Remplissage reduces risk of postoperative recurrent instability versus bankart repair alone

American Orthopaedic Society for Sports Medicine

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. (July 16, 2022, 1:15 p.m.) — Patients undergoing a Bankart repair with remplissage have a better rate of survival than those with an isolated Bankart repair, according to research presented today at the American Orthopaedic Society of Sports Medicine 2022 Annual Meeting.

According to previously reported research results from a two-year follow-up comparing patients who received arthroscopic Bankart repair with/without remplissage for the treatment of traumatic recurrent shoulder instability, there is a greater risk of postoperative recurrent instability in patients without a remplissage. The researchers from that previous study, led by Peter MacDonald, M.D., from the Pan Am Clinic in Winnipeg, Manitoba sought to determine whether the earlier findings change after a longer-term follow-up.

Dr. Sheila McRae, also from the Pan Am Clinic, presented the research.

According to AOSSM, the remplissage (French, "to fill in") procedure during arthroscopic stabilization prevents recurrent dislocations in two ways: the infraspinatus tenodesis acts as a checkrein against the anterior translation of the humeral head and filling in the defect with the tendon and capsule converts the Hill-Sachs lesion to an extra-articular defect, preventing it from engaging the glenoid.

Enrolled patients were randomized intra-operatively to an arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage (52 patients in the REMP group) or isolated Bankart repair (50 patients in the NO REMP group) between 2011 and 2017. Inclusion criteria were patients 14 years or older diagnosed with traumatic anterior shoulder instability with a glenoid defect >15% and the presence of a Hill-Sachs defect (of any size).

/Public Release. This material from the originating organization/author(s) might be of the point-in-time nature, and edited for clarity, style and length. Mirage.News does not take institutional positions or sides, and all views, positions, and conclusions expressed herein are solely those of the author(s).View in full here.