Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials Involving Anterior Shoulder Instability

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic repair is gaining popularity over open repair for the treatment of bankart lesions. The study aims to evaluate the outcome of arthroscopic repair with open repair in randomised controlled trials conducted comparing the two techniques. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane library, PubMed and EMBASE up to December 2017 for clinical trials comparing the outcomes of arthroscopic bankart repair with open bankart repair. We used fixed or random effects model depending upon heterogenicity. Dichotomous variables were presented as Risk Ratios (RRs) with 95% Confidence Intervals (CIs), and continuous data were measured as measured differences with 95% CIs. RESULT: Five studies were included, with sample size ranging from 42 to 196. Fixed effect analysis showed that the shoulder was more stable in open repair (RR=0.897, 95% CI: 0.821 to 0.980, P= 0.94) but the loss of external rotation at shoulder joint was also higher in those had open repair (RR=0.325, SMD=-0.411, 95% CI: -1.229 to 0.407). The functional outcome assessed by Rowe score was better in open repair (P=0.325). The operative time was lesser in arthroscopic repair but was not statistically significant (P=0.085). CONCLUSION: Our meta-analysis showed that the use of arthroscopic repair though offers better shoulder movement but the open repair is superior in terms of shoulder stability.