The Arthroscopic Bristow Procedure Is Superior to the Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure in Return to Sports but Inferior in Graft Healing: A Comparative Study With 3.4-Year Follow-Up

Abstract

To compare clinical and computed tomography outcomes between the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure and the arthroscopic Bristow procedure. Patients who underwent arthroscopic Latarjet or Bristow procedures with at least 2 years of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Thirty-eight shoulders were included in the Latarjet group, and 34 were included in the Bristow group. Recurrence of dislocation, clinical scores, rate of return to sports (RTS), and computed tomography assessment findings (position of transferred coracoid, graft healing, graft absorption, and glenohumeral degenerative osteoarthritis [OA]) were obtained at final follow-up. No recurrent dislocation occurred in either group, and no significant differences in clinical scores were found between the 2 procedures, with a mean follow-up period of 3.4 years. The operative time in the Bristow group was significantly shorter than that in the Latarjet group (P < .001). The transferred coracoid had healed in 94.7% of the patients in the Latarjet group and 85.3% in the Bristow group at final follow-up (P= .01). No significant difference in graft absorption or the degree of glenohumeral OA was detected between the 2 groups. However, moderate to severe OA only occurred in the Latarjet group at final follow-up (4 of 38 shoulders, 10.5%). The postoperative external rotation angle and level of RTS favored the Latarjet procedure (P= .030 and P= .034, respectively). Both the arthroscopic Latarjet and arthroscopic Bristow procedures led to good clinical scores with no new dislocation episodes. The Bristow group showed significantly less graft healing than the Latarjet group. However, the arthroscopic Bristow procedure took less operative time and showed a lower rate of early moderate to severe glenohumeral OA, better range of motion, and a higher rate of RTS. Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic trial.