Arthroscopic versus open bankart repair for traumatic anterior shoulder instability

Techniques for the arthroscopic treatment of patients with recurrent shoulder instability have flourished despite several early reports indicating greater failure rates compared with traditional open stabilization techniques. Proponents of arthroscopic stabilization cite its advantages as including more accurate identification of intra-articular pathology, less morbidity, improved cosmesis, faster recovery, and, possibly, greater returns in postoperative motion. Disadvantages include complications inherent to the technique applied, requisite technical skill, a potential lack of versatility to treat a spectrum of pathology, and generally higher failure rates. As the knowledge of the basic science behind the pathophysiology of shoulder instability improves and as more clinical reports emerge, the exact indications for arthroscopic stabilization are gradually being refined. Techniques for the arthroscopic stabilization treatment of patients with recurrent shoulder instability have flourished despite several early reports indicating greater failure rates compared with traditional open stabilization techniques. Proponents cite advantages including more accurate identification of intra-articular pathology, less morbidity, improved cosmesis, faster recovery, and, possibly, greater return of postoperative motion. Disadvantages include complications inherent to the applied techniques, requisite technical skill, a potential lack of versatility to treat a spectrum of pathology, and generally higher failure rates. As knowledge of the basic science of the pathophysiology of shoulder instability improves, and as more clinical reports emerge, the exact indications for arthroscopic stabilization gradually are being refined.