Table 2.
Recent clinical studies and outcomes on arthroscopy instability repair
| Authors | Journal (year) | N | Mean follow-up in months | Outcomes | Recurrence rate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Castagna et al. [47] | Am J Sports Med (2010) | 31 | 130.8 | Rowe score, 80.1 UCLA score, 32.1 71% returned to activity |
19.4% |
| Voos et al. [48] | Am J Sports Med (2010) | 73 | 33 | ASES score, 94.9 | 9.6% |
| Cho et al. [49] | Clin Orthop Surgery (2010) | 62 | 15 | ASES score, 91.8 Rowe, 94.1 |
NA |
| Zhu et al. [50] | Am J Sports Med (2011) | 49 | 29 | ASES score, 96 Rowe score, 89.8 Constant score, 97.8 |
8.2% |
| Millett et al. [51] | Am J Sports Med (2013) | 15 | 32.4 | ASES score, 98 quickDASH, 2.8 |
7% |
| Jiang et al. [52] | Am J Sports Med (2013) | 50 | 32.5 | ASES score, 95.7 Rowe score, 91.4 |
8% |
| Maiotti et al. [53] | J Shoulder Elbow Surg (2016) | 89 | 31.5 | ASES score, 95.5 Rowe score, 94.1 |
3.3& |
| Milchteim et al. [54] | Arthroscopy (2016) | 94 | 60 | ASES score, 91.5 Rowe score, 84.3 Satisfaction, 8.8/10 |
6.4% |
| Maiotti et al. [55] | Arthroscopy (2016) | 110 | 40.5 | ASES score, 96.5 Rowe score, 95.3 VAS score, 0.5 |
2.7% |
| Bionna et al. [5] | Am J Sports Med (2016) | 60 | 63.6 | SPORTS score, 8 | 10% |
| Aboalata et al. [3] | Am J Sports Med (2017) | 180 | 156 | Satisfied, 92.3% Return to sport, 49.5% |
18.2% |
| Nakagawa et al. [56] | Am J Sports Med (2017) | 172 | 24 | NA | 29.4% |