Hongo, Michio

Background Although the use of rotator interval closure is frequently advocated as a useful supplement to shoulder instability repairs, the addition of a rotator interval closure after arthroscopic instability repair has not been fully investigated. Purpose The objective of this study was to investigate whether a rotator interval closure improves glenohumeral stability in an anterior and posterior instability shoulder model. Study Design Controlled laboratory study. Methods Fourteen fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulder specimens were dissected free of soft tissues, leaving the rotator cuff intact with simulated cuff loading. All specimens were mounted in a custom testing apparatus using infrared sensors to document glenohumeral translation and rotation. The specimens were then tested for stability in the following order: vented/subluxated state, after arthroscopic anterior (Group 1; 7 specimens) or posterior (Group 2; 7 specimens) instability repair with suture anchors, and then after rotator interval closure. For each of the 3 testing conditions, the following were measured: (1) external and internal rotation at neutral, (2) external and internal rotation at 90° of abduction, (3) posterior and anterior translation at neutral rotation (15 N and 25 N), (4) anterior translation at 90° of abduction and external rotation (Group 1; 15 N and 25 N), (5) posterior translation at 90° of flexion and internal rotation (Group 2; 15 N and 25 N), and (6) sulcus testing in neutral (7.5 N). Results Posterior stability was only improved after anchor capsulolabral repair (8.0 to 5.0 mm; P = .017, 25 N), but there was no improvement after rotator interval closure (5.0 to 4.6 mm; P = .453). However, anterior stability was improved after capsulolabral repair (8.6 to 4.0 mm; P = .016, 25 N) and also improved further by rotator interval closure (4.0 to 2.4 mm; P = .007). The mean loss of external rotation was significantly increased by the addition of the rotator interval closure in both neutral and abducted glenohumeral positions, with a mean external rotation loss of 28° in neutral ( P = .013). The addition of a rotator interval closure did not improve sulcus stability ( P = .4). Conclusion The addition of an arthroscopic rotator interval closure after posterior capsulolabral repair did not improve posterior stability; however, anterior stability was improved further after a rotator interval closure. Inferior stability was not improved. Arthroscopic rotator interval closure significantly decreased external rotation at both neutral and abducted arm positions. Clinical Relevance Arthroscopic closure may be beneficial in certain cases of anterior shoulder instability; however, posterior instability was not improved. Predictable losses of external rotation after rotator interval closure are of concern.

Purpose The purposes of this study were to investigate the differences between open and arthroscopic closure of the rotator interval (RI) on glenohumeral translation and range of motion. We also sought to determine if the addition of either an open or arthroscopic RI closure increases stability of the shoulder. Methods Fourteen fresh‐frozen (10 paired) cadaveric shoulder specimens were mounted in a custom testing apparatus, and glenohumeral translation and rotation were obtained by using an optoelectric tracking system (Optotrak Certus; Northern Digital, Ontario, Canada). Specimens were randomly allocated to either open (n = 7) or arthroscopic (n = 7) plication of the RI. The following were measured first with an intact and vented specimen and subsequently after an RI closure using either open or arthroscopic techniques: (1) range of motion in neutral and 90° abduction; (2) anterior and posterior translation at neutral rotation; (3) anterior translation at 90° abduction with external rotation; and (4) posterior translation at 90° flexion with internal rotation. Results Posterior stability was not improved from the intact state by either open (1.0‐mm change) or arthroscopic (0.1‐mm change) repair. The sulcus stability was improved in the open group (5.7 mm to 2.9 mm, P = .028), but not arthroscopically (5.1 to 4.1 mm, P = .499). Neutral anterior stability was improved after open repair (7.2 to 2.6 mm, P = .018), but not arthroscopically (2.3 to 2.4 mm, P = 0.5). However, anterior stability in external rotation (ER) at 90° abduction was improved in the arthroscopic repair group (5.5 to 3.1 mm, P = .006). The mean loss of ER in neutral was greater in the open group (40.8°) versus the arthroscopic group (24.4°, P = .0038). The arthroscopic group showed an 11.7° loss of ER in 90° abduction ( P = .018) versus the open group loss of 4.8°. There were no significant differences in loss of IR in either neutral or 90° abduction. Conclusions Posterior stability was not improved by either open or arthroscopic rotator interval repair, and sulcus stability only improved with the open technique. Anterior stability in neutral was improved after open repair and in the arthroscopic repair group with the arm abducted. There was a large loss of external rotation with both techniques. Clinical Relevance This study suggests that arthroscopic RI closure adds little to the overall posterior and inferior stability of the shoulder joint, although anterior stability may be improved. There is a potentially large loss of external rotation after either repair method.