Skip to content

The Role of Rotator Interval Closure in Bankart Lesion Repair

The Role of Rotator Interval Closure in Bankart Lesion Repair

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01620619
Enrollment
142
Registered
2012-06-15
Start date
2010-02-28
Completion date
Unknown
Last updated
2014-04-25

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Anterior Shoulder Instability, Bankart Lesions

Keywords

Shoulder, Bankart, Anterior Instability, Rotator Cuff

Brief summary

The null hypothesis is that there is no statistical difference between the two treatment groups for any outcome. The investigators suspect that patients who undergo a Bankart lesion repair with rotator interval closure will have lower quality of life and less external rotation compared to patients who undergo a Bankart lesion repair alone. No difference will be observed for recurrence rate between the two treatment groups

Detailed description

Research assessing the role and effectiveness of rotator interval closure is important to attempt to determine the most beneficial and efficient treatment for Bankart lesions and anterior shoulder instability. To date there is only weak evidence supporting the superiority of Bankart lesion repair in addition to rotator interval closure compared to Bankart lesion repair alone. Does Bankart lesion repair with rotator interval closure result in differences in quality of life, range of motion and recurrence at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 1 year and 2 years in similar patients with Bankart lesions who are treated with Bankart lesion repair alone?

Interventions

OTHERArthroscopic Bankart Repair alone

Usual arthroscopic Bankart repair

PROCEDUREClosure of rotator interval

Usual arthroscopic Bankart repair plus rotator cuff interval closure

Sponsors

University of Western Ontario, Canada
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE (Subject, Outcomes Assessor)

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
15 Years to 51 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients between the ages of 15 to 50 years * At least one episode of demonstrated dislocation * Bankart lesion of the anterior glenoid labrum * Absence of other capsular and tendon injuries * Absence of glenoid fractures or divots

Exclusion criteria

* Posterior instability or the need for posterior surgical reconstruction * Significant bone lesions greater than 3mm of the humeral head anterior-to- posterior (Hill-Sachs lesions) * Presence of other pathologic conditions of the shoulder (excluding SLAP lesions)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index3,6 weeks;3,6 months; 1,2 yearsDisease-specific quality of life measurement tool (21 questions, 4 domains)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Range of Motion3,6 months; 1-2 years* Universal goniometer * Internal & external ROM at neutral (0°) and 90° of abduction * Both active and passive ROM at both positions
4-Item Pain Intensity Measure3,6, weeks; 3, 6 months; 1,2 yearsPain intensity in the morning, afternoon, evening and with activity
Upper Extremity Functional Index3,6 weeks; 3,6 months; 1,2 yearsLimb-specific quality of life measurement tool (20 questions)
Recurrence3,6 weeks; 3,6 months; 1,2 yearsPatient-reported re-dislocation

Countries

Canada

Contacts

Primary ContactDianne Bryant, PhD
dianne.bryant@uwo.ca5196612111

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026