• Jin-Young Park, Jae-Hyung Lee, Kyung-Soo Oh, Seok-Won Chung, HyunJun Park, and Ju Yong Park.
• Center for Shoulder, Elbow and Sports at NEON Orthopaedic Clinic, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
• J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020 Apr 1; 29 (4): e124-e129.

BackgroundThe purposes were to compare the characteristics of 2 groups of patients who underwent revision Bankart repair with and without glenoid rim fractures and to examine risk factors for glenoid rim fractures.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 39 patients who needed revision surgery after arthroscopic Bankart repair and identified 19 patients with and 20 patients without glenoid rim fractures. The insertion angle of the suture anchor, anchor position on the glenoid, and demographic data were compared between the groups.ResultsThe mean anchor insertion angles in the glenoid fracture group (group F) at the 2-, 3-, 4-, and 5-o'clock positions were 64°, 58°, 55°, and 55°, respectively; those in the no-fracture group (group R) were 60°, 63°, 60°, and 55°, respectively (P = .630, P = .207, P = .166, and P = .976, respectively). At the 5-o'clock position, anchors were fixed to the glenoid face in 13 cases in group F and in 3 cases in group R (P = .040). Although age (P = .529) and sex (P = 1.0) did not differ between the groups, elite and professional athletes had a significantly higher incidence of glenoid rim fractures (P = .009).ConclusionThe anchor insertion angle did not affect glenoid rim fracture occurrence after arthroscopic Bankart repair. However, the placement of the suture anchor at the 5-o'clock position on the glenoid face could increase the risk of glenoid rim fracture after trauma. Athletes were more likely to have glenoid rim fractures owing to major trauma after arthroscopic Bankart repair.Copyright © 2019 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

26 keywords...

hide…