Advertisement

Instability severity index score values below 7 do not predict recurrence after arthroscopic Bankart repair

  • Miguel Angel Ruiz IbánEmail author
  • Cristina Victoria Asenjo Gismero
  • Santos Moros Marco
  • Raquel Ruiz Díaz
  • Teresa del Olmo Hernández
  • Gabriel del Monte Bello
  • Miguel García Navlet
  • Jose Luis Ávila Lafuente
  • Jorge Díaz Heredia
SHOULDER
  • 21 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

To evaluate the efficacy of the Instability Severity Index Score (ISIS) in predicting an increased recurrence risk after an arthroscopic Bankart repair.

Methods

Retrospective review of a cohort of patients operated in three different centres. The inclusion criteria (recurrent anterior instability [dislocation or subluxation] with or without hyperlaxity, arthroscopic Bankart repair) and the exclusion criteria (concomitant rotator cuff lesion, acute first-time dislocation, surgery after a previous anterior stabilization, surgery for an unstable shoulder without true dislocation or subluxation; multidirectional instability) were those used in the study that defined the ISIS score. The medical records and a telephone interview were used to identify the six variables that define the ISIS and identify recurrences.

Results

One hundred and sixty-three shoulders met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of these, 140 subjects (22 females/118 males; mean age 35.5 ± 7.9) with 142 (89.0%) shoulders were available for follow-up after 5.3 (1.1) (range 3.1–7.4) years. There were 20 recurrences (14.1%). The mean (SD) preoperative ISIS was 1.8 (1.6) in the patients without recurrence and 1.8 (1.9) in the patients with recurrence (n.s.). In the 117 subjects with ISIS between 0 and 3 the recurrence rate was 12.8%; in the 25 with ISIS 4 to 6 the rate was 20% (n.s.).

Conclusion

For subjects with anterior shoulder instability in which an arthroscopic Bankart repair is being considered, the use of the ISIS, when the values obtained are ≤ 6 was not useful to predict an increased recurrence risk in the midterm in this retrospectively evaluated case series. The efficacy of the ISIS score in defining a group of subjects with a preoperative increased risk of recurrence after an arthroscopic Bankart instability repair is limited in lower risk populations (with ISIS scores ≤ 6).

Level of evidence

Retrospective case series, Level IV.

Keywords

Shoulder instability Recurrence ISIS Anterior shoulder instability Remplissage Bankart repair 

Notes

Funding

No external funding was received.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest regarding the issues presented in this article.

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the local Ethics committee.

References

  1. 1.
  2. 2.
    Bak K, Wiesler ER, Poehling GG (2010) Consensus statement on shoulder instability. Arthroscopy 26:249–255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Balg F, Boileau P (2007) The instability severity index score. A simple pre-operative score to select patients for arthroscopic or open shoulder stabilisation. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89:1470–1477CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Boileau P, Saliken D (2017) Editorial commentary: the wake of the dragon: will the orthopaedic community adopt the shoulder arthroscopic latarjet procedure as we adopted the arthroscopic rotator cuff repair? Arthroscopy 33:2139–2143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Boileau P, Villalba M, Hery JY, Balg F, Ahrens P, Neyton L (2006) Risk factors for recurrence of shoulder instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:1755–1763CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bonnevialle N, Azoulay V, Faraud A, Elia F, Swider P, Mansat P (2017) Results of arthroscopic Bankart repair with Hill-Sachs remplissage for anterior shoulder instability. Int Orthop 41:2573–2580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boughebri O, Maqdes A, Moraiti C, Dib C, Leclere FM, Valenti P (2014) Results of 45 arthroscopic Bankart procedures: Does the ISIS remain a reliable prognostic assessment after 5 years? Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-014-1562-5 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bouliane M, Saliken D, Beaupre LA, Silveira A, Saraswat MK, Sheps DM (2014) Evaluation of the instability severity index score and the western ontario shoulder instability index as predictors of failure following arthroscopic Bankart repair. Bone Joint J 96-B:1688–1692CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Coudane H, Walch G, Sebesta A (2000) Chronic anterior instability of the shoulder in adults methodology. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 86(Suppl 1):94–95Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Delage Royle A, Balg F, Bouliane MJ, Canet-Silvestri F, Garant-Saine L, Sheps DM et al (2017) Indication for computed tomography scan in shoulder instability: sensitivity and specificity of standard radiographs to predict bone defects after traumatic anterior glenohumeral instability. Orthop J Sports Med 5:2325967117733660CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Di Giacomo G, Itoi E, Burkhart SS (2014) Evolving concept of bipolar bone loss and the Hill-Sachs lesion: from “engaging/non-engaging” lesion to “on-track/off-track” lesion. Arthroscopy 30:90–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ee GW, Mohamed S, Tan AH (2011) Long term results of arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability. J Orthop Surg Res 6:28CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gagey OJ, Gagey N (2001) The hyperabduction test. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83:69–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gasparini G, De Benedetto M, Cundari A, De Gori M, Orlando N, McFarland EG et al (2016) Predictors of functional outcomes and recurrent shoulder instability after arthroscopic anterior stabilization. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 24:406–413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kropf EJ, Tjoumakaris FP, Sekiya JK (2007) Arthroscopic shoulder stabilization: is there ever a need to open? Arthroscopy 23:779–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lee SH, Lim KH, Kim JW (2018) Risk factors for recurrence of anterior-inferior instability of the shoulder after arthroscopic bankart repair in patients younger than 30 years. Arthroscopy 34:2530–2536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nourissat G, Kilinc AS, Werther JR, Doursounian L (2011) A prospective, comparative, radiological, and clinical study of the influence of the “remplissage” procedure on shoulder range of motion after stabilization by arthroscopic Bankart repair. Am J Sports Med 39:2147–2152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Owens BD, DeBerardino TM, Nelson BJ, Thurman J, Cameron KL, Taylor DC et al (2009) Long-term follow-up of acute arthroscopic Bankart repair for initial anterior shoulder dislocations in young athletes. Am J Sports Med 37:669–673CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Phadnis J, Arnold C, Elmorsy A, Flannery M (2015) Utility of the instability severity index score in predicting failure after arthroscopic anterior stabilization of the shoulder. Am J Sports Med 43:1983–1988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Porcellini G, Campi F, Pegreffi F, Castagna A, Paladini P (2009) Predisposing factors for recurrent shoulder dislocation after arthroscopic treatment. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91:2537–2542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Randelli P, Ragone V, Carminati S, Cabitza P (2012) Risk factors for recurrence after Bankart repair a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 20:2129–2138CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rollick NC, Ono Y, Kurji HM, Nelson AA, Boorman RS, Thornton GM et al (2017) Long-term outcomes of the Bankart and Latarjet repairs: a systematic review. Open Access J Sports Med 8:97–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rouleau DM, Hebert-Davies J, Djahangiri A, Godbout V, Pelet S, Balg F (2013) Validation of the instability shoulder index score in a multicenter reliability study in 114 consecutive cases. Am J Sports Med 41:278–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ruiz Iban MA (2017) Shoulder instability. current concepts and controversies. Open Orthop J 11:810–811CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Thomazeau H, Courage O, Barth J, Pelegri C, Charousset C, Lespagnol F et al (2010) Can we improve the indication for Bankart arthroscopic repair? A preliminary clinical study using the ISIS score. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 96:S77–S83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tordjman D, Vidal C, Fontes D (2016) Mid-term results of arthroscopic Bankart repair: a review of 31 cases. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 102:541–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    van der Linde JA, van Kampen DA, Terwee CB, Dijksman LM, Kleinjan G, Willems WJ (2011) Long-term results after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization using suture anchors: an 8- to 10-year follow-up. Am J Sports Med 39:2396–2403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Waterman BR, Burns TC, McCriskin B, Kilcoyne K, Cameron KL, Owens BD (2014) Outcomes after bankart repair in a military population: predictors for surgical revision and long-term disability. Arthroscopy 30:172–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Weaver JK, Derkash RS (1994) Don’t forget the Bristow-Latarjet procedure. Clin Orthop Relat Res 308:102–110Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yamamoto N, Itoi E, Abe H, Minagawa H, Seki N, Shimada Y et al (2007) Contact between the glenoid and the humeral head in abduction, external rotation, and horizontal extension: a new concept of glenoid track. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16:649–656CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miguel Angel Ruiz Ibán
    • 1
    Email author
  • Cristina Victoria Asenjo Gismero
    • 1
  • Santos Moros Marco
    • 2
  • Raquel Ruiz Díaz
    • 1
  • Teresa del Olmo Hernández
    • 2
  • Gabriel del Monte Bello
    • 3
  • Miguel García Navlet
    • 3
  • Jose Luis Ávila Lafuente
    • 2
  • Jorge Díaz Heredia
    • 1
  1. 1.Unidad de Hombro y Codo, Hospital Universitario Ramón y CajalMadridSpain
  2. 2.Unidad de Miembro SuperiorHospital MazZaragozaSpain
  3. 3.Unidad de Hombro y Codo, Hospital Asepeyo CosladaMadridSpain

Personalised recommendations