• Eran Maman, Oleg Dolkart, Efi Kazum, Noam Rosen, Gavriel Mozes, Michael Drexler, and Ofir Chechik.
• Shoulder Unit, Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, 6 Weizman Street, Tel Aviv, 64239, Israel.
• Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2017 May 1; 137 (5): 673-677.

PurposeArthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) provides satisfactory results for recurrent anterior shoulder instability, but the high recurrence rate post-ABR remain a concern. One of the adjunct procedures proposed to improve ABR results is arthroscopic rotator interval closure (ARIC). This study prospectively evaluated the outcomes of ABRs alone compared to combined ABR + ARIC and identified risk factors related to failure of each procedure.MethodsThirty-nine consecutive patients (mean age 23.1 (18.3-37.5) years; 37 males) underwent arthroscopic stabilization for recurrent anterior traumatic shoulder instability. Twenty patients underwent ABR alone and 19 underwent ABR + ARIC. Remplissage was added when glenoid engagement was observed during surgery. All patients were prospectively followed, and their postoperative courses were reviewed and functionally assessed at the last visit.ResultsThe re-dislocation rate was higher in the ABR + ARIC group compared to the ABR only group at a mean follow-up of 4.2 (2-5.6) years (3 vs. 0, P = 0.06). More subluxations were found in the ABR only group (2 vs. 1, respectively; P = 0.58). The final limitation of range of motion (ROM) compared with the preoperative ROM was similar in both groups. Remplissage procedures were performed more often in the ABR only group [12 (60%) vs. 4 (21%), P = 0.013].ConclusionsARIC performed as an adjunct to ABR showed no superiority in attaining value-added stability compared to ABR alone. Adding a remplissage procedure may achieve better stability.Level Of EvidenceLevel 2.

30 keywords...

hide…