Conservative treatment of acute traumatic posterior shoulder dislocations (Type A) is a viable option especially in patients with centred joint, low gamma angle, and middle or old age.

PURPOSE: Purpose of this study was to evaluate the mid- to long-term outcome after conservatively treated first-time posterior shoulder dislocations and to determine structural defects associated with failure. METHODS: In this multi-centric retrospective study, 29 shoulders in 28 patients with first-time acute posterior shoulder dislocation (Type A1 or A2 according to the ABC classification) and available cross-sectional imaging were included. Outcome scores as well as radiological and magnetic resonance imaging were obtained at a mean follow-up of 8.3 ± 2.7 years (minimum: 5 years). The association of structural defects with redislocation, need for secondary surgery, and inferior clinical outcomes were analysed. RESULTS: Redislocation occurred in six (21%) shoulders and nine shoulders (31%) underwent secondary surgery due to persistent symptoms. The posttraumatic posterior glenohumeral subluxation was higher in the redislocation group compared to the no redislocation group; however, statistical significance was not reached (61.9 ± 12.5% vs. 50.6 ± 6.4%). Furthermore, a higher adapted gamma angle was observed in the failed conservative treatment group versus the conservative treatment group, similarly without statistically significant difference (97.8° ± 7.2°, vs. 93.3° ± 9.7°). The adapted gamma angle was higher than 90° in all patients of failed conservative therapy and the redislocation group. An older age at the time of dislocation showed a significant correlation with better clinical outcomes (SSV: r = 0.543, p = 0.02; ROWE: r = 0.418, p = 0.035 and WOSI: r = 0.478, p = 0.045). Posterior glenohumeral subluxation after trauma correlated with a worse WOSI (r = - 0.59, p = 0.02) and follow-up posterior glenohumeral decentring (r = 0.68, p = 0.007). The gamma angle (r = 0.396, p = 0.039) and depth of the reverse Hill-Sachs lesion (r = 0.437, p = 0.023) correlated significantly with the grade of osteoarthritis at follow-up. CONCLUSION: Conservative treatment is a viable option in patients with an acute traumatic posterior shoulder dislocation with good outcome after mid- and long-term follow-up especially in patients with centred joint, low gamma angle, and middle or old age. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Arthroscopic Bankart repair with an individualized capsular shift restores physiological capsular volume in patients with anterior shoulder instability.

PURPOSE: Capsular volume reduction in the context of anterior arthroscopic shoulder stabilization represents an important but uncontrolled parameter. The aim of this study was to analyse capsular volume reduction by arthroscopic Bankart repair with an individualized capsular shift in patients with and without ligamentous hyperlaxity compared to a control group. METHODS: In the context of a prospective controlled study, intraoperative capsular volume measurements were performed in 32 patients with anterior shoulder instability before and after arthroscopic Bankart repair with an individualized capsular shift. The results were compared to those of a control group of 50 patients without instability. Physiological shoulder joint volumes were calculated and correlated with biometric parameters (sex, age, height, weight and BMI). RESULTS: Patients with anterior shoulder instability showed a mean preinterventional capsular volume of 35.6 ± 10.6 mL, which was found to be significantly reduced to 19.3 ± 5.4 mL following arthroscopic Bankart repair with an individualized capsular shift (relative capsular volume reduction: 45.9 ± 21.9%; P < 0.01). Pre-interventional volumes were significantly greater in hyperlax than in non-hyperlax patients, while post-interventional volumes did not differ significantly. The average shoulder joint volume of the control group was 21.1 ± 7.0 mL, which was significantly correlated with sex, height and weight (P < 0.01). Postinterventional capsular volumes did not significantly differ from those of the controls (n.s.). CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic Bankart repair with an individualized capsular shift enabled the restoration of physiological capsular volume conditions in hyperlax and non-hyperlax patients with anterior shoulder instability. Current findings allow for individual adjustment and intraoperative control of capsular volume reduction to avoid over- or under correction of the shoulder joint volume. Future clinical studies should evaluate, whether individualized approaches to arthroscopic shoulder stabilization are associated with superior clinical outcome.

What are the factors to affect outcome and healing of meniscus bucket handle tears?

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of this study is to identify patient, meniscus rupture and surgical characteristics that influence the outcome and clinical healing following operative repair of bucket handle tears. METHODS: Between 02/2006 and 10/2012, a total of 38 patients (14 women, 24 men) with bucket handle tears underwent surgical meniscus repair. There were 27 isolated repairs and 11 with concomitant anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) replacement. Patients were analyzed on an average of 44.4 months (range 15-96 months) after surgery by the use of standardized subjective scoring instruments [Lysholm, International Knee Documentation Committee (IKDC), Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) and Tegner Activity Scale (TAS)]. To identify factors affecting the outcome and suture survival, patient-specific, trauma-specific as well as meniscus- and surgery-specific factors were collected. Patients were divided in two groups with healed menisci (group 1) and re-rupture subjects (group 2). Meniscus re-rupture was defined as a clinical failure. RESULTS: There were 25 patients with healed menisci and 13 (34.2%) that sustained re-rupture and underwent either partial meniscectomy (n = 8) or re-suture (n = 5). Group 1 achieved slightly higher outcome compared to group 2 [Lysholm: 87.8 vs. 84.3 (p = 0.35), IKDC: 86.9 vs. 85.7 (p = 0.67), KOOS: 91.3 vs. 90.5 (p = 0.74)]. TAS was better for group 2 [5.9 vs. 6.8 (p = 0.36)]. Strong impact to result in a significantly increased outcome was identified for higher age, subjective knee joint stability, high preoperative Lysholm Score, short trauma-to-repair time, previous ACL reconstruction and a smaller number of sutures to fulfill meniscus repair. Lower patient age, male gender and higher activity level had the strongest impact to provoke re-rupture. CONCLUSION: Clinical outcome after meniscus bucket handle suture is satisfying. Re-rupture rate among this collective was 34.2%. Clear risk factors were identified for diminished clinical healing and outcome.