Comparison of Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of Vertical Simple Stitch Versus Modified Mason-Allen Stitch in Arthroscopic Bankart Repairs: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Study.

Background: In spite of the probable advantages of Bankart repair with modified Mason-Allen technique, there has been no study to evaluate the clinical outcomes of the modified Mason-Allen technique for Bankart repair. Purpose: To prospectively compare the anatomic and clinical outcomes between the vertical simple stitch and the modified Mason-Allen stitch with respect to the labral height, retear rate, redislocation/apprehension, and various functional outcome scores. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 2. Methods: Patients who underwent arthroscopic Bankart repair with double-loaded suture anchors were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups: the vertical simple stitch method (SS; n = 45) or the Bankart repair using modified Mason-Allen technique (BRUMA; n = 41). All patients underwent computed tomography arthrography at 6 months postoperatively and various functional outcome measurements at least 2 years postoperatively. The labral height and width at the 3-, 4-, and 5-o'clock positions were measured preoperatively and at 6 months after surgery on axial computed tomography arthrography; the redislocation/apprehension rate, the retear rate, and various functional outcome scores were evaluated at each follow-up visit. Results: Postoperative labral height and width were significantly increased at all locations (all P < .001) in both groups, but they were not statistically different between groups (all P > .05). Two patients in the SS group (4.4%) and 2 in the BRUMA group (4.9%) experienced redislocation after surgery, and 4 patients in the SS group (8.9%) and 2 in the BRUMA group (4.9%) group showed apprehension after surgery. Additionally, 5 patients in the SS group (11.1%) and 2 in the BRUMA group (4.9%) showed retear at 6 months (P = .239). There were no differences in any functional outcome scores (all P > .05). Conclusion: There was no difference in the radiologic outcomes at 6 months and the clinical outcomes assessed at least 2 years after surgery between the groups. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]