Skip to main content
. 2018 Jun 23;52(23):1498–1506. doi: 10.1136/bjsports-2017-098539

Table 5.

Summary of findings for use of absorbable compared with non-absorbable implant materials in labrum surgery in treatment of chronic post-traumatic shoulder instability

Absorbable compared with non-absorbable implant materials in labrum surgery for prevention of recurrent instability in treatment of chronic post-traumatic shoulder instability
Patient or population: chronic post-traumatic shoulder instability in general population
Setting: surgical versus surgical management
Intervention: absorbable implant material
Comparison: non-absorbable implant material
Outcome
Number of participants
(studies)		 Relative effect
(95% CI)		 Anticipated absolute effects (95% CI) Certainty What happens
Non-absorbable Absorbable Difference
Recurrent instability rate after surgical intervention in treatment of chronic post-traumatic shoulder instability
Follow-up: mean 2 years
Number of participants: 232
(three RCTs)		 RR 0.62
(0.21 to 1.86)		 9.6% 5.9%
(2.0 to 17.8)		 3.6% fewer
(7.6 fewer to 8.2 more)		 ⨁⨁⨁◯
Moderate*		 Absorbability of implants does not seem to affect the recurrent instability rate.

*Rated down for serious risk of bias (lack of blinding).

RCT, randomised controlled trial; RR, relative risk.