Lei Wang, Yaosheng Liu, Xiuyun Su, Shubin Liu
(Department of Orthopeadics, Hospital Affiliated to Academy of Military Medical Sciences, Beijing, China (mainland))
Med Sci Monit 2015; 21:3028-3035
The optimal treatment for Bankart lesion remains controversial. Therefore, we performed this meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of patients managed with open Bankart repair versus arthroscopic Bankart repair.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: After systematic review of online databases, a total of 11 trials with 1022 subjects were included. The methodological quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed using the PEDro critical appraisal tool, and non-RCTs were evaluated by Newcastle-Ottawa (NO) quality assessment tool. Outcomes of shoulder stability, range of motion (ROM), functional scales, and surgical times were analyzed.
RESULTS: Data synthesis showed significant differences between the two strategies, with regards to stability of the shoulder (P=0.008, RR=0.94, 95% CI: 0.89 to 0.98), and ROM (P<0.001, SMD=–0.47, 95% CI: –0.72 to –0.22).
CONCLUSIONS: Open Bankart repair produced a more stable shoulder but had a relatively poor shoulder motion, compared with arthroscopic Bankart repair, for the treatment of Bankart lesion.
Keywords: Arthroscopy - methods, Adult, Female, Humans, Joint Instability - surgery, Male, Middle Aged, Orthopedics - methods, Quality Assurance, Health Care, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Range of Motion, Articular, Recurrence, Reproducibility of Results, Shoulder - surgery, Shoulder Joint - surgery, Treatment Outcome