Arthroscopic Bankart Repair with and without Arthroscopic Infraspinatus Remplissage in Anterior Shoulder Instability with Hill-Sachs Defect: Randomized Controlled Trial
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives: The purpose of this prospective randomized, double blinded controlled trial was to compare patient-reported outcomes and clinical results between arthroscopic Bankart repair with and without arthroscopic infraspinatus remplissage in patients with anterior shoulder instability with a Hill-Sachs lesion. Failure to recognize and address large Hill Sach’s defects during arthroscopic stabilization surgery for glenohumeral instability is known to lead to high rates of recurrence. Arthroscopic remplissage has evolved in recent years as a reproducible technique with a proposed benefit of decreased dislocations. However, there are no high level clinical studies to conclusively support its efficacy in reducing redislocations. Methods: One hundred and four patients, aged 14 years and older, with a confirmed Hill Sach’s lesion on ultrasound, CT or MRI, were randomized intraoperatively after confirming an engaging Hill Sach’s lesion to either undergo arthroscopic infraspinatus remplissage (REMP) or no remplissage during arthroscopic Bankart repair (NO REMP). Exclusion criteria included a glenoid defect >15% of the AP glenoid diameter, significant shoulder arthropathy, infection, or medical comorbidities. The primary outcome measure was the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability score (WOSI). Secondary outcomes included the Simple Shoulder Test (SST), the American Shoulder and Elbow Society standardized assessment of shoulder function (ASES), active range of motion, stability tests, and incidence of revision surgery. Study time points were pre-, 3-, 6-, 12-, and 24-months post-operative. Significance level was 0.05. Results: A summary of demographics and outcomes are presented in Table 1. There were 53 patients (45 men, 8 women) randomized to REMP and 52 (46 men, 6 women) patients to NO REMP. The groups were comparable with regard to age, body mass index (BMI), and gender distribution). Both groups demonstrated a similar improvement in all subjective scores over time to 12-months post-operative with no difference between the groups (collection of data to 24-months post-operative is ongoing until 2019). The WOSI significantly improved from pre- to 12-months post-operative in both study groups. There were no differences between groups at any time point. ASES scores and SST scores followed a similar pattern. Additionally, there were no differences in range of motion between groups at any time point. There were 2/53 re-dislocations in REMP postoperatively compared to 6/52 in NO REMP; this difference was not significant (p=0.161). There were no differences between groups in reports of limitations in participation in sport attributed to the operated shoulder up to 12-months post-operative. Conclusion: Based on this study, there is no difference in subjective outcome scores and redislocations rates between remplissage and no remplissage for an engaging Hill Sach’s lesion while performing arthroscopic Bankart stabilization. As data continues to be gathered to 24-months post-operative including MRI, longer term benefits or drawbacks may become evident. [Table: see text]
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,008 | 0,004 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».