www.elsevier.com/locate/cuor
KEYWORDS
Shoulder instability;
Classification;
Laxity;
Instability;
Arthroscopy;
Treatment
Introduction
Shoulder instability is a long recognised problem.
Papyras reported a case of shoulder dislocation in
30002500 BC. Hippocrates, in 460 BC, described
the reduction of a dislocated shoulder using the
heel in the axilla and application of traction to the
affected arm. He also described the use of a Red
Hot iron inserted into the axilla to cause scarring
in the lower part of the joint to deal with the
recurrent instability, which can follow an acute
dislocation.1
In the first half of the 1900s many non-anatomical
procedures were described for the treatment of the
*Corresponding author. Tel.: 44-208-954-2300.
E-mail address: angusandromney@aol.com (A. Lewis).
0268-0890/$ - see front matter & 2004 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
doi:10.1016/j.cuor.2004.04.002
ARTICLE IN PRESS
98
A. Lewis et al.
Degree of instability.
Chronicity of instability.
Volition of instability.
Direction of instability.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
The classification of shoulder instability: new light through old windows!
99
Aetiology of instability
In any classification system it is important to
distinguish traumatic and atraumatic causes. This
distinction is critical in the selection of treatment.
Unfortunately in many classification systems this
distinction is not clear-cut. Rowe reported in 1963
that approximately 96% of patients will present
with a traumatic component and 4% will have an
atraumatic component.15 However these figures
are likely to be different now with the increased
popularity of sport together with the tendency for
athletes to start participation at an earlier age and
to train more intensively.
In an individual with a clear history of trauma the
treatment decision is generally straightforward.
The difficulty comes when the patient is unable to
give a clear-cut history of specific injury. Furthermore patients with lax joints can sustain trivial
injuries which can initiate instability; thus there is
a broad spectrum of presentations. Atraumatic
causes can be confusing to classify and manage.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
100
Finally there are those patients who have hyperlaxity of all their joints and others, often athletic,
who have laxity of the shoulders only. Some
patients have no laxity, but still present with
atraumatic instability. As our understanding increases it is fair to say that the terms which
describe instability as habitual, voluntary or involuntary become inadequate.
The ideal classification system should satisfy the
following criteria:
*
*
*
*
*
Rockwood classification
In 1979 Rockwood classified instability on the basis
of the presence or absence of trauma:16
Type I Traumatic subluxation without previous
dislocation.
Type II Traumatic subluxation after previous
dislocation.
Type III Atraumatic voluntary subluxation.
(A) With psychiatric problems.
(B) Without psychiatric problems.
Type IV Atraumatic involuntary subluxation.
A. Lewis et al.
Degree of Trauma
Multidirectional Instability
No Laxity
Single traumatic event
Some of the difficulties with this classification arise from trying to define the meaning
of trauma versus no trauma, since there is a
gradation between a severe fall resulting in a
traumatic instability and the absence of injuries in,
for example, the patient who throws a ball and
the arm kept going. The management of
instability which arises as a result of these
intermediate degrees of injury can vary. In these
days of trying to determine, for example, when to
do an arthroscopic repair, classification systems
probably require greater subtlety than can be
obtained in the Rockwood system. Neither does it
allow for mixed pathologies nor shifting pathology
over time.
Direction of instability
Unidirectional Instability
Unidirectional Instability
Generalised Laxity
ARTICLE IN PRESS
The classification of shoulder instability: new light through old windows!
Stanmore classification
Patients are classified into three polar groups: Type
I (True TUBS), Type II (True AMBRI), or Type III
(Muscle patterning disorders/Habitual non-structural). In using this system over the years we
became aware that there is a continuum between
these polar groups with some patients falling in
between. We found that the best model in which to
capture these cases is in the form of a triangle with
the polar groups at each corner (Fig. 1).
101
Polar Type I
Traumatic
Structural
Reducing
Muscle
Patterning
Polar Type II
Atraumatic
Structural
Reducing Trauma
Figure 1 Stanmore classification: the triangle model,
which demonstrates the polar group concept.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
102
A. Lewis et al.
Table 1
Pathology
Group I
Group II
Group III
Trauma
Articular surface damage
Capsular problem
Laxity
Muscle patterning
Yes
Yes
Bankart lesion
Unilateral
Normal
No
Yes
Dysfunctional
Uni/bilateral
Normal
No
No
Dysfunctional
Often bilateral
Abnormal
Polar Type I
Traumatic
Reducing
Muscle
Patterning
43
I(II)47
I(III)21
III(I)27
II(I)30
24
Polar Type III
Muscle patterning
Non-structural
III(II)11
II(III) 4
16
Polar Type II
Atraumatic
Structural
Reducing Trauma
History
Taking an adequate history and performing an
accurate and thorough examination remains the
bedrock in assessing patients with instability. It is
possible, in 90% of cases, to arrive at a correct
diagnosis.10,22
When taking a history from these patients it is
important to identify precisely the part which
trauma played in the onset of the condition. A
documented anterior dislocation associated with
significant trauma, that later develops into a
recurrent problem, is a straightforward management problem (Type I instability). Fortunately
ARTICLE IN PRESS
The classification of shoulder instability: new light through old windows!
Table 2
103
Pathology
Group I (II) Group II (I) Group I(III) Group III(I) Group II(III) Group III(II)
Trauma
Yes
Yes
/
No
/
Yes
/
Yes
No
Yes
Yes
Yesn
Yes
Examination
General examination in recurrent instability is
important. It is also important to specifically look
at the contour of the shoulder. Look for any muscle
wasting of the shoulder girdle including the rotator
cuff. It is important to assess general posture, since
poor posture can be one of the predisposing factors
to a muscle patterning disorder, as can a general
tendency to poor joint position sense and balancing
mechanisms.
There are specific tests for laxity of the shoulder,
for example the Sulcus sign (which tests inferior
laxity) and the anterior and posterior drawer tests.
It is important however to realise that these
demonstrate laxity and are not tests of instability.
To test for instability there are both anterior and
posterior apprehension tests. The anterior apprehension tests tend to be more valuable.10 It is
important to assess for impingement and secondary
rotator cuff damage.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
104
Investigations
Imaging
Basic investigations, such as a simple plain X-ray,
still have an important place. A true AP projection
perpendicular to the glenohumeral joint has its
limitations, as many of the radiographic features
that are likely to be present are obscured by
projection overlap of the glenoid fossa and the
back of the humeral head. If the arm is internally
rotated to throw the back of the humeral head into
profile it may be possible to define a posterior
Broca cleavage defect,20 subsequently called a Hill
Sachs defect.26 An axial view is useful in diagnosing
acute dislocation, but in the case of recurrent
instability a Stryker Notch View is of greater value
to identify a Broca defect, which is pathognomonic
of a structural anterior instability.27 More sophisticated investigations to assess instability have been
introduced, such as CT and MRI scanning. Certainly
CT-scanning is useful in assessing bone architecture, especially in cases where there is instability
secondary to glenoid dysplasia or traumatic fractures. CT arthrography is also effective at identifying labral tears and ligamentous laxity. MRI and MR
arthrography have probably superseded CT, MRI
being most useful for identifying associated rotator
cuff damage, but is less useful for identifying labral
lesions. Recent reports of sensitivities and specificities of 88% and 93%, respectively, have been
reported. Other reports are not so impressive. MR
arthrography certainly is an encouraging alternative.28
Examination under anaesthetic
This forms an essential part of assessing instability.29 Both shoulders need to be examined. Reports
have demonstrated sensitivities and specificities of
100% and 93%, respectively.3032 However this
investigation is only sufficient by itself in a few
cases. Usually it cannot confidently distinguish
between laxity and instability without the benefit
of additional techniques such as arthroscopy.
Arthroscopy
Although this is invasive it is the only way to
accurately assess structural damage in the
shoulder. It enables the clinician to assess both
the static and dynamic processes in the shoulder
joint. It allows identification of the subtle humeral
head defects and scuffing of the labrum, which can
be the clinching evidence in difficult cases. A Hill
Sachs (Broca) lesion can occur in 80% of patients
with recurrent instability at arthroscopy compared
to only 47% of Hill Sachs lesion26 and only 13% of
A. Lewis et al.
Electromyography
Electromyography (EMG) studies are not essential
for the classic traumatic unidirectional instability
(Type I). However its contribution to the atraumatic
complex instability (Type II and III) can be invaluable. It is well known that normal scapulothoracic rhythm depends on the normal co-ordinated
muscle coupling activity to enable smooth placement of the upper limb in space, whilst maintaining dynamic constraint to glenohumeral joint
displacement. Despite this knowledge, scapulothoracic dysfunction is grossly underestimated
with respect to shoulder instability. EMG analysis
can help to validate this clinical observation and to
reveal dysfunction, which is not clinically apparent.
Rowe observed this phenomenon in patients with
voluntary instability where the instability was
caused by certain muscles becoming abnormally
suppressed while others were abnormally recruited, the direction of instability varying with
the precise patterns of uncoupling.7 Over-activity
of the rotator cuff muscles has been observed in
patients with generalised joint laxity.35 We use
functional EMG analysis with flexible wire electrodes in all patients in whom we suspect a muscle
patterning disorder, either on clinical or arthroscopic grounds. We have come to recognise a
number of patterns (Fig. 1).
ARTICLE IN PRESS
The classification of shoulder instability: new light through old windows!
Principles of treatment
Using this classification system we can suggest some
principles of treatment, which can be summarised
by the statements:
*
105
ARTICLE IN PRESS
106
A. Lewis et al.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
The classification of shoulder instability: new light through old windows!
57%.54 This procedure was described for both
anterior and posterior instability, but recurrence
rates from 20% to 30% have been reported.5557
Variations on the original technique have been
using a medially based shift with similar
results.58,59
In addition to capsular shift procedures, arthroscopic techniques have diversified. Laser assisted
and radio frequency capsulorraphy have been
introduced to shrink the capsule, but the exact
role of these procedures has not yet been defined.
Lyons reported encouraging results with laserassisted capsulorraphy (LASC) in 26 patients,
achieving stability in 96%,60 but the minimum
follow-up was only 2 years. Another recent study
compared LASC with radio frequency capsulorraphy
in 56 patients with MDI and at 18 months follow-up
there was still a 2030% failure rate with both
treatments. However these results were comparable with an open inferior capsular shift procedure,
with the added advantage of being minimally
invasive.51
In addition to soft tissue procedures the literature contains descriptions of bony procedures, the
goals of which are the same as those for the soft
tissue techniques. These operations are less frequently performed these days, but on the glenoid
side an osteotomy of the glenoid neck can be
performed for posterior instability if there is
excessive retroversion or flattening of the glenoid
surface. Scott originally described this procedure in
1967.61 In patients with unidirectional posterior
instability with no other structural abnormality one
can expect a 12% recurrence rate at 5 years.62 Auto
graft bone blocks have been used to treat Broca
defects of less than 50% of the surface of the
humeral head, again with varying success. Defects
greater than 50% really require prosthetic replacement.63 Other bone block procedures have been
described for posterior instability to augment
stability of the humeral head within the glenoid
fossa with reasonable results. They are more
applicable to recurrent instability where previous
soft tissue surgery has failed.
Conclusion
There are many different treatment regimens
available to treat the complicated and diverse
pathologies which contribute to shoulder instability. It is difficult to decide which to use in specific
cases and many failures of treatment come about
as a result of an inadequate understanding of the
precise pathologies active in each case. We feel
107
References
1. Adams F. The genuine works of Hippocrates, vols. 1 and 2.
New York: Krieger Publishing, 1886.
2. Bigliani LU, Kurzwell PR, Schwartzbach CC, Wolfe IN, Flatow
EL. Inferior capsular shift procedure for anteriorinferior
shoulder instability in athletes. Am J Sports Med
1994;22:57884.
3. Emery RJH, Mullaji AB. Genohumeral instability in adolescence. JBJS 1991;73:4068.
4. Brown GA, Tan JL, Kirkley A. The lax shoulder in females.
Clin Orthop Relat Res 2000;372:11022.
5. Beighton P, Soloman L, Soskolne CL. Articular mobility in the
African population. Ann Rheum Dis 1973;32:4138.
6. Rowe C, Zarins B. Recurrent anterior subluxation of the
shoulder. JBJS 1981;63A:86372.
7. Rowe C, Pierce DS, Cark JG. Voluntary dislocation of the
shoulder. JBJS 1973;55A:44560.
8. Lipmann Kessel, I Bayley. Clin disorders of the shoulder.
Churchill Livingstone, 2nd ed. 1986; p. 18997.
9. Huber H, Gerber C. Voluntary subluxation of the shoulder in
children. JBJS 1994;76B:11822.
10. Calvert P. Classification and clinical assessment. Minisymposium: shoulder instability. Curx Ortho 1996;10:
1517.
11. Bayley JIL, Fischer K, Tsutsui H, Matthews J. Functional
biofeedback in the management of habitual shoulder
instability: a pilot study. In: Takagishi N, editor The Shoulder
Proceedings of the Third International Conference of the
Shoulder, Fukusica, 1986. p. 3127.
12. Fisher K, Bayley JIL. Unpublished Data. Shoulder unit Royal
National Orthopaedic Hospital, Stanmore.
13. Takwale VJ, Calvert P, Rattue H. Involuntary positional
instability of the shoulder in adolescents and young adults.
JBJS 2000;82B:71923.
14. Neer CS, Foster CR. Inferior capsular shift for involuntary for
inferior and multidirectional instability of the shoulder. JBJS
1980;62A:897908.
15. Rowe CR. Anterior dislocation of the shoulder. Prognosis and
treatment. Surg Clin North Am 1963;43:160924.
16. Rockwood CA. Subluxation of the shoulder: the classification
diagnosis, and treatment. Orthop Trans 1979;4:306.
17. Thomas SC, Matsen FA. An approach to the repair of avulsion
of the glenohumeral ligaments in the management of
traumatic anterior glenohumeral stability. JBJS 1989;71A:
50613.
18. Schneeberger AG, Gerber C. Classification and therapy of
the unstable shoulder. Ther Umsch 1998;553:18791.
19. Kuroda S, Sumiyoshi T, Moriishi J, Maruta K. The natural
course of atraumatic shoulder instability. J Shoulder Elbow
Surg 2001;10:1004.
20. Broca A. Contributions a Ietude des luxations de Iepaule.
Bull Soc Anat Paris 1890;4:31236 (5mme series).
21. Bayley JIL. Functional feedback in the management of
habitual shoulder instabilityFa pilot study 19801986.
Third ISSC, Fukuoka, Japan, 1986.
22. Vienne P, Gerber C. Clinical examination of the shoulder.
Ther Umsch 1998;55(3):18791.
ARTICLE IN PRESS
108
A. Lewis et al.