A Biomechanical, Cadaveric Evaluation of Single- Versus Double-Row Repair Techniques on Stability of Bony Bankart Lesions

Am J Sports Med. 2021 Mar;49(3):773-779. doi: 10.1177/0363546520985184. Epub 2021 Feb 5.

Abstract

Background: Previous studies comparing stability between single- and double-row arthroscopic bony Bankart repair techniques focused only on the measurements of tensile forces on the bony fragment without re-creating a more physiologic testing environment.

Purpose: To compare dynamic stability and displacement between single- and double-row arthroscopic repair techniques for acute bony Bankart lesions in a concavity-compression cadaveric model simulating physiologic conditions.

Study design: Controlled laboratory study.

Methods: Testing was performed on 13 matched pairs of cadaveric glenoids with simulated bony Bankart fractures with a defect width of 25% of the inferior glenoid diameter. Half of the fractures were repaired with a double-row technique, and the contralateral glenoids were repaired with a single-row technique. To determine dynamic biomechanical stability and ultimate step-off of the repairs, a 150-N load and 2000 cycles of internal-external rotation at 1 Hz were applied to specimens to simulate early rehabilitation. Toggle was quantified throughout cycling with a coordinate measuring machine. Three-dimensional spatial measurements were calculated. After cyclic loading, the fracture displacement was measured.

Results: The bony Bankart fragment-glenoid initial step-off was found to be significantly greater (P < .001) for the single-row technique (mean, 896 µm; SD, 282 µm) compared with the double-row technique (mean, 436 µm; SD, 313 µm). The motion toggle was found to be significantly greater (P = .017) for the single-row technique (mean, 994 µm; SD, 711 µm) compared with the double-row technique (mean, 408 µm; SD, 384 µm). The ultimate interface displacement was found to be significantly greater (P = .029) for the single-row technique (mean, 1265 µm; SD, 606 µm) compared with the double-row technique (mean, 795 µm; SD, 398 µm).

Conclusion: Using a concavity-compression glenohumeral cadaveric model, we found that the double-row arthroscopic fixation technique for bony Bankart repair resulted in superior stability and decreased displacement during simulated rehabilitation when compared with the single-row repair technique.

Clinical relevance: The findings from this study may help guide surgical decision-making by demonstrating superior biomechanical properties (improved initial step-off, motion toggle, and interface displacement) of the double-row bony Bankart repair technique when compared with single-row fixation. The double-row repair construct demonstrated increased stability of the bony Bankart fragment, which may improve bony Bankart healing.

Keywords: bony Bankart; displacement; double-row; single-row; step-off; toggle.

MeSH terms

  • Arthroscopy
  • Bankart Lesions*
  • Biomechanical Phenomena
  • Cadaver
  • Humans
  • Scapula / surgery
  • Suture Techniques