Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Versus Open Latarjet for First-Time Dislocators in Athletes.

BACKGROUND: In athletes with a first-time shoulder dislocation, arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and the open Latarjet procedure (OL) are the most commonly utilized surgical procedures to restore stability and allow them to return to play (RTP). PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of ABR and OL in athletes with a first-time shoulder dislocation. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of patients with first-time shoulder dislocation who underwent primary 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. Patients who underwent ABR were pair-matched in a 2:1 ratio with patients who underwent OL by age, sex, sport, and level of preoperative play. The rate, level, and timing of RTP, as well as the Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score were evaluated. Additionally, we compared recurrence, visual analog scale pain score, Subjective Shoulder Value, Rowe score, satisfaction, and whether patients would undergo the surgery again. RESULTS: Overall, 80 athletes who underwent ABR and 40 who underwent OL were included, with a mean follow-up of 50.3 months. There was no significant difference between ABR and OL in rate of RTP, return to preinjury level, time to return, or recurrent dislocation rate. There were also no differences between ABR and OL in patient-reported outcome scores or patient satisfaction. When collision athletes were compared between ABR and OL, there were no differences in RTP, SIRSI score, or redislocation rate. CONCLUSION: ABR and OL resulted in excellent clinical outcomes, with high rates of RTP and low recurrence rates. Additionally, there were no differences between the procedures in athletes participating in collision sports.

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 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.

Open Latarjet Procedure in Athletes Following Failed Prior Instability Surgery Results in Lower Rates of Return to Play.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of open Latarjet (OL) in competitive athletes with primary shoulder instability versus those with recurrent instability versus those undergoing OL for failed prior instability surgery. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent OL with a minimum of 24-month follow-up was performed. Additionally, these were pair-matched in a 1:2:1 ratio for age, gender, sport, level of preoperative play, and follow-up length for primary instability, recurrent instability and failed prior instability surgery. Return to sport, the level of return and the timing of return were assessed. Additionally, recurrence, Visual Analogue Scale for pain (VAS), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Rowe score, Shoulder Instability-Return to Sport after Injury (SIRSI) score, satisfaction, and whether they would undergo the same surgery again were compared. RESULTS: After pair-matching, a total of 200 patients were included, with a mean age of 22.7 years and a mean follow-up of 38.8 months. Overall, there was no significant difference in any of the clinical outcome scores (VAS, Rowe, SIRSI, SSV) used for the 3 groups (P > 0.05 for all). However, there was a significantly lower rate of return to play for those undergoing OL because of failed prior instability surgery (88% vs 91% vs 64%, P < 0.0001) and for return at the same or a higher level (66% vs 78% vs 56%, P = 0.02). There was no significant difference in the rate of recurrent instability among the 3 groups (6% vs 5% vs 6%, P = 0.95). CONCLUSION: OL results in excellent clinical outcomes and low recurrence rates for those with primary shoulder instability, those with recurrent instability and those undergoing OL for failed prior instability surgery. However, in those undergoing OL for failed prior stabilization surgery, there was a lower rate of return to play. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III: Retrospective Comparative Study.