TY - JOUR
T1 - Open Latarjet Results in Lower Recurrent Instability and Revision Rates Than Arthroscopic Bankart Repair at a 10-Year Follow-Up
T2 - A Systematic Review
AU - Meyer, Alex M.
AU - Lorentz, Samuel G.
AU - Klifto, Christopher S.
AU - Bradley, Kendall E.
AU - Lau, Brian C.
AU - Dickens, Jonathan F.
AU - Hurley, Eoghan T.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2025 Arthroscopy Association of North America
PY - 2025
Y1 - 2025
N2 - Purpose: To compare arthroscopic Bankart repair versus the open Latarjet procedure at a minimum of a 10-year follow-up evaluating recurrence and arthropathy development rates. Methods: A systematic review was performed in concordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies were included if they reported on the arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Latarjet procedure with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Recurrent instability, revisions, and instability arthropathy were evaluated. Results: Overall, 40 studies met our criteria and were included, with 2,019 shoulders undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair and 1,069 undergoing the open Latarjet procedure. The rate of recurrent instability was 0.0% to 22.6% (redislocations: 0.0%-9.6%) in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure and 13.3% to 82.2% (redislocations: 9.6%-25.7%) among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. The rate of total revisions was 0.0% to 17.9% in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure and 4.8% to 42.9% among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. The rate of overall arthritis was 10.3% to 71.4% in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure and 16.7% to 89.3% among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. Conclusions: There was a lower recurrent instability rate and revision rate in the open Latarjet group compared to the arthroscopic Bankart group at long-term follow-up. The rates of moderate to severe arthritis were comparable between the 2 procedures. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.
AB - Purpose: To compare arthroscopic Bankart repair versus the open Latarjet procedure at a minimum of a 10-year follow-up evaluating recurrence and arthropathy development rates. Methods: A systematic review was performed in concordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Studies were included if they reported on the arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Latarjet procedure with a minimum 10-year follow-up. Recurrent instability, revisions, and instability arthropathy were evaluated. Results: Overall, 40 studies met our criteria and were included, with 2,019 shoulders undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair and 1,069 undergoing the open Latarjet procedure. The rate of recurrent instability was 0.0% to 22.6% (redislocations: 0.0%-9.6%) in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure and 13.3% to 82.2% (redislocations: 9.6%-25.7%) among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. The rate of total revisions was 0.0% to 17.9% in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure and 4.8% to 42.9% among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. The rate of overall arthritis was 10.3% to 71.4% in those undergoing an open Latarjet procedure and 16.7% to 89.3% among those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair. Conclusions: There was a lower recurrent instability rate and revision rate in the open Latarjet group compared to the arthroscopic Bankart group at long-term follow-up. The rates of moderate to severe arthritis were comparable between the 2 procedures. Level of Evidence: Level IV, systematic review of Level I-IV studies.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85215589990&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.12.038
DO - 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.12.038
M3 - Review article
C2 - 39788392
AN - SCOPUS:85215589990
SN - 0749-8063
JO - Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
JF - Arthroscopy - Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery
ER -