BACKGROUND: 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.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: