Arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage yields similar outcomes to open Latarjet for primary and revision stabilization in the setting of subcritical glenoid bone loss.

Abstract

Background: Management of patients with recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability in the setting of subcritical glenoid bone loss (GBL), defined in this study as 20% GBL or less, remains controversial. This study aimed to compare arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage (ABR + R) to open Latarjet for subcritical GBL in primary or revision procedures. We hypothesized that ABR + R would yield higher rates of recurrent instability and reoperation compared to Latarjet in both primary and revision settings.

Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on patients undergoing either arthroscopic ABR + R or an open Latarjet procedure. Patients with connective tissue disorders, critical GBL (>20%), <2 year follow-up, or insufficient data were excluded. Recurrent instability and revision were the primary outcomes of interest. Additional outcomes of interest included subjective shoulder value, strength, and range of motion (ROM) RESULTS: One hundred eight patients (70 ABR + R, 38 Latarjet) were included with an average follow-up of 4.3 ± 2.1 years. In the primary and revision settings, similar rates of recurrent instability (Primary: P = .60; Revision: P = .28) and reoperation (Primary: P = .06; Revision: P = 1.00) were observed between Latarjet and ABR + R. Primary ABR + R exhibited better subjective shoulder value, active ROM, and internal rotation strength compared to primary open Latarjet. However, no differences were observed in the revision setting.

Conclusion: Similar rates of recurrent instability and reoperation in addition to comparable outcomes with no differences in ROM were found for ABR + R and Latarjet in patients with subcritical GBL in both the primary and revision settings. ABR + R can be a safe and effective procedure in appropriately selected patients with less than 20% GBL for both primary and revision stabilization.