To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Arthroscopic or open techniques display no differences in treatment of Bankart lesion

Download
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Author Verified
Ace Report Cover
June 2013

Arthroscopic or open techniques display no differences in treatment of Bankart lesion

Vol: 2| Issue: 5| Number:7| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:2
Journal Level of Evidence:N/A

Treatment of Bankart lesions in traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder: A randomized controlled trial comparing arthroscopy and open techniques

Arthroscopy. 2012 Jul;28(7):900-8. doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2011.11.032. Epub 2012 Feb 17

Contributing Authors:
N Archetti Netto MJ Tamaoki M Lenza JB dos Santos MH Matsumoto F Faloppa JC Belloti

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

50 patients were randomized to compare the functional assessments of two techniques in treating Bankart lesion in traumatic anterior shoulder instability; patients received either an open or arthroscopic procedure. At a mean of 37.5 month follow-up, no clinically relevant differences were seen in the primary outcome measure (Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score) or any of the secondary o...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue