Long-term Follow-up of Acute Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Initial Anterior Shoulder Dislocations in Young Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Little is known of the long-term results of acute arthroscopic Bankart repair for first-time traumatic anterior glenohumeral dislocations. HYPOTHESIS: Acute arthroscopic Bankart repair for first-time traumatic anterior glenohumeral dislocations will provide good results at long-term follow-up. STUDY DESIGN: Case series; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: The authors evaluated a cohort of young patients who sustained first-time anterior glenohumeral dislocations and were acutely treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair using bioabsorbable tacks. Subjective outcome measures were obtained at a mean follow-up of 11.7 years (range, 9.1-13.9 years). RESULTS: Thirty-nine patients (40 shoulders) were available of the original cohort of 49 shoulders (82%). Two of the 9 who were lost to follow-up had revision surgery before being lost and are carried forward in the calculations of recurrent instability and revision surgery but are not included in the calculation of the functional scores. The mean Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation was 91.7, the mean Western Ontario Shoulder Instability score was 371.7, the mean subjective Rowe score was 25.3, the mean Simple Shoulder Test was 11.1, the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Society score was 90.9, the mean Short Form-36 Physical Component score was 94.4, and the mean Tegner score was 6.5. Six patients sustained recurrent dislocations for a redislocation rate of 14.3%. Nine patients (21.4%) reported experiencing subluxation events. Six patients (14.3%) underwent revision stabilization surgery. CONCLUSION: At long-term follow-up, acute arthroscopic Bankart repair for first-time traumatic anterior glenohumeral dislocations resulted in excellent subjective function and return to athletics in young, active patients with an acceptable rate of recurrence and reoperation.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".