header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

AN EXPERTISE-BASED RANDOMISED CLINICAL TRIAL COMPARING ARTHROSCOPIC VERSUS OPEN STABILIZATION FOR RECURRENT ANTERIOR SHOULDER INSTABILITY: TWO-YEAR POST-OPERATIVE DISEASE-SPECIFIC QUALITY OF LIFE OUTCOMES

Canadian Orthopaedic Association (COA)



Abstract

Purpose

This prospective, expertise-based randomized clinical trial compares arthroscopic to open shoulder stabilization by measuring the disease-specific quality of life outcome in patients with traumatic unidirectional anterior shoulder instability, and determining the incidence of recurrent instability at 2-years post-operatively.

Method

One hundred and ninety-six patients were randomly allocated to arthroscopic (n=98) or open (n=98) repair using an expertise-based approach with a surgeon specializing in one type of surgery. Randomization was performed using computer-generation, variable block sizes and concealed envelopes. Outcomes were measured at baseline, 3 and 6 months, 1 and 2 years post-operatively. These outcomes included the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) Index quality of life outcome and the American Shoulder and Elbow Society (ASES) functional outcome. Both outcomes were measured on a visual analog scale from 0 to 100, where a higher score represents better quality of life or function. Recurrent instability was categorized as traumatic/atraumatic, and as a subluxation/dislocation. Analyses included ANOVA of repeated measures and independent t-tests. Bonferroni adjustments for pairwise contrasts were made for multiple comparisons. Chi-squared analyses were performed on recurrence. Statistical significance was reported at p < 0.05.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences at baseline with respect to gender, involved dominant shoulders, age, WOSI or ASES scores. At 2-years post-operatively, 19 patients in the Open group and 14 patients in the Arthroscopic group were lost to follow-up. A comparison of the baseline characteristics of these lost to follow-up patients showed no statistically significant differences in WOSI and ASES scores, age, involved dominant shoulder, gender and presence of Hill Sachs lesions between the groups. Of the patients that completed 2-year follow-up, there was no difference in mean WOSI score between the two groups: Open = 85 (SD = 20; 95% CI = 81 89), Arthroscopic = 82 (SD = 20; 95% CI = 77 86), p = 0.31. The ASES score for the Open group at 2-years was 91 (SD = 13; 95% CI = 88 94) and 88 (SD = 16; 95% CI = 85 92) for the Arthroscopic group, p = 0.17. Recurrence rates at 2-years were statistically different with 11% in the Open (9/80) and 23% in the Arthroscopic (20/87) groups, p = 0.05.

Conclusion

At 2-years post-operative follow-up, there was no difference in disease-specific quality of life between Open and Arthroscopic repair. Open repair had a significantly lower risk of recurrence.