Reasons Why Athletes Do Not Return to Sports After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: A Comparative Study of 208 Athletes With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up. Issue 7 (17th July 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Rossi, Luciano Andrés; Tanoira, Ignacio; Brandariz, Rodrigo; Pasqualini, Ignacio; Ranalletta, Maximiliano
• Is Part Of: Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine. Volume 9:Issue 7(2021)
• Publication Date: 2021-07-17
• Subjects: glenohumeral instability -- return to sports -- Bankart -- athletes; Sports medicine -- Periodicals; Orthopedics -- Periodicals; Arthroscopy -- Periodicals; Arthroplasty -- Periodicals; Knee -- Surgery -- Periodicals; 616.7
• DOI: 10.1177/23259671211013394
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2325-9671

Abstract

Background: There is a lack of information regarding the reasons why patients do not return to sports after an arthroscopic Bankart repair and whether there is a relationship between return to sports and functional outcomes. Purpose: To evaluate the reasons why competitive athletes who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair did not return to sports and whether there was a relationship between returning to sports and postoperative outcome scores and complications. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Of 217 competitive athletes who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair for isolated anterior glenohumeral instability between June 2014 and December 2017, a total of 208 athletes (96%) were evaluated at minimum 2-year follow-up. Return to sports, the level of sports achieved, and the time between surgery and return to competition were assessed, and patients who did not return to sports were asked to provide the reasons for cessation. The Rowe score and the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS) were used to assess functional outcomes. Recurrences, reoperations, and complications were also evaluated. Results: The mean patient age was 24 years (range, 18-30 years), and the mean follow-up was 44 months (range, 24-90 months). Of the 208 athletes, 73% were able to return to sports (65% returned to their preinjury level), and 27% did not return to sports. Of those who did not return, the most frequent reasons were fear of reinjury (44%), lack of confidence in their shoulder (12%), and concern about a new rehabilitation process in case of recurrence (10%). The Rowe and ASOSS scores showed significant postoperative improvement in all patients ( P < .001), with no significant differences between the 2 study groups at the final follow-up. There were 21 recurrences (10%) and 5 complications (2.4%), and 11 patients (5.3%) underwent revision surgery, with no significant differences in these rates between the groups. Conclusion: Of patients who did not return to sports, 74% left for a reason independent of shoulder function, with the most frequent causes being fear of reinjury and a concern about new rehabilitation process. Neither outcome scores nor complications varied significantly between patients who returned and those who did not return to sports.