Summary

Bristow versus Latarjet in athletes

Abstract

Objective

To prospectively compare the Bristow and Latarjet techniques in high-demand athletes and assess that, even though they are different procedures, they can lead to similar results. Material and methods: Nine shoulders were lost to follow-up at five years, leaving 41 (82%) for final evaluation. Nineteen Bristow and 22 Latarjet techniques were performed. All patients were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively regarding the degree of active and passive lateral rotation; degree of active and passive elevation; visual analogue scale (VAS) score for pain, EROE, WOSI and ASES scores. Results: Comparing the two techniques, in terms of range of motion, we found no statistically significant difference in passive lateral rotation in favor of the Latarjet technique four weeks after surgery (Latarjet mean: 29.1 degrees; Bristow mean: 20 .53 degrees; p=0.01). We also found a statistically significant difference in passive elevation in favor of the Latarjet technique eight weeks after surgery (Latarjet mean: 132.73 degrees; Bristow mean: 120.21 degrees; p=0.04). Regarding the functional scores, sports return and complications there was no statistical difference. Comparing patients' age, BMI, sports experience, dominant limb, injury mechanism and whether they were amateur or professional athletes with shoulder functional scores to assess whether any of the factors were related to a worse functional outcome, no statistically significant correlation was found.

Conclusions

The Bristow and Latarjet techniques showed significant improvement in functional scores, low complication rate, absence of recurrence, good return to sport rate and preservation of shoulder range of motion. The Latarjet technique showed better results in the initial range of motion, but at the last follow-up, both procedures produced similar ranges of motion.