Arthroscopic Hill-Sachs Remplissage with Bankart Repair: Strategy and Technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Arthroscopic Hill-Sachs remplissage describes the fixation of the posterior aspect of the capsule and the infraspinatus tendon into a posterosuperior humeral head impaction fracture in cases of recurrent anteroinferior glenohumeral instability. STEP 1 ANTERIOR CAPSULOLABRAL MOBILIZATION AND GLENOID PREPARATION: Perform diagnostic arthroscopy through a standard posterior portal to rule out additional pathology and document the "engaging" nature of the Hill-Sachs defect. STEP 2 PREPARATION OF THE HILL-SACHS DEFECT: With the camera remaining in the posterior portal, the assistant provides visualization of the Hill-Sachs defect by translating the humeral head anteriorly over the glenoid rim with direct pressure on the proximal part of the humerus. STEP 3 REMPLISSAGE WITH THE POSTERIOR ASPECT OF THE CAPSULE AND INFRASPINATUS TENDON: Transfer the camera to the anterior portal and leave a switching stick in the posterior portal; under direct visualization, withdraw the posterolateral cannula from the posterior aspect of the capsule and the infraspinatus tendon until it rests in the subdeltoid space (∼1 cm). STEP 4 ANTERIOR BANKART REPAIR: Transition the camera back to the standard posterior portal over a switching stick in order to perform the Bankart repair. STEP 5 POSTOPERATIVE REHABILITATION PROTOCOL: Patients wear a brace and perform pendulum exercises for four weeks, and then initiate range-of-motion exercises; they avoid strengthening for eight weeks and sports for three to six months. RESULTS: In our recently published series of forty-seven patients (forty-two male and five female; average age, twenty-nine years), the use of Bankart repair combined with Hill-Sachs remplissage performed according to the above algorithm resulted in 98% of the patients being satisfied or very satisfied with their surgical result and a recurrent instability rate of only 2% at a mean of twenty-four months postoperatively.IndicationsContraindicationsPitfalls & Challenges.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".