Advertisement

Posterior bony Bankart bridge technique results in reliable clinical 2-year outcomes and high return to sports rate for the treatment of posterior bony Bankart lesions

  • Lucca Lacheta
  • Brandon T. Goldenberg
  • Marilee P. Horan
  • Peter J. MillettEmail author
Shoulder
  • 34 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To introduce the arthroscopic “posterior bony Bankart bridge” repair technique, and to report clinical outcomes, patient satisfaction, recurrent instability rate, and return to sport rate.

Methods

Patients who were treated for posterior bony Bankart lesions with posterior bony Bankart bridge technique and were at least 2 years out from surgery were included. Clinical outcomes were assessed prospectively by the use of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Score, Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE) Score, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) Score and patient satisfaction. Return to sports rate and complications were reported.

Results

Seven patients with a median age of 23.5 (range 17–43) and a median follow-up of 8 years (range 3–10) were included. Median time from injury to surgery was 15 days (range 3 days–2.2 years). Mean glenoid bone defect was 19% (range 11–31%). At final follow-up the median postoperative outcome scores were: ASES score 100 (range 92–100), SANE score 99 points (range 94–99) and QuickDASH 2.2 points (range 0–9). Median satisfaction of all patients was 10/10 (range 9–10). One patient reported subjective recurrent subluxations, which resolved under physical therapy. No patient underwent further surgery. No complications were noticed. At final follow-up, all patients (100%) reported that their sports participation levels were equal to their pre-injury levels.

Conclusion

The arthroscopic posterior bony Bankart bridge technique leads to reliable postoperative shoulder function and restores shoulder stability with high patient satisfaction and low complication rate in this small patient cohort for the treatment of posterior bony Bankart lesions. Also, no recurrent dislocation was observed at a minimum follow-up of at least 3 years, one patient continued to complain of subjective subluxations which resolved under physical therapy. All patients were able to return to their pre-injury sports level.

Level of evidence

Case series, Level IV.

Keywords

Shoulder Posterior instability Bony Bankart Lesion Suture Bridge 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding

There is no funding source.

Conflict of interest

Dr. Peter J. Millett: relevant financial relationships to be discussed, directly or indirectly, referred to or illustrated with or without recognition within this presentation are as follows: Consultants and Royalties: Arthrex, Inc., Medbridge, Springer Publishing. Paid consultant for (Arthrex exceeding $500.00/year) and I receive Royalties from Arthrex for surgical devices I developed. Stock in: VuMedi. Research activities supported by the Steadman Philippon Research Institute (SPRI) and Vail Valley Medical Center (VVMC). Corporate sponsorships for SPRI: Smith & Nephew, Arthrex, Siemens, Össur Americas, Inc. Lucca Lacheta: Position at Steadman Philippon Research Institute is sponsored by AGA funded through Arthrex, Inc. Brandon T. Goldenberg and Marilee P. Horan received no direct funding but are employees of SPRI: Steadman Philippon Research Institute (SPRI) exercises special care to identify any financial interests or relationships related to research conducted here. During the past calendar year, SPRI has received grant funding or in-kind donations from Arthrex, DJO, MLB, Ossur, Siemens, Smith & Nephew and XTRE.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

References

  1. 1.
    Ahmad CS, Galano GJ, Vorys GC, Covey AS, Gardner TR, Levine WN (2009) Evaluation of glenoid capsulolabral complex insertional anatomy and restoration with single- and double-row capsulolabral repairs. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18:948–954CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Buhler M, Gerber C (2002) Shoulder instability related to epileptic seizures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11:339–344CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cameron SE (1998) Arthroscopic reduction and internal fixation of an anterior glenoid fracture. Arthroscopy 14:743–746CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Clavert P, Aim F, Bonnevialle N, Arboucalot M, Ehlinger M, Bauer T et al (2019) Biomechanical properties of transosseous bony Bankart repair in a cadaver model. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 105:271–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    DeLong JM, Jiang K, Bradley JP (2015) Posterior instability of the shoulder: a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical outcomes. Am J Sports Med 43:1805–1817CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Godin JA, Altintas B, Horan MP, Hussain ZB, Pogorzelski J, Fritz EM et al (2019) Midterm results of the bony Bankart bridge technique for the treatment of bony Bankart lesions. Am J Sports Med 47:158–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hines A, Cook JB, Shaha JS, Krul K, Shaha SH, Johnson J et al (2018) Glenoid bone loss in posterior shoulder instability: prevalence and outcomes in arthroscopic treatment. Am J Sports Med 46:1053–1057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kim DS, Yoon YS, Chung HJ (2011) Single-row versus double-row capsulolabral repair: a comparative evaluation of contact pressure and surface area in the capsulolabral complex-glenoid bone interface. Am J Sports Med 39:1500–1506CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Longo UG, Rizzello G, Locher J, Salvatore G, Florio P, Maffulli N et al (2016) Bone loss in patients with posterior gleno-humeral instability: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:612–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Luedke C, Tolan SJ, Tokish JM (2017) Arthroscopic repair of posterior bony Bankart lesion and subscapularis remplissage. Arthrosc Tech 6:e689–e694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ly JA, Coleman EM, Kropf EJ (2016) Arthroscopic double-row suture anchor repair of acute posterior bony Bankart lesion. Arthrosc Tech 5:e839–e843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maffulli N, Longo UG, Gougoulias N, Caine D, Denaro V (2011) Sport injuries: a review of outcomes. Br Med Bull 97:47–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Maffulli N, Longo UG, Spiezia F, Denaro V (2011) Aetiology and prevention of injuries in elite young athletes. Med Sport Sci 56:187–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McDonald LS, Thompson M, Altchek DW, McGarry MH, Lee TQ, Rocchi VJ et al (2016) Double-row capsulolabral repair increases load to failure and decreases excessive motion. Arthroscopy 32:2218–2225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Millett PJ, Braun S (2009) The “bony Bankart bridge” procedure: a new arthroscopic technique for reduction and internal fixation of a bony Bankart lesion. Arthroscopy 25:102–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Millett PJ, Horan MP, Martetschlager F (2013) The “bony Bankart bridge” technique for restoration of anterior shoulder stability. Am J Sports Med 41:608–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nacca C, Gil JA, Badida R, Crisco JJ, Owens BD (2018) Critical glenoid bone loss in posterior shoulder instability. Am J Sports Med 46:1058–1063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Plath JE, Feucht MJ, Bangoj R, Martetschlager F, Wortler K, Seppel G et al (2015) Arthroscopic suture anchor fixation of bony Bankart lesions: clinical outcome, magnetic resonance imaging results, and return to sports. Arthroscopy 31:1472–1481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Robinson CM, Seah M, Akhtar MA (2011) The epidemiology, risk of recurrence, and functional outcome after an acute traumatic posterior dislocation of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:1605–1613CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Schwartz DG, Goebel S, Piper K, Kordasiewicz B, Boyle S, Lafosse L (2013) Arthroscopic posterior bone block augmentation in posterior shoulder instability. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 22:1092–1101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Spiegl UJ, Smith SD, Todd JN, Coatney GA, Wijdicks CA, Millett PJ (2014) Biomechanical comparison of arthroscopic single- and double-row repair techniques for acute bony Bankart lesions. Am J Sports Med 42:1939–1946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sugaya H (2014) Techniques to evaluate glenoid bone loss. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 7:1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wellmann M, Pastor MF, Ettinger M, Koester K, Smith T (2018) Arthroscopic posterior bone block stabilization-early results of an effective procedure for the recurrent posterior instability. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 26:292–298CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© European Society of Sports Traumatology, Knee Surgery, Arthroscopy (ESSKA) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Steadman Philippon Research InstituteVailUSA
  2. 2.Center for Musculoskeletal SurgeryCharité-Universitaetsmedizin BerlinBerlinGermany
  3. 3.The Steadman ClinicVailUSA

Personalised recommendations