Arthroscopic Bankart with remplissage results in lower rates of recurrent instability with similar range of motion compared to isolated arthroscopic Bankart for anterior glenohumeral instability: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Journal Articles
Overview
Research
Identity
Additional Document Info
View All
Overview
abstract
AbstractPurposeThe addition of the remplissage procedure to an arthroscopic Bankart procedure has been shown to improve clinical outcomes, yet at the expense of potentially decreasing shoulder range of motion. The purpose of this study was to assess recurrent instability, range of motion, functional outcomes and rates of return to sport outcomes in patients undergoing an isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair compared to those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair in addition to the remplissage procedure.MethodsAccording to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, a search was conducted using three databases (MEDLINE/OVID, EMBASE and PubMed). Retrieved studies were screened based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria for comparative studies. Data were extracted and meta‐analysis performed using a random‐effects model.ResultsA total of 16 studies (13 level III studies, 2 level II studies and 1 level I) were included with a total of 507 and 704 patients in the Bankart plus remplissage and isolated Bankart repair groups, respectively. No studies reported glenoid bone loss of >20% with the least percentage of glenoid bone loss reported among studies being <1%. There was a significantly increased rate of recurrent dislocations (odds ratio [OR] = 4.22, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.380–7.48, p < 0.00001) and revision procedures (OR = 3.36, 95% CI: 1.52–7.41, p = 0.003) in the isolated Bankart repair group compared to the Bankart plus remplissage group. Additionally, there were no significant differences between groups in terms of external rotation at side (n.s.), in abduction (n.s.) or at forward flexion (n.s.) at final follow‐up. Furthermore, return to preinjury level of sport favoured the Bankart plus remplissage group (OR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.35–0.85, p = 0.007).ConclusionPatients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart plus remplissage for anterior shoulder instability have lower rates of recurrent instability, higher rates of return to sport, and no significant difference in range of motion at final follow‐up when compared to an isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair. Further large, prospective studies are needed to further determine which patients and degree of bone loss would benefit most from augmentation with the remplissage procedure.Level of EvidenceLevel III.
