Does the experience affect the knowledge about auxiliary portals in shoulder arthroscopy? A questionnaire study and review of the auxiliary portals

Aim: This questionnaire study investigated the usability of need -driven portals from the safe zone instead of seconder -specific portals. Material and Methods: A face-to-face questionnaire concerning the anatomic localization of auxiliary specific secondary portals and in which pathology treatment they were used was conducted with 24 orthopedic surgeons. Seven specific seconder portals were included and four portals out of the safe zone were excluded from the study. Observers were divided into two groups according to their shoulder arthroscopy experiences and comparative evaluations were carried out. Results: SPSS 24. Ver Fisher -Exact test was used for statistical analysis and p<0.05 was accepted as significant. The existence of poor and medium results more often than good results in the study indicated that need -driven portals from the safe zone are more convenient. Additionally, the surgical experience was observed to have a more positive effect on the results. When the groups were statistically evaluated with the Fisher Exact Test in terms of anatomical localization and which pathology treatment they are used for, no significant difference was obtained (p=0.059-0.444), except for the Wilmington portal used in pathological treatment (p=0.018). Discussion: It has been observed that recalling and applying specific secondary portals in daily surgical practice is challenging. Instead, many surgeons find it appropriate to open a portal from a suitable area within the safe zone, with an inside -out or outside -to -inside technique, depending on the location and type of pathology.