ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2025
Comparative Results After Latarjet Procedure for Shoulder Instability Management Between Primary and Revision Cases After Failed Arthroscopic Bankart Procedure: A Midterm Follow-up Study.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Anterior shoulder dislocation is often complicated by recurrent instability, with reported rates being as high as 70% in young patients. Bony lesions, young age, and contact sports have been correlated with higher rates of recurrent instability. The optimal surgical modality remains debatable, with the majority of surgeons preferring the arthroscopic Bankart procedure as the primary repair for recurrent instability. Purpose: To compare the outcomes of the Latarjet procedure performed as a primary procedure versus the Latarjet procedure in the setting of a previously failed Bankart repair. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence 3. Methods: A retrospective comparative study was conducted of patients with traumatic anterior shoulder instability who underwent an open Latarjet as primary or revision surgery between 2012 and 2019. Outcomes were assessed using the Rowe score, Oxford Shoulder Instability (OSI) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and rate of recurrent instability. All patients had at least 4 years of follow-up. Radiographs were analyzed using the Samilson and Pietro classification. Results: In total, 43 and 17 patients were included in the primary and revision groups, respectively. Mean follow-up was 7.7 years for the primary group and 7.9 years for the revision group. Postoperatively, Rowe and VAS scores were not significantly different between groups, but OSI scores were significantly worse for the revision group versus the primary group (40.6 ± 1.3 vs 42.1 ± 1.4, respectively). The difference in OSI scores was less than the minimal clinically important difference (8.6), indicating limited clinical relevance. Return to daily activities, including sports activities, was comparable between the 2 groups. One patient from each group had recurrent instability ( Conclusion: The Latarjet procedure effectively prevented chronic anterior shoulder instability and was associated with high patient satisfaction as both a primary and a revision procedure. OSI scores were marginally lower in patients with previous failed Bankart repair compared with primary Latarjet. Similar outcomes were observed for shoulder stability and arthritis development, although these findings are limited to midterm follow-up. These findings support the use of primary arthroscopic Bankart repair with revision Latarjet as a realistic surgical option for previous surgical failure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.