Table 1.

Summary of the included studies, describing authors, publication year, study design, technique, characteristics of the patients, results and main findings.

Author and publication year	Study design	Techniques/ aim	Characteristics of patients	Results and main findings
Genena et al, 2023 [24]	Prospective randomized trial	– ABR vs open Latarjet; – Clinical outcomes and return to sport	– N=30 male patients * ABR group=15 patients * Latarjet group=15 patients * Diagnosis: traumatic anterior shoulder instability with minimal glenoid bone loss – Age=18–41 years – F/U=13.27±2.7 months	– The mean of Rowe score in Bankart and Latarjet groups preoperatively was 29±14 and 38±12, respectively – The mean Rowe score was increased in Bankart and latarject at final follow-up to 74±18.8 and 85±15.8, respectively – There was no significant difference in the postoperative range of motion and Rowe score among the Bankart and Latarjet groups – The time to return to sports/work was significantly lower in the Latarjet repair group (5.2 months) than in the ABR group (7 months) – The mean procedural time for Bankart was significantly lower (43.33±5.27 min) that of than Latarjet (72.33±10.38 min) – None of the patients had recurrent dislocation within the follow-up period – Open Latarjet is a more invasive and non-anatomical procedure but is less costly, with a shorter time to return to sports/work than ABR
Paul et al, 2023 [25]	------	– ABR without and with concomitant remplissage – Comparison between the outcomes of the 2 procedures	– N=62 patients – 31 Patients underwent repair with concomitant remplissage – 31 Controls underwent ABR without concomitant remplissage – Diagnosis: anterior shoulder instability – Age=18–55 years – F/U=2.8±1.8 years	– Glenoid bone loss was similar in both groups (11% vs 11%, P<0.956) – Engaging Hille-Sachs lesions were more prevalent in the remplissage group than in the no remplissage group (84% vs 3%, P<0.001) – There was no significant variation in the rate of redislocation between remplissage and non-remplissage (12.9% vs 9.7%), subjective instability (45.2% vs 25.8%), revision (12.9% vs 0%), or reoperation (12.9% vs 0%) between groups (all P>0.05) – The rate of returning to sport in non-remplissage and remplissage groups was 52.6% and 57.1% (P=0.7), respectively, and the duration until return to sport was 7.6±2.4 (5.9–9.3) months and 9.3±6.2 (4.9–13.7) months for the 2 groups, respectively – There were no differences in return to sport rates, shoulder range of motion, or patient-reported outcome measures (all P>0.05). – Both ABR with and without concomitant remplissage resulted in similar outcomes, such as shoulder motion
Pouges et al, 2021 [26]	Randomized controlled trial	– ABR vs immobilization – Compare the outcomes between the 2 methods	– N=40 patients – Group 1: 20 underwent ABR – Group 2: 20 underwent nonoperative immobilization – Diagnosis: The first episode of anterior shoulder dislocation – Age=18–25 years old – F/U=2 years	– Recurrence of instability was significantly reduced in the surgical group compared with the nonoperative group (10% vs 70%, respectively; P=0.0001) – Fewer patients in the surgical group vs the nonoperative patients had another episode of dislocation (0% vs 30%), subluxation (10% vs 65%, respectively; P=0.003), or a positive apprehension test (5% vs 158%, respectively; P=0.0005) – The Walch-Duplay score (88.4 vs 70.3 points; P=0.046) and WOSI points (11.5 vs 17.7; P=0.035) were significantly better in the surgical group than in the nonoperative group after 2 years of follow-up – The level of sport was the same or better in 89% of the surgical group compared to 53% of the nonoperative group (P=0.012) – After 2 years, 95% of the surgical treatment group had returned to sport, whereas 68% of those in the nonoperative treatment group had returned – No significant difference in range of motion between both groups – No surgical complications – First-time shoulder dislocations can be managed by ABR as it reduces the risk of secondary shoulder dislocation and improved functional outcomes, compared with immobilization, after a 2-year follow-up. Also, ABR could be offered as a primary treatment option in a younger population
Minkus et al, 2021 [27]	Randomized controlled trial	– ABR and Immobilization in ER and ABD – Outcomes including recurrence for both methods	– N=112 patients – Group 1: 60 immobilization in ER and ABD patients – Group 2: 52 ABR patients – Diagnosis: First-time anterior shoulder dislocation – Age=20–37 years – F/U=2 years	– At follow-up, 91 patients (81.3%) were available – The recurrence rate was 19.1% and 2.3% in groups 1 and 2, respectively (P=0.016) – No significant differences were found between groups regarding clinical shoulder scores (P>0.05) – Return to sport was after 6 months in both groups. – Immobilization in ER+ABD and primary ABR for the treatment of first shoulder dislocation showed no differences in clinical shoulder scores, but recurrent instability was significantly higher after nonoperative treatment
Garcia-Vega et al, 2021 [28]	Longitudinal, observational and retrospective	– ABR with suture anchors – Outcomes of ABR and risk factors of recurrence	– N=41 patients – Diagnosis: anterior shoulder instability – Age=19 years and above – F/U=average 84 months (7 years)	– The overall recurrence (redislocation) rate was 9.4% – 54.3% of the patients achieved excellent/good results – The range of motion was complete in 90% of the cases – The complication rate was low; only 4.88% of the patients presented advanced osteoarthritis – It was not possible to identify risk factors related to a worse outcome after surgery – ABR with suture anchors is the gold standard treatment of anterior shoulder dislocation
Moore et al, 2020 [29]	Retrospective review	– ABR – Outcomes including recurrence of ABR among female patients	– N=31 female patients (34 shoulders) – Complain: anterior shoulder instability – Age=17–48 years old – F/U=mean of 51.9 months (4.3 years)	– 82.4% of patients were satisfied/very satisfied with their surgery – The mean time of return to play was 6 (3–12) months – Of the 29 patients who played sports prior to surgery, 24 (82%%) returned to play, and 17 (58%) returned to the same or higher level – 3 patients (8.8%) experienced recurrent instability; 1 patient (2.9%) had a recurrent dislocation, and 2 patients (5.9%) had recurrent subluxation – Female patients with anterior shoulder instability treated with ABR have low recurrence and complication rates, with good patient-reported outcomes and high satisfaction rates, as well as a high rate of return to play
Arican & Turhan 2019 [30]	------	– ABR with all-soft suture anchor & conventional metal anchor – Clinical outcomes of both sutures	– N=32 patients – Group 1: 17 patients treated with 1.8 mm all-suture anchor with 2 (5 metric) Hi-Fi sutures – Group 2: 15 patients underwent repair with conventional titanium 3.5-mm suture anchors with 2 preloaded ultrabraid suture – Diagnosis: traumatic anterior instability – Age=18–55 years – F/U=17–28 months – Group 1; mean 23.71±3.65 months – Group 2; mean 21.87±4.39 months	– The mean ASES score elevated significantly in group 1 (P=0.0001) and in group 2 (P=0.0001) after ABR, but there was no significant difference between the 2 groups after treatment (P=0.2) – The mean ASES% change did not differ between the groups (P=0.4) – The mean ROWE score increased significantly in group 1 (P=0.0001) and in group 2 (P=0.0001) after ABR, but the increase did not vary between the 2 groups (P=0.4) – The mean ROWE% change did not differ between the groups (P=0.2) – ABR with an all-soft suture anchor showed comparable clinical and functional results as the conventional metal suture anchor at short-term follow-up
Alkhathami et al, 2018 [31]	-------	– ABR – Recurrence rate and risk factors	– N=50 patients (51 shoulders) – Diagnosis: traumatic anterior shoulder instability – Age=15–40 years – F/U=-------	– Recurrence (re-dislocation) rate after ABR was 9.8% – Re-injury within the first year was a risk for re-dislocation after ABR (P<0.001) – By multivariate analysis, large Hill-Sachs lesions (OR, 6.75) and <4 suture anchors (OR, 9.45) were significant risk factors for re-dislocation after ABR – A large Hill-Sachs lesion and the number of suture anchors were significant determinants for re-dislocation after ABR

ABR – arthroscopic Bankart repair; F/U – follow-up; ER – external rotation; ABD – abduction; OR – odds ratio; ASES – American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons.