A Comparison of the Spectrum of Intra-articular Lesions in Acute and Chronic Anterior Shoulder Instability

doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2007.05.009

Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery

Volume 23, Issue 9, September 2007, Pages 985-990

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2007.05.009 Get rights and content

Purpose: The purpose of the study was to compare the incidence of secondary intra-articular shoulder lesions in patients with acute and chronic anterior shoulder instability. The occurrence of glenoid shape alterations (inverted pear glenoid) in recurrent instability was especially examined. Methods: Data for all arthroscopically ascertained intra-articular shoulder lesions in a series of 127 patients with acute and chronic traumatic anterior instability were recorded. Results: Hemarthrosis was evident in all patients with acute dislocation and in 7 patients with chronic laxity who underwent surgery shortly after a dislocation episode. In both groups the presence of a chondral or osteochondral Hill-Sachs lesion was noted in 112 patients (88.1%), a Bankart lesion was noted in 106 patients (83.46%), an anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) lesion was noted in 13 patients (10.23%), a SLAP lesion was noted in 26 patients (20.47%), a humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament (HAGL) lesion was noted in 2 acutely dislocated shoulders (1.57%), and capsular laxity was noted in 33 patients (25.98%). All ALPSA lesions were noted in patients with chronic instability (P = .044), and both HAGL lesions were found in patients with acute dislocations (P = .002). In patients with acute dislocations the incidence of Bankart lesions was 78.2% (18/23), whereas in chronic cases the incidence of Bankart or ALPSA lesions was 97.11% (101/104) (P = .002). In the group with acute dislocations there was a Hill-Sachs lesion in 15 cases (65.21%) and chronic recurrent instability accounted for 97 cases (93.26%) (P = .001). The capsule was considered lax in 2 patients with acute instability and 31 patients with chronic instability (8.69% v 29.8%, P = .037). The overall frequency of SLAP lesions was not statistically significant between acute and chronic cases (P = .868), unlike their distribution. In acute cases there were 3 type I and 2 type II SLAP lesions, whereas in chronic cases there were 4 type I, 13 type II, 3 type III, and 1 type IV SLAP lesions. Loose bodies were found and removed in 17 chronic and 4 acute cases (16.34% v 13.04%, P = .903). A partial-thickness articular rotator cuff tear was found in 14 patients: 12 with chronic dislocations and 2 with acute dislocations (11.53% v 8.69%, P = .694). The cuff tears were partial articular surface tears, involving less than 25% of the cuff thickness, and were treated with debridement, and cuff repair was not necessary in any case. The inverted pear configuration of the glenoid was found in 16 cases with chronic instability (15.38%), whereas no patient with an acutely dislocated shoulder had an inverted pear–shaped glenoid (P = .044). Conclusions: Associated, secondary intra-articular lesions are more frequent in patients with chronic compared with acute shoulder instability, probably as a result of the repeated dislocation or subluxation episodes. Level of Evidence: Level IV, prognostic case series.

Section snippets

Methods

In our department 127 male patients with traumatic acute and chronic anterior shoulder instability underwent diagnostic and operative arthroscopy of the shoulder joint. All findings were recorded prospectively by use of a special evaluation form. Arthroscopy was performed within 10 days of the first dislocation episode in 23 patients (18.11%), whereas the instability was chronic and recurrent in the rest. Most patients were military cadets, with a mean age at the time of surgery of 23.8 years

Results

Hemarthrosis was evident in all patients with acute dislocation and in 7 patients with chronic laxity who underwent operation soon after a recent dislocation episode. Of the patients, 12 had mild instability (1+), 94 had anterior instability with spontaneous reduction (2+), and 21 had anterior instability with nonreducing dislocation (3+). In both groups the presence of a chondral or osteochondral Hill-Sachs lesion was noted in 112 patients (88.1%), a Bankart lesion was noted in 106 patients

Discussion

The prevalence of glenohumeral joint lesions was described in a series of patients with acute and recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Patients with recurrent shoulder instability had significantly more associated lesions relative to patients with acute dislocations. In both acutely and chronically unstable shoulders, multiple lesions coexist, and these have to be addressed at surgery.

The spectrum of the pathoanatomic lesions encountered in shoulder instability is broad.8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13

Conclusions

Arthroscopy helps to locate and quantify the associated lesions in patients with anterior shoulder instability. The incidence of shoulder lesions increases with time because the initial dislocation and secondary lesions are more common in patients with chronic instability. In symptomatic, unstable shoulders, early stabilization may be recommended to prevent secondary injuries.

References (30)

C. Milgrom et al.
A prevalence study of recurrent shoulder dislocations in young adults
J Shoulder Elbow Surg
(1998)
P. Habermeyer et al.
Evolution of lesions of the labrum-ligament complex in posttraumatic anterior shoulder instability: A prospective study
J Shoulder Elbow Surg
(1999)
N. Maffulli et al.
Articular cartilage lesions in the symptomatic anterior cruciate ligament-deficient knee
Arthroscopy
(2003)
R. Norlin
Intraarticular pathology in acute, first-time anterior shoulder dislocation: An arthroscopic study
Arthroscopy
(1993)
R.L. te Slaa et al.
A prospective arthroscopic study of acute first-time anterior shoulder dislocation in the young: A five-year follow-up study
J Shoulder Elbow Surg
(2003)
A.W. Werner et al.
Arthroscopic findings in atraumatic shoulder instability
Arthroscopy
(2004)
N. Pouliart et al.
Simulated capsulolabral lesion in cadavers: Dislocation does not result from a Bankart lesion only
Arthroscopy
(2006)
W.J. Hart et al.
Arthroscopic observation of capsulolabral reduction after shoulder dislocation
J Shoulder Elbow Surg
(2005)
G. Porcellini et al.
Shoulder instability and related rotator cuff tears: Arthroscopic findings and treatment in patients aged 40 to 60 years
Arthroscopy
(2006)
M. Tauber et al.
Reasons for failure after surgical repair of anterior shoulder instability
J Shoulder Elbow Surg
(2004)

J.J. Calandra et al.

The incidence of Hill-Sachs lesions in initial anterior shoulder dislocations

Arthroscopy

(1989)

M.V. Larrain et al.

Arthroscopic management of traumatic anterior shoulder instability in collision athletes: Analysis of 204 cases with a 4- to 9-year follow-up and results with the suture anchor technique

Arthroscopy

(2006)

I.K. Lo et al.

The inverted pear glenoid: An indicator of significant glenoid bone loss

Arthroscopy

(2004)

J.E. Labriola et al.

Stability and instability of the glenohumeral joint: The role of shoulder muscles

J Shoulder Elbow Surg

(2005)

L. Hovelius

Incidence of shoulder dislocation in Sweden

Clin Orthop Relat Res

(1982)

Cited by (254)

Controversies in surgical management of anterior shoulder instability. State of the Art
2024, Journal of ISAKOS
Arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) has been accepted as a standard procedure for anterior shoulder instability with a minimum or no glenoid bone loss and an on-track Hill-Sachs lesion if present. However, several controversies exist in the surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability. This article will discuss some of these controversies in, “simple,” dislocations (without bone loss) as well as, “complex,” (with critical bone loss). Determining which patients will benefit from an arthroscopic procedure depends on multiple factors including age, activity level, adequate determination of bone loss, performed with feasible and reliable imaging techniques. In the absence of concomitant significant bony and soft tissue pathology, ABR alone can provide satisfactory clinical results on a long-term basis. Controversies, including whether to remove cartilage from the edge of the glenoid, knotted versus knotless anchors, and routine rotator interval closure, still exist. In cases with significant bone loss, several bone restoring procedures have been described, such as, the Latarjet procedure, iliac crest bone graft, arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction with a frozen distal tibial allograft, and fresh distal tibial allograft reconstruction. This article will address these controversies and provide guidance based on available published data.
Arthroscopic Humeral Avulsion of the Glenohumeral Ligament (HAGL) Repair Utilized Accessory Posterior Portal in the Beach-Chair Position
2024, Arthroscopy Techniques
Shoulder instability, often associated with both soft tissue and bone lesions, can result in shoulder pain and dysfunction. To address this, the combined procedure of a Bankart repair in conjunction with humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament (HAGL) repair aims to minimize failure rates in a single procedure. While HAGL repair is imperative for preventing recurrent instability, there remains a lack of consensus on the optimal surgical technique. This Technical Note aims to elucidate a surgical approach for addressing and repairing HAGL lesions using arthroscopy, specifically employing a combined posterior viewing portal and posteroinferior working portal in the beach-chair position.
Glenoid track and subcritical Hill-Sachs lesion
2024, JSES International
We have proposed the concept of glenoid track (“on-track/off-track” lesion) to evaluate the risk of engagement of the Hill-Sachs lesion with the glenoid after arthroscopic Bankart repair. This concept has been widely used and many clinical validation studies have been reported. To measure the glenoid track width, we have recommended to use 3-dimensional computed tomography (CT) images. However, the CT method has the issue of radiation exposure and involves time and effort to make 3-dimensional CT images from 2-dimensional images. For these reasons, there are several reports describing the measurement method using magnetic resonance imaging. Recently, the threshold of the critical glenoid bone loss becomes lower. A zone of bone loss below the critical size is called “subcritical bone loss”, which might be related to deterioration of quality of life and bone grafting is recommended. We applied the concept of “subcritical bone loss” to the glenoid track. Patients with “on-track” lesions can be divided into 2 subgroups: those with a “peripheral-track” lesion (most medial 1/4) and those with a “central-track” lesion (the rest 3/4). More recently, similar evaluation methods to evaluate the risk of “off-track” lesions have been reported: ‘‘distance to dislocation’’ and “Hill-Sachs interval/glenoid track ratio”. Also, similar concept to “peripheral-track” lesion, “near-track” lesion was reported. The concept of “peripheral-track” lesion is a concept of assessing an “on-track” lesion which is very close to the medial margin of the glenoid track (subcritical bone loss).
Similar evaluation methods to evaluate the risk of “off-track” or “peripheral-track” lesions were proposed in the literature. A review was performed by searching PubMed. Journal articles published between January 2014 and January 2023 were taken into account. They were compared and their differences were explained.
The “near-track” lesion concept is similar to “peripheral-track” lesion. However, the cutoff value is different: Hill-Sachs occupancy ≥ 75% is the “peripheral-track” lesion, whereas “distance to dislocation” < 8 mm is the “near-track” lesion.
We introduced update of the glenoid track concept including the evaluation method, peripheral-track lesion, and its clinical application.
Editorial Commentary: Immediate Surgical Stabilization Following a First-Time Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Dislocation Is Still the Best Evidence-Based Approach
2023, Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
Traumatic anterior shoulder dislocations are unfortunately common. The initial dislocation is enough to cause permanent anatomic and biomechanical alterations to the glenohumeral joint, which increases the likelihood of further events. When a patient crosses into the multiple dislocator category, further soft-tissue and bony injury occurs. This is almost certainly the reason that the number of preoperative dislocations significantly diminishes the success of an arthroscopic stabilization and increases the need for a more aggressive approach that may carry greater risks of complications. When it comes to recurrent instability, there remains very little doubt regarding the appropriate treatment for a first-time traumatic dislocation: immediate surgical stabilization! Assuming no significant glenoid or humeral bone loss, arthroscopic stabilization remains an effective surgery with a high-benefit, low-risk profile, especially when combined with a remplissage in high-risk circumstances. At least 4 randomized controlled trials support immediate versus nonoperative management for every outcome measured: recurrence, return to sport, patient-reported outcomes, and sustained event-free survival, especially pronounced at 2 years. The decision to recommend surgery, is of course, not always straightforward, necessitating an informed discussion with the patient and the family, especially when other outcomes such as return to play are deemed equally relevant and can be successfully achieved with nonoperative management. Nonetheless, more than any other outcome measure, is there a more important outcome than recurrence regarding long-term health implications? Lastly, can we do better with study designs and outcome measures to better understand risk factors to identify patients better suited for surgery after a first-time event than others? Absolutely. But until then, when up to 60% can sustain a recurrent dislocation in this population, and up to 90% in high-risk individuals, the odds are not in my favor with nonoperative treatment. Despite potential limitations in our current literature, immediate surgery following a first-time dislocation is still the best evidence-based approach.
Review of Burkhart and DeBeer's (2000) article on traumatic glenohumeral bone defects and their relationship to failure of arthroscopic Bankart repair: Where have we taken the concept of glenoid bone loss in 2023?
2023, Journal of ISAKOS
This classic discusses the original publication by Burkhart and DeBeer “Traumatic Glenohumeral Bone Defects and Their Relationship to Failure of Arthroscopic Bankart Repair” published in 2000 in Arthroscopy. At that time, the authors sought to understand the reasons behind the failure of arthroscopic soft tissue repair. Based on their findings, the authors introduced the concept of the inverted pear glenoid and engaging Hill-Sachs lesion which is now part of the orthopedic lexicon. The importance of bony pathologic changes in anterior glenohumeral instability has become so apparent, that it now forms the basis of clinical understanding and underpins treatment algorithms. Since this publication over 20 years ago, the idea of glenohumeral bone loss has been extensively explored and refined. There is no doubt of the importance of structural bone loss yet there is still uncertainty as to the best management of those with subcritical bone loss. The purpose of revisiting this classic article is to look at where we are in understanding recurrent instability and bony deficiency while appreciating how far we have come.
This review begins with a detailed summary of the classic article along with a historic perspective. Next, we look at the current evidence as it pertains to the classic article and how modern technology and innovation has advanced our ability to assess and quantify glenohumeral bone loss. We finish with expert commentary on the topic from two current surgeons with a research interest in shoulder instability to offer an insight into how modern surgeons view and address this issue. One of the original authors also reflects on the topic. The findings of this classic study changed the way we think about shoulder instability and opened the doors to an exciting body of research that is still growing today. Future research offers an opportunity for high quality evidence to guide management in the group of patients with subcritical bone loss and we eagerly await the results.
Anterior-posterior glenohumeral translation in shoulders with traumatic anterior instability: a systematic review of the literature
2023, JSES Reviews, Reports, and Techniques
Reports of glenohumeral translation in shoulders with traumatic anterior instability have been presented. The aim of this systematic review was to investigate anterior-posterior translation in shoulders with traumatic anterior instability.
This systematic review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies including patients aged ≥15 years with previous traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation or subluxation were included. The outcome was anterior-posterior glenohumeral translation. A search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane library was performed on July 17, 2022. Two reviewers individually screened titles and abstracts, reviewed full text, extracted data, and performed quality assessment.
Twenty studies (582 unstable shoulders in total) of varying quality were included. There was a lack of standardization and unity across studies. Radiography, ultrasound, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, motion tracking, instrumentation, and manual testing were used to assess the glenohumeral translation. The glenohumeral translation in unstable shoulders ranged from 0.0 ± 0.8 mm to 11.6 ± 3.7 mm, as measured during various motion tasks, arm positions, and application of external force. The glenohumeral translation was larger or more anteriorly directed in unstable shoulders than in stable when contralateral healthy shoulders or a healthy control group were included in the studies. Several studies found that the humeral head was more anteriorly located on the glenoid in the unstable shoulders.
This systematic review provides an overview of the current literature on glenohumeral translation in traumatic anterior shoulder instability. It was not able to identify a threshold for abnormal translation in unstable shoulders, due to the heterogeneity of data. The review supports that not only the range of translation but also the direction hereof as well as the location of the humeral head on the glenoid seem to be part of the pathophysiology. Technical development and increased attention to research methodology in recent years may provide more knowledge and clarity on this topic in the future.

View all citing articles on Scopus

: The authors report no conflict of interest.

View full text

Original ArticleA Comparison of the Spectrum of Intra-articular Lesions in Acute and Chronic Anterior Shoulder Instability

Section snippets

Methods

Results

Discussion

Conclusions

J Shoulder Elbow Surg

J Shoulder Elbow Surg

Arthroscopy

Arthroscopy

J Shoulder Elbow Surg

Arthroscopy

Arthroscopy

J Shoulder Elbow Surg

Arthroscopy

J Shoulder Elbow Surg

Arthroscopy

Arthroscopy

Arthroscopy

Stability and instability of the glenohumeral joint: The role of shoulder muscles

J Shoulder Elbow Surg

Incidence of shoulder dislocation in Sweden

Clin Orthop Relat Res

Original Article
A Comparison of the Spectrum of Intra-articular Lesions in Acute and Chronic Anterior Shoulder Instability