Weber Osteotomy for Large Hill-Sachs Defects: Clinical and CT Assessments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Weber derotation osteotomy is an uncommon procedure that typically is reserved for patients with engaging Hill-Sachs defects who have had other surgical treatments for shoulder instability fail. It is unknown whether the desired humeral derotation actually is achieved with the Weber osteotomy. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: The purposes of this study were to answer the following questions: (1) What are the complication (including redislocation) and reoperation rates of the Weber osteotomy? (2) What are the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and functional (ROM in internal rotation, self care) results? (3) What fraction of the patients had humeral derotation within 10° of the desired rotation? METHODS: A chart review of 19 Weber osteotomies and clinical assessment of 10 Weber osteotomies were performed by independent clinicians. The chart review, at a mean followup of 51 months (range, 13-148 months), focused on the complication rate and the frequency of redislocation. The clinical and CT assessments, at a mean followup of 54 months (range, 26-151 months), focused on ASES scores, ability of patients to perform self care with the affected arm, and CT scans to measure change in humeral retroversion. RESULTS: There were 25 complications and nine reoperations in 17 patients (19 shoulders), including pain (six patients, of whom one had complex regional pain syndrome), hematoma, infection, nonunion, delayed union, reoperations related to hardware and other noninstability-related causes (five patients), and internal rotation deficit. Redislocation occurred in one patient, who underwent repeat surgery, and subjective instability developed in two others. The mean ASES score was 78 points (of 100 points); six of the 10 patients (11 procedures) evaluated in person found it difficult or were unable to wash their backs with the affected arm. Humeral derotation varied from 7° to 77°; only three of the nine patients for whom CT scans were available had derotation within 10° of the desired rotation. CONCLUSIONS: Complication rates with the Weber osteotomy were much higher than previously reported. Because seven of 17 patients were lost to followup, the redislocation rate may be higher than we observed here. Given the unpredictable variability in humeral derotation achieved with a Weber osteotomy, an improved surgical technique is critical to avoid osteoarthritis and loss of internal rotation associated with overrotation.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".