Cargando…

Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes

BACKGROUND: In athletes with recurrent shoulder instability, arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the open Latarjet procedure (OL) are commonly indicated to restore stability and allow them to return to play (RTP). PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of ABR and OL in athletes with recurrent shoulder i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Hurley, Eoghan T., Davey, Martin S., Montgomery, Connor, O’Doherty, Ross, Gaafar, Mohamed, Pauzenberger, Leo, Mullett, Hannan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8436306/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34527752
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671211023801
_version_ 1783751974574882816
author Hurley, Eoghan T.
Davey, Martin S.
Montgomery, Connor
O’Doherty, Ross
Gaafar, Mohamed
Pauzenberger, Leo
Mullett, Hannan
author_facet Hurley, Eoghan T.
Davey, Martin S.
Montgomery, Connor
O’Doherty, Ross
Gaafar, Mohamed
Pauzenberger, Leo
Mullett, Hannan
author_sort Hurley, Eoghan T.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: In athletes with recurrent shoulder instability, arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the open Latarjet procedure (OL) are commonly indicated to restore stability and allow them to return to play (RTP). PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of ABR and OL in athletes with recurrent shoulder instability. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with recurrent shoulder instability who underwent ABR and OL and had a minimum 24-month follow-up. Indications for OL over ABR in this population were those considered at high risk for recurrence, including patients with glenohumeral bone loss. The patients were pair-matched in a 1:1 ratio (OL and ABR) by age, sex, sport, and level of preoperative play. We evaluated the rate, level, and timing of RTP, and the Shoulder Instability–Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score between procedures. Additionally we compared the recurrence rate, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Rowe score, satisfaction, and whether patients would undergo the same surgery again. RESULTS: Participants included 62 athletes who underwent ABR and 62 who underwent OL, with a mean follow-up of 47.7 months. There was no significant difference between ABR and OL in rate of RTP, return to preinjury level, time to return, SIRSI score, VAS score, SSV, or patient satisfaction. OL resulted in a significantly lower recurrence rate (1.6% vs 16.1% for ABR; P = .009) and a significantly higher Rowe score (mean ± SD, 90.5 ± 12.2 vs 82.2 ± 20.8 for ABR; P = .008). In collision athletes, there was no significant difference between ABR and OL regarding RTP rate (89.1% vs 94.5%; P = .489) or SIRSI score (70.4 ± 24.8 vs 73.8 ± 19.6; P = .426), but OL resulted in a lower recurrence rate (14.5% vs 1.8%; P = .031). CONCLUSION: ABR and OL resulted in excellent clinical outcomes, with high rates of RTP in athletes. However, lower recurrence rates were seen with OL.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8436306
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-84363062021-09-14 Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes Hurley, Eoghan T. Davey, Martin S. Montgomery, Connor O’Doherty, Ross Gaafar, Mohamed Pauzenberger, Leo Mullett, Hannan Orthop J Sports Med Article BACKGROUND: In athletes with recurrent shoulder instability, arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the open Latarjet procedure (OL) are commonly indicated to restore stability and allow them to return to play (RTP). PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of ABR and OL in athletes with recurrent shoulder instability. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with recurrent shoulder instability who underwent ABR and OL and had a minimum 24-month follow-up. Indications for OL over ABR in this population were those considered at high risk for recurrence, including patients with glenohumeral bone loss. The patients were pair-matched in a 1:1 ratio (OL and ABR) by age, sex, sport, and level of preoperative play. We evaluated the rate, level, and timing of RTP, and the Shoulder Instability–Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score between procedures. Additionally we compared the recurrence rate, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Rowe score, satisfaction, and whether patients would undergo the same surgery again. RESULTS: Participants included 62 athletes who underwent ABR and 62 who underwent OL, with a mean follow-up of 47.7 months. There was no significant difference between ABR and OL in rate of RTP, return to preinjury level, time to return, SIRSI score, VAS score, SSV, or patient satisfaction. OL resulted in a significantly lower recurrence rate (1.6% vs 16.1% for ABR; P = .009) and a significantly higher Rowe score (mean ± SD, 90.5 ± 12.2 vs 82.2 ± 20.8 for ABR; P = .008). In collision athletes, there was no significant difference between ABR and OL regarding RTP rate (89.1% vs 94.5%; P = .489) or SIRSI score (70.4 ± 24.8 vs 73.8 ± 19.6; P = .426), but OL resulted in a lower recurrence rate (14.5% vs 1.8%; P = .031). CONCLUSION: ABR and OL resulted in excellent clinical outcomes, with high rates of RTP in athletes. However, lower recurrence rates were seen with OL. SAGE Publications 2021-09-08 /pmc/articles/PMC8436306/ /pubmed/34527752 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671211023801 Text en © The Author(s) 2021 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work as published without adaptation or alteration, without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Article
Hurley, Eoghan T.
Davey, Martin S.
Montgomery, Connor
O’Doherty, Ross
Gaafar, Mohamed
Pauzenberger, Leo
Mullett, Hannan
Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes
title Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes
title_full Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes
title_fullStr Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes
title_full_unstemmed Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes
title_short Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for Recurrent Shoulder Instability in Athletes
title_sort arthroscopic bankart repair versus open latarjet for recurrent shoulder instability in athletes
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8436306/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34527752
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/23259671211023801
work_keys_str_mv AT hurleyeoghant arthroscopicbankartrepairversusopenlatarjetforrecurrentshoulderinstabilityinathletes
AT daveymartins arthroscopicbankartrepairversusopenlatarjetforrecurrentshoulderinstabilityinathletes
AT montgomeryconnor arthroscopicbankartrepairversusopenlatarjetforrecurrentshoulderinstabilityinathletes
AT odohertyross arthroscopicbankartrepairversusopenlatarjetforrecurrentshoulderinstabilityinathletes
AT gaafarmohamed arthroscopicbankartrepairversusopenlatarjetforrecurrentshoulderinstabilityinathletes
AT pauzenbergerleo arthroscopicbankartrepairversusopenlatarjetforrecurrentshoulderinstabilityinathletes
AT mulletthannan arthroscopicbankartrepairversusopenlatarjetforrecurrentshoulderinstabilityinathletes