Orthopedic Research Centre, Ghaem Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran; Student Research Committee, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
Orthopedic Research Centre, Ghaem Hospital, Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Mashhad, Iran.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2024 Dec;33(12):e652-e674. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2024.06.024. Epub 2024 Aug 14.
The Bankart repair and Latarjet procedure are both effective surgical methods for treating repeated recurrent anterior dislocation of the shoulder. However, there is still little consensus regarding the standard treatment for recurrent anterior instability of the shoulder. Typically, the choice of treatment has been influenced more by training and tradition rather than the existing evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes, recurrence, and complications between the 2 procedures, among both athletic and nonathletic cohorts.
Relevant clinical trials were identified through a systematic search of databases in April 2023 including PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane. Randomized controlled trials and cohort studies were included if they compared patient-reported outcomes or complication rates of open Latarjet procedure vs. arthroscopic Bankart repair. Continuous data, such as patient-reported outcomes were pooled as the weighted mean difference. For dichotomous data such as recurrence and revision rates, the pooled risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was calculated using random effects meta-analysis.
Twenty-one clinical studies (3 randomized controlled trials) were included in the meta-analysis involving a total of 13,176 operated shoulders. Arthroscopic Bankart showed a 3.08 times higher risk of recurrence and revision due to postoperative instability (RR = 3.08, 95% CI 2.03-4.68) compared with those who had the Latarjet approach. The Rowe score was higher in the Latarjet group by an average of 4.55 points (95% CI 2.41-6.68). This difference was more pronounced in athletes, with an increase of 5.47 points (95% CI 0.16-10.78), compared with the nonathletic population: 4.03 (95% CI 2.04-6.02). Return to sport time was shorter by 0.40 months (95% CI -0.75 to -0.05) in the Latarjet group. The total complication rate was approximately 47% lower in the Bankart group (RR = 0.53, 95% CI 0.31-0.90). Additionally, the risk of hematoma was 75% lower in patients undergoing the arthroscopic Bankart compared with the Latarjet procedure. External rotation, assessed both in abduction and adduction of the arm, as well as forward elevation, show no significant differences between the 2 groups.
Our results demonstrate that the Latarjet procedure has a lower recurrence rate, excels in patient-reported outcomes, and requires less time for return to sports. Thus, it may be a superior alternative to arthroscopic Bankart repair. However, it is still associated with a higher incidence of complications.
Bankart 修复和 Latarjet 手术都是治疗复发性肩关节前脱位的有效手术方法。然而,对于复发性肩关节前不稳定的标准治疗方法仍存在争议。通常,治疗方法的选择更多地受到培训和传统的影响,而不是现有的证据。本系统评价和荟萃分析旨在比较两种手术方法在运动和非运动人群中的患者报告结局、复发和并发症。
通过系统搜索数据库(2023 年 4 月包括 PubMed、Scopus、Web of Science 和 Cochrane),确定相关的临床试验。如果比较开放 Latarjet 手术与关节镜 Bankart 修复的患者报告结局或并发症发生率,将纳入随机对照试验和队列研究。连续数据,如患者报告结局,以加权均数差进行汇总。对于复发和翻修率等二分类数据,使用随机效应荟萃分析计算汇总风险比(RR)及其 95%置信区间(CI)。
共纳入 21 项临床研究(3 项随机对照试验),涉及 13176 例接受手术的肩关节。与 Latarjet 组相比,关节镜 Bankart 组术后因不稳定而复发和翻修的风险高 3.08 倍(RR=3.08,95%CI 2.03-4.68)。Latarjet 组的 Rowe 评分平均高出 4.55 分(95%CI 2.41-6.68)。在运动员中,这种差异更为明显,增加了 5.47 分(95%CI 0.16-10.78),而非运动员为 4.03 分(95%CI 2.04-6.02)。Latarjet 组的重返运动时间缩短了 0.40 个月(95%CI -0.75 至 -0.05)。Bankart 组的总并发症发生率约低 47%(RR=0.53,95%CI 0.31-0.90)。此外,与 Latarjet 手术相比,关节镜 Bankart 术后血肿的风险降低了 75%。在肩关节外展和内收以及前屈时,两组的外旋均无显著差异。
我们的结果表明,Latarjet 手术具有较低的复发率,在患者报告结局方面表现出色,并且恢复运动的时间更短。因此,它可能是关节镜 Bankart 修复的更好选择。然而,它仍然与更高的并发症发生率相关。