Dataset Information

Return to Sport Following Arthroscopic Repair of 270° Labral Tears.

ABSTRACT:

Purpose

To evaluate the rate of return to sport following arthroscopic repair of 270° labral tears.

Methods

We performed a retrospective review of patients with 270° labral tears treated arthroscopically between 2013 and 2017 by a single surgeon. Patients were followed-up to assess whether they were able to return to sport, the level to which they returned and the timing of return. Complications, the Visual Analogue Scale for pain (VAS), the Rowe score, the Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score, and the Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV) were recorded.

Results

The study included 25 patients, with a mean follow-up of 42.2 ± 16.5 months. Of the 25 patients, 19 (76.0%) returned to sport at a mean of 6.8 ± 2.6 months, while 15 (60%) returned at the same or a higher level. At final follow-up, the mean Rowe score was 80.6 ± 14.2; the mean SIRSI score was 61.8 ± 25.4; the mean SSV was 86.4 ± 15.2; and the mean VAS score was 2.2 ± 2.0. One patient reported recurrent subluxation, but no patients suffered a recurrent dislocation during the study period. No revision surgeries were performed within the study period.

Conclusion

Patients with 270° labral tears who were treated with arthroscopic repair showed an overall high rate of return to sport. Despite a low rate of recurring instability, not all patients were able to return to their previous levels of sports.

Level of evidence

Level IV, therapeutic case series.

SUBMITTER: Pounder EJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7283938 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeThe purpose of this study was to systematically review the evidence in the literature to ascertain whether acetabular labral repair (ALR) or debridement (ALD) resulted in superior patient outcomes.MethodsThe systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Peer-reviewed studies comparing ALR and ALD published in English with full text available were included. Patients undergoing both open and arthroscopic surgery in randomized controlled trials, prospective cohort studies, retrospective cohort studies, and case-control studies were included. Studies were quantified for methodological quality using the MINORS criteria. Clinical outcomes were compared, with qualitative analysis, and quantitative analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism version 7. A P value <.05 was considered to be statistically significant.ResultsThere were 8 studies included (level of evidence [LOE] I = 1; LOE II = 2; LOE III = 5). The 7 studies compared 364 patients (369 hips) with ALR to 318 patients (329 hips) with ALD, with a mean follow-up time ranging between 32-120 months. Five studies found significantly improved patient reported outcomes with ALR (Harris Hip Score, Merle d'Aubigné, Pain, SF-12). Several studies compared the outcomes after ALR and ALD and found statistical significance in all investigated metrics in favor of ALR. One study found a significant improvement in abduction but no other study found any difference in range of motion. No study found any difference in complication rate, revision rate or conversion to total hip arthroplasty. Although, 2 studies found ALR reduced the rate of osteoarthritic progression.ConclusionCurrent literature suggests that acetabular labral repair may result in superior patient reported outcomes. However, there appears to be no significant difference in the rate of progression to total hip arthroplasty at up to 10-year follow-up.Level of evidenceLevel III, systematic review of Level I, II, and III studies.