required revision surgery were compared with those who did not. Age, gender, labral and/or capsular injury, level of sport, and return to sport were compared. Pre- and postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, pain, function, stability, range of motion, strength, and satisfaction were also compared. Magnetic resonance imaging measurements of glenoid bone width, glenoid version, labral width, labral version, and cartilage version were also compared.

Results: A total of 149 contact athletes' shoulders met inclusion criteria. Eight shoulders required revision surgery (5.4%) at 13.0-year follow-up with 2.6 years between primary surgery and revision. Preoperative stability was significantly worse in those that required revision (0.008). Postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was significantly worse in the revision group (75.1 vs 87.8, P = .03). The only significant risk factor for requiring revision surgery was decreased glenoid bone width (26.4 mm vs 29.1 mm, P = .005). Cartilage version, labral version, and bone version were not significantly different, nor was labral width. Sex, labral injury, capsule injury, both capsule and labrum injury, and level of sport were not risk factors. Both return to sport at the same level (revision = 16.7% vs nonrevision = 72.1%, P < .001) and overall return to sport (revision = 50.0% vs nonrevision=93.7%, P < .001) were significantly worse in the revision group.

Conclusions: Contact athletes underwent revision arthroscopic posterior capsulolabral repair at an incidence of 5.4% at minimum 4-year and average 13.0-year follow-up. The only significant risk factors for requiring revision surgery was smaller glenoid bone width and higher preoperative instability. Return to play after their subsequent surgery was significantly worse.

Level of evidence: Level III, comparative study.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

Publication types