Outcomes of the Latarjet Procedure Compared With Bankart Repair for Recurrent Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Instability.

Abstract

Are clinical and patient-reported outcomes different between the Latarjet and Bankart repair stabilization procedures when performed for recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability? Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane databases, American College of Physicians Journal Club, and Database of Abstracts of Review of Effectiveness were searched up to June 2015. The search terms used were Bankart AND Latarjet OR Bristow. Criteria used to include studies that (1) were written in English; (2) compared the outcomes of any Latarjet procedure (Bristow-Latarjet, coracoid transfer, or modified Bristow) with Bankart repair (anatomic); (3) reported a minimum of 1 outcome of recurrence, redislocation, revision, or patient-reported outcome measure; and (4) reported original data. Data presented in any format (text, table, figure) were extracted from all included studies. The quality of each study was assessed using the Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) checklist. Summary statistics were reported as relative risks and weighted mean differences. Fixed-effects (the assumed treatment effect was the same across studies) and random-effects (variations in treatment effect were assumed among studies) models were tested. Heterogeneity between trials was assessed using the χ2 statistic, and the amount (percentage) of variation across studies due to heterogeneity was calculated using the I 2 statistic. Forest plots were used to present pooled results. After the initial search, 245 articles were identified. After we applied the inclusion criteria, a total of 8 studies reporting on 795 patients (Latarjet = 379, Bankart = 416) were included in this review. Using the National Health and Medical Research Council's level of evidence, the authors scored 7 of the studies at level III and 1 study at level II. All Latarjet procedures were performed using an open technique, whereas the Bankart procedure was performed open in 6 studies and arthroscopically in 2 studies. The demographics of the patients (age, proportion of males to females, proportion with surgery on the dominant side, and proportion of revisions) were similar between the 2 surgical procedures. Four groups reported that patients who underwent the Latarjet procedure had fewer recurrences than patients in the Bankart repair group (11.6% versus 21.1%, respectively), irrespective of whether the Bankart was performed open or arthroscopically. Similarly, 4 groups observed that the Latarjet procedure resulted in fewer postsurgical redislocations (5.0%) than the Bankart (9.5%) procedure, irrespective of whether the repair was open or arthroscopic. The authors of 7 studies noted no differences between the 2 procedures in revision rates (Latarjet: 3.4%, Bankart: 4.5%), and 8 studies demonstrated no differences in complications requiring reoperation (Latarjet: 5.0%, Bankart: 3.1%). Investigators in 7 studies used the Rowe score to measure patient-reported satisfaction and function; patients who underwent the Latarjet procedure reported better Rowe scores postsurgically than patients who underwent the Bankart repair (scores: 79.0 and 85.4, respectively). Researchers in 4 studies reported a loss of external-rotation range of motion, which was less in the Latarjet (11.5°) compared with the Bankart (20.9°) procedure. Of the 5 groups that reported return to function, a trend suggested that a greater proportion of patients who underwent the Latarjet procedure returned to work, sport, and throwing activities compared with those who underwent the Bankart repair. The Latarjet procedure produced fewer recurrences, better patient-reported outcomes, and less restricted external-rotation motion than the Bankart repair.