• BACKGROUND
    • There is little comparative long-term clinical data comparing Bankart repair alone to the addition of remplissage.
  • QUESTIONS/PURPOSES
    • Our purpose was to compare results of patients with significant humeral head lesions and who underwent either isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair or remplissage.
  • METHODS
    • This is a retrospective cohort study of 14 isolated arthroscopic Bankart and 10 remplissage repairs all with large engaging Hill-Sachs (HS) lesions. Average follow-up was 40.72 months (26.3-51.1) in the Bankart group and 31.55 months (24.1-39.9) in the remplissage group. Surgical failure was defined as a dislocation or subluxation. Groups were matched on handedness, age within 3 years, and HS lesion size. Glenoid bone loss and HS size were measured on MRI. Additionally, WOSI and DASH scores were obtained.
  • RESULTS
    • The average age at surgery was 26.0 years (17.8-41.1) of the isolated Bankart patient and 24.4 years (16.4-38.3) in the remplissage group. The average HS lesion volume was 310.22 mm(3) in the Bankart group and 283.79 mm(3) in the remplissage group. The failure rate for the Bankart group was 8 out of 14 patients (57.14%). For the remplissage group, the failure rate was 2 out of 10 patients (20.0%). Average WOSI scores were 73.72 in the Bankart group and 79.54 in the remplissage group. For DASH scores, the average Disability/Symptoms Scores were 16.23 for the Bankart group and 12.05 for the remplissage patients.
  • CONCLUSIONS
    • In comparison to isolated Bankart repair, remplissage was a superior option for recurrent instability patients with large Hill-Sachs lesions as seen by diminished failure rates and improved outcome scores.