Arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage versus Latarjet procedure for management of engaging Hill-Sachs lesions with subcritical glenoid bone loss in traumatic anterior shoulder instability: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background A large engaging Hill-Sachs lesion (HSL) with subcritical glenoid bone loss (GBL) is approached through either increasing the glenoid arc by the Latarjet procedure or converting the HSL to an extra-articular defect by arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage (BRR). Until now, there has been no evidence-based consensus about which of these 2 most appropriate procedures is the better surgical choice. The purpose of this study was to analyze the current literature comparing results of BRR vs. the Latarjet procedure in the treatment of engaging HSLs with subcritical GBL. Methods A comprehensive review of the PubMed and Cochrane databases was completed for studies that compared the clinical outcomes and complications of BRR vs. the Latarjet procedure with minimum follow-up of 2 years. The outcome measures analyzed included postoperative Rowe score, visual analog scale pain score, postoperative range of motion (ROM), and rates of recurrent instability and other complications. Results Overall, 4 articles (level III evidence in 3 and level II in 1) were included from an initial 804 abstracts. The study population consisted of a total of 379 patients, of whom 194 underwent BRR and 185 underwent the Latarjet procedure. There were no unacceptable differences in baseline characteristics between the 2 groups. For the rate of recurrent instability, both groups had comparable risk ratios (RRs) (N = 379; RR, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-1.41). The risk of other complications was significantly increased with the Latarjet procedure (by about 7 times) relative to the the BRR procedure (N = 379; RR, 7.37; 95% CI, 2-27). Both groups had comparable postoperative Rowe scores (n = 190; mean difference [MD], –0.9; 95% CI, –3.45 to 1.7) and visual analog scale pain scores (n = 347; MD, –0.2; 95% CI, –0.6 to 0.2). Moreover, both groups had comparable postoperative external rotation ROM (MD, –1.7°; 95% CI, –9.4° to 6°) and internal rotation ROM (MD, 1.95°; 95% CI, –5.35° to 9.25°). There was substantial heterogeneity in the effect of both procedures on postoperative pain and ROM (external rotation and internal rotation). Conclusion Both the BRR and Latarjet procedures are effective for the management of engaging HSLs with subcritical GBL and give comparable clinical outcomes. However, given the fewer overall postoperative complications, remplissage may be safer. The results of the included studies were adequately consistent for most analyzed outcomes. However, for the intervention effect on postoperative pain and ROM, there was a small body of evidence, limiting the strength of the reported conclusions. A large engaging Hill-Sachs lesion (HSL) with subcritical glenoid bone loss (GBL) is approached through either increasing the glenoid arc by the Latarjet procedure or converting the HSL to an extra-articular defect by arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage (BRR). Until now, there has been no evidence-based consensus about which of these 2 most appropriate procedures is the better surgical choice. The purpose of this study was to analyze the current literature comparing results of BRR vs. the Latarjet procedure in the treatment of engaging HSLs with subcritical GBL. A comprehensive review of the PubMed and Cochrane databases was completed for studies that compared the clinical outcomes and complications of BRR vs. the Latarjet procedure with minimum follow-up of 2 years. The outcome measures analyzed included postoperative Rowe score, visual analog scale pain score, postoperative range of motion (ROM), and rates of recurrent instability and other complications. Overall, 4 articles (level III evidence in 3 and level II in 1) were included from an initial 804 abstracts. The study population consisted of a total of 379 patients, of whom 194 underwent BRR and 185 underwent the Latarjet procedure. There were no unacceptable differences in baseline characteristics between the 2 groups. For the rate of recurrent instability, both groups had comparable risk ratios (RRs) (N = 379; RR, 0.72; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-1.41). The risk of other complications was significantly increased with the Latarjet procedure (by about 7 times) relative to the the BRR procedure (N = 379; RR, 7.37; 95% CI, 2-27). Both groups had comparable postoperative Rowe scores (n = 190; mean difference [MD], –0.9; 95% CI, –3.45 to 1.7) and visual analog scale pain scores (n = 347; MD, –0.2; 95% CI, –0.6 to 0.2). Moreover, both groups had comparable postoperative external rotation ROM (MD, –1.7°; 95% CI, –9.4° to 6°) and internal rotation ROM (MD, 1.95°; 95% CI, –5.35° to 9.25°). There was substantial heterogeneity in the effect of both procedures on postoperative pain and ROM (external rotation and internal rotation). Both the BRR and Latarjet procedures are effective for the management of engaging HSLs with subcritical GBL and give comparable clinical outcomes. However, given the fewer overall postoperative complications, remplissage may be safer. The results of the included studies were adequately consistent for most analyzed outcomes. However, for the intervention effect on postoperative pain and ROM, there was a small body of evidence, limiting the strength of the reported conclusions.