Arthroscopic Posterior Labral Repair in Active-Duty Military Patients: A Reliable Solution for an At-Risk Population, Regardless of Anchor Type.

Autor:	Scanaliato JP; William Beaumont Army Medical Center, El Paso, Texas, USA., Childs BR; William Beaumont Army Medical Center, El Paso, Texas, USA., Dunn JC; William Beaumont Army Medical Center, El Paso, Texas, USA., Czajkowski H; Carthage Area Hospital, Carthage, New York, USA., Parnes N; Carthage Area Hospital, Carthage, New York, USA.; Claxton-Hepburn Medical Center, Ogdensburg, New York, USA.
Jazyk:	angličtina
Zdroj:	The American journal of sports medicine [Am J Sports Med] 2022 Sep; Vol. 50 (11), pp. 3036-3044. Date of Electronic Publication: 2022 Aug 19.
DOI:	10.1177/03635465221111568
Abstrakt:	Background: Active-duty servicemembers are a population at risk for the development of posterior shoulder instability. While short-term outcomes after arthroscopic posterior labral repair for posterior shoulder instability are promising, there is a paucity of longer term follow-up data for this procedure. Purposes: The primary purpose was to report midterm outcomes after arthroscopic posterior labral repair in active-duty military patients for posterior shoulder instability without bone loss. The secondary purpose was to determine if outcomes varied between anchor types used. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Preoperative and postoperative outcomes, with a minimum 3-year follow-up, for a visual analog scale for pain, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and the Rowe score were collected and analyzed. A separate subgroup analysis was performed comparing the outcomes of patients who underwent repair with biocomposite anchors versus those who underwent repair with all-suture anchors. Results: A total of 73 patients with a mean follow-up of 82.55 ± 24.20 months met the inclusion criteria and were available for analysis. As a whole, the cohort demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvements in outcome scores at final follow-up. Preoperative and postoperative range of motion did not vary significantly. While the difference in final outcome scores between the 2 anchor types did not reach statistical significance, a statistically significantly larger proportion of patients who underwent repair with all-suture anchors versus those who underwent repair with biocomposite anchors met the Patient Acceptable Symptom State for the SANE (97.14% vs 78.95%, respectively; P = .0180) and the ASES score (88.57% vs 68.42%, respectively; P = .0171). The proportion of patients who achieved the substantial clinical benefit or surpassed the minimal clinically important difference, however, did not vary by anchor type. Overall, 70 patients (95.89%) remained on active duty and were able to return to preinjury work and recreational activity levels. There were 3 patients (4.11%) who had recurrent posterior instability. Conclusion: This population of active-duty servicemembers undergoing posterior labral repair for posterior labral instability without bone loss demonstrated a statistically and clinically significant improvement in midterm outcomes, a low recurrence rate, and a rate of return to active duty of 95.89%, regardless of the anchor type used.
Databáze:	MEDLINE
Externí odkaz:	Zobrazit plný text záznamu