Cost-effectiveness of the arthroscopic Bankart procedure versus open Latarjet in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability

Maximiliano Cruz Palacios; Ramon Esperon Hernandez; Felipe Camara Arrigunaga; Felipe Amador Martinez Escalante; Guillermo Bobadilla Lezcano

doi:10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20263886

Authors

Maximiliano Cruz Palacios Hospital de Ortopedia Cruz Roja de Mérida, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico
Ramon Esperon Hernandez Hospital de Ortopedia Cruz Roja de Mérida, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4632-7917
Felipe Camara Arrigunaga Hospital de Ortopedia Cruz Roja de Mérida, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8109-076X
Felipe Amador Martinez Escalante Hospital de Ortopedia Cruz Roja de Mérida, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico https://orcid.org/0009-0005-7381-8393
Guillermo Bobadilla Lezcano Hospital de Ortopedia Cruz Roja de Mérida, Mérida, Yucatán, Mexico https://orcid.org/0009-0002-7009-9635

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/issn.2455-4510.IntJResOrthop20263886

Keywords:

Bankart, Anterior instability, Cost-effectiveness , Latarjet, Shoulder surgery

Abstract

Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of the Latarjet procedure compared to arthroscopic Bankart repair as first-line treatment for recurrent shoulder instability in patients with ISIS greater than 3. It was hypothesized that the Latarjet procedure is more cost-effective due to its lower recurrence rate in patients who participate in high-demanding shoulder activities. Mean age was 32.42±12.11 years (15-40).

Methods: Retrospective, comparative cohort study including 33 patients (33 shoulders) with anterior shoulder instability treated with arthroscopic Bankart or Latarjet repair between 2018 and 2024. Patients aged 18 to 45 years with a minimum follow-up of 1 year, impact sports activity, and ISIS score >3 were included. Postoperative constant and Rowe scores were evaluated, and procedure costs were obtained from hospital administration. Cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using the ICER index.

Results: The sample population included 27 male patients (81.8%), 6 female patients (18.2%), with mean age of 24.62 (range from 18 to 45 years); a total of 33 shoulders, The study compared the costs of arthroscopic Bankart surgery ($ 25,481) and open Latarjet surgery ($19,019), showing a significant difference (p<0.001). The cost of devices was higher for Bankart procedure ($11,399 versus $2,940 p<0.01); two anchors were used in most Bankart cases, while two titanium screws were used in all Latarjet cases.

Conclusions: The Latarjet procedure, although less expensive than arthroscopic Bankart surgery, shows a clinically and statistically significant improvement in postoperative constant and Rowe scores. With no significant difference in hospitalization costs and a lower rate of recurrence of instability. Both procedures are effective in improving anterior shoulder instability.

References

Pugliese M, Loppini M, Vanni E, Longo UG, Castagna A. Cost-effectiveness analysis of arthroscopic Bankart repair versus open Latarjet reconstruction in anterior shoulder instability. Int Orthop. 2023;47(7):1771-7.

Min K, Fedorka C, Solberg MJ, Shaha SH, Higgins LD. The cost-effectiveness of the arthroscopic Bankart versus open Latarjet in the treatment of primary shoulder instability. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018;27(6):S2-9.

Cowling PD, Akhtar MA, Liow RY. What is a Bristow-Latarjet procedure? A review of the described operative techniques and outcomes. Bone Joint J. 2016;98-B(9):1208-14.

Phadnis J, Arnold C, Elmorsy A, Flannery M. Utility of the instability severity index score in predicting failure after arthroscopic anterior stabilization of the shoulder. Am J Sports Med. 2015;43(8):1983-8.

Balg F, Boileau P. The Instability Severity Index Score: a simple pre-operative score to select patients for arthroscopic or open shoulder stabilisation. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007;89(11):1470-7.

IBM Corp. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 26.0. Armonk (NY): IBM Corp.; 2019. Available in: https://www.ibm.com/products/spss-statistics. Accessed on 1 September 2025.

Maman E, Dolkart O, Krespi R, Kadar A, Mozes G, Safran O, et al. A multicenter retrospective study with a minimum 5-year follow-up comparing arthroscopic Bankart repair and the Latarjet procedure. Orthop J Sports Med. 2020;8(8):2325967120941366.

Bessière C, Trojani C, Carles M, Mehta SS, Boileau P. The open Latarjet procedure is more reliable in terms of shoulder stability than arthroscopic Bankart repair. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2014;472(8):2345-51.

Bliven KCH, Parr GP. Outcomes of the Latarjet procedure compared with Bankart repair for recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability. J Athl Train. 2018;53(2):181-3.

Hossein Zadeh R, Daliri M, Sadeghi M, Sahebi M, Moradi A, Samei M, et al. Arthroscopic Bankart repair versus Latarjet procedure for recurrent shoulder instability: a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes and complication rates in general and athletic populations. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2024;33(12):e652-74.

Lho T, Lee J, Oh KS, Chung SW. Latarjet procedure for failed Bankart repair provides better stability and return to sports but worse postoperative pain and external rotation limitations with more complications compared to revision Bankart repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023;31(8):3541-58.

Billaud A, Baverel L, Metais P, ReSurg, SoFEC. Arthroscopic Latarjet yields better union and prevention of instability compared to arthroscopic bony Bankart repair: a systematic review. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2023;31(12):5994-6005.

Schrouff CLJH, Verlaan L. Bankart repair with remplissage versus Latarjet procedure on recurrence, postoperative pain scores, external rotation, and Rowe score in patients with a Hill-Sachs lesion: a systematic review. JSES Rev Rep Tech. 2023;3(4):461-8.

Delgado C, Martínez-Rodríguez JM, Candura D, Valencia M, Martínez-Catalán N, Luengo-Alonso G, et al. Arthroscopic Bankart repair versus arthroscopic Latarjet for anterior shoulder instability: a matched-pair long-term follow-up study. Orthop J Sports Med. 2025;13(3):23259671241313474.

Khan M, Bedi A, Degen R, Warner J, Bhandari M; STABLE Investigators. Multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing Bankart repair with remplissage and Latarjet procedure in shoulder instability with subcritical bone loss (STABLE): study protocol. BMJ Open. 2024;14(11):e089831.

Imam MA, Shehata MSA, Martin A, Attia H, Sinokrot M, Bahbah EI, et al. Bankart repair versus Latarjet procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 3275 shoulders. Am J Sports Med. 2021;49(7):1945-53.

Cognetti DJ, DeFoor MT, Hartzler RU, Sheean AJ. Glenoid augmentation for subcritical bone loss: a narrative review. Ann J. 2024;9:15.

Wang L, Li Y, Fu M, Wang T, Tan H. Efficacy and safety of the Latarjet procedure for the treatment of athletes with glenoid bone defects ≥20%: a single-arm meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res. 2024;19(1):159.

Çağlar C, Akçaalan S, Akbulut B, Kengil MC, Uğurlu M, Doğan M. Open Latarjet reduces residual apprehension compared with arthroscopic Bankart repair for anterior glenohumeral instability. JSES Int. 2024;8(5).

Deshpande V, Barnett I, Valk J, Mathur A, Simpson E, Saunders P, et al. Similar outcomes, but significantly lower complication rate with arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage versus open or arthroscopic Latarjet for shoulder instability across a wide range of glenoid bone loss: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JSES Rev Rep Tech. 2025;5(4):778-89.