HOME HELP CONTACT US SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) All Versions of this Article: 35/4/537    most recent 0363546506296520v1 Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in ISI Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Sisto, D. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Sisto, D. J. Related Collections Shoulder Operative

Revision of Failed Arthroscopic Bankart Repairs

From the Los Angeles Orthopaedic Institute, Sherman Oaks, California

^* Address correspondence to Domenick J. Sisto, MD, Ortho. Inst., 4955 Van Nuys Blvd, Ste 615, Sherman Oaks, CA (e-mail: laortho{at}aol.com).

Background: The results following open revision surgery following a failed arthroscopic Bankart procedure are not well documented.

Purpose: To evaluate the results of patients with a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair treated with a traditional, open Bankart repair.

Study Design: Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

Methods: Thirty patients (28 male and 2 female) who had a mean age of 24 years (range 15–36) at the time of operation were evaluated. The mean interval from the time of the operation to the final follow-up was 46 months (range 24–55). The rating systems of Rowe and the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) were recorded preoperatively and at the time of the final evaluation.

Results: After open repair, mean modified Rowe scores improved from 25 preoperatively to 84.2 points. The results were excellent in 2 (6.7%), good in 24 (80%), and fair in 4 (13.3%); there were no poor results. The UCLA shoulder score improved from a mean of 17 points preoperatively to 29 points (P = .001 for all comparisons). Twenty-six patients (87%) did not have an anchor placement inferior to the 4-o’clock position for a right shoulder or the 8-o’clock position for the left shoulder after the index arthroscopic repair. There were no rotator interval closures performed at the index arthroscopic Bankart repair, and 10 patients (33%) required an interval closure at the open revision procedure. Twenty-five patients (83%) immobilized the operated arm in a sling for less than 2 weeks following the index arthroscopic repair.

Conclusion: Patients with failed arthroscopic Bankart repairs can be successfully treated with a revision, open Bankart repair. Inadequate postoperative immobilization, large rotator intervals, and improper anchor placement are possible risk factors that may increase the incidence of failure of an arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Key Words: shoulder • instability • revision • arthrotomy

This article has been cited by other articles:

				F. Franceschi, U. G. Longo, L. Ruzzini, G. Rizzello, N. Maffulli, and V. Denaro Arthroscopic Salvage of Failed Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Prospective Study With a Minimum Follow-up of 4 Years Am. J. Sports Med., July 1, 2008; 36(7): 1330 - 1336. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]