Abstract:Background: There is a lack of evidence in the literature comparing outcomes between the arthroscopic Bankart repair and the Latarjet procedure in competitive rugby players with glenohumeral instability and a glenoid bone loss <20%. Purpose: To compare return to sport, functional outcomes, and complications between the arthroscopic Bankart repair and the Latarjet procedure in competitive rugby players with glenohumeral instability and a glenoid bone loss <20%. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Between June 2010 and February 2018, 130 competitive rugby players with anterior shoulder instability were operated on in our institution. The first 80 patients were operated on with the arthroscopic Bankart procedure and the other 50 with the open Latarjet procedure. Return to sport, range of motion (ROM), the Rowe score, and the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS) were used to assess functional outcomes. Recurrences, reoperations, and complications were also evaluated. Results: In the total population, the mean follow-up was 40 months (range, 24-90 months) and the mean age was 24.2 years (range, 16-33 years). Ninety-two percent of patients were able to return to rugby, 88% at their preinjury level of play. Eighty-nine percent of patients in the Bankart group and 87% in the Latarjet group returned to compete at the same level ( P = .788). No significant difference in shoulder ROM was found between preoperative and postoperative results. The Rowe and ASOSS scores showed statistical improvement after operation ( P < .01). No significant difference in functional scores was found between the groups The Rowe score in the Bankart group increased from a preoperative mean (± SD) of 41 ± 13 points to 89.7 points postoperatively, and in the Latarjet group, from a preoperative mean of 42.5 ± 14 points to 88.4 points postoperatively ( P = .95). The ASOSS score in the Bankart group increased from a preoperative mean of 53.3 ± 3 points to 93.3 ± 6 points postoperatively, and in the Latarjet group, from a preoperative mean of 53.1 ± 3 points to 93.7 ± 4 points postoperatively ( P = .95). There were 18 recurrences (14%). The rate of recurrence was 20% in the Bankart group and 4% in the Latarjet group ( P = .01). There were 15 reoperations (12%). The rate of reoperation was 16% in the Bankart group and 4% in the Latarjet group ( P = .03). There were 6 complications (5%). The rate of complications was 4% in the Bankart group and 6% in the Latarjet group ( P = .55). The proportion of postoperative osteoarthritis was 10% in the Bankart group (8/80 patients) and 12% (6/50 patients) in the Latarjet group ( P = .55). Conclusion: In competitive rugby players with glenohumeral instability and a glenoid bone loss <20%, both the arthroscopic Bankart repair and the Latarjet procedure produced excellent functional outcomes, with most athletes returning to sport at the same level they had before the injury. However, the Bankart procedure was associated with a significantly higher rate of recurrence (20% vs 4%) and reoperation (16% vs 4%) than the Latarjet procedure.

Bipolar Bone Loss in Male Athletes With Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Instability: An Evaluation Using a New Scoring System

Postoperative Recurrence of Instability After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Shoulders With Primary Instability Compared With Recurrent Instability: Influence of Bipolar Bone Defect Size

Influence of Glenoid Defect Size and Bone Fragment Size on the Clinical Outcome After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Male Collision/Contact Athletes

Remaining Large Bone Fragment of a Bony Bankart Lesion in Shoulders With a Subcritical Glenoid Defect: Association With Recurrent Anterior Instability

Accuracy and reliability of imaging modalities for studying bipolar bone loss in anterior shoulder instability: A systematic review

Characteristics of High-Risk Bipolar Bone Loss Lesions Using 3-Dimensional Imaging

Defining Critical Humeral Bone Loss: Inferior Craniocaudal Hill-Sachs Extension as Predictor of Recurrent Instability After Primary Arthroscopic Bankart Repair

Effects of Bone Incorporation After Arthroscopic Stabilization Surgery for Bony Bankart Lesion Based on Preoperative Glenoid Defect Size

The Radiologic Evaluation and Clinical Significance of Glenohumeral Bone Loss in Anterior Shoulder Instability

The Latarjet Procedure for Recurrent Anterior Shoulder Instability in the Contact Athlete

Bone Fragment Union and Remodeling After Arthroscopic Bony Bankart Repair for Traumatic Anterior Shoulder Instability With a Glenoid Defect

Long-term Effectiveness and Outcome-Determining Factors of Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Recreational Sports Population: An Assessment of 100 Patients With a Mean Follow-up of 12.7 Years

Bone Fragment Resorption and Clinical Outcomes of Traumatic Bony Bankart Lesion Treated With Arthroscopic Repair Versus Open Latarjet

Validating the Glenoid Track Concept Using Dynamic Arthroscopic Assessment

Management of bone loss in anterior shoulder instability

Absorption of the Bone Fragment in Shoulders With Bony Bankart Lesions Caused by Recurrent Anterior Dislocations or Subluxations

Recurrence and Revision Rates With Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Compared With the Latarjet Procedure in Competitive Rugby Players With Glenohumeral Instability and a Glenoid Bone Loss <20%

Borderline Glenoid Bone Defect in Anterior Shoulder Instability: Latarjet Procedure Versus Bankart Repair

Clinical efficacy of arthroscopic Bankart repair and the risk factors for postoperative recurrence

Association of the Stability Ratio with Postoperative Clinical Function and Recurrence of Instability in Patients with Anterior Shoulder Instability: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Mid-term to long-term results of primary arthroscopic Bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability: a retrospective study