Suture Anchor Fixation of Bony Bankart Fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: As an alternative to the standard single-point suture-anchor technique, a suture-bridge technique has been described for the treatment of bony Bankart fractures. There is, however, little evidence supporting one technique over the other. Purpose/ HYPOTHESIS: To compare the failure strength, fixation stability, and loading mechanics of the 2 techniques for the fixation of bony Bankart fractures. We hypothesized that use of the double-point suture-bridge technique would result in superior strength and fixation stability because of the increased compression and contact area between the bony fragment and glenoid fracture site. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: A total of 16 shoulders (8 pairs) were tested with an intact glenoid, after creation of a 15% bony Bankart fracture, and after fragment fixation using a single-point or suture-bridge technique. Paired specimens were randomly assigned to each technique. Cyclic progressive loading was applied via a materials testing machine to the glenoid concentrically and eccentrically according to a staircase protocol. Failure strength, fragment displacement, glenoid strain load transfer, and contact area were quantified. RESULTS: No significant differences in failure strength were found between the single-point and suture-bridge techniques (mean strength, 74 ± 28 N vs 77 ± 56 N, respectively; P = .91). Additionally, no significant differences were found for glenoid load transfer (P ≥ .318) and glenohumeral joint contact (P = .357) between the 2 techniques. Centralized loading, however, produced significant differences in fragment displacement at 5, 150, and 200 N (P ≤ .045), with the single-point technique permitting greater fragment displacement in all cases (0.06-0.28 mm). Similarly, eccentric loading caused significantly greater fragment displacement with the single-point technique at ≥25 N compared with the suture-bridge technique (mean range, 0.38-0.63 mm vs 0.14-0.19 mm, respectively; .009 ≤ P ≤ .048). CONCLUSION: Single-point and suture-bridge techniques for the fixation of bony Bankart fragments have equivalent failure strengths and load transfers. The suture-bridge technique does provide statistically greater initial fracture fragment stability; however, the clinical implications of this are presently unknown. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study will aid in the selection of the optimal repair technique for bony Bankart fractures by providing important insights into the quality of initial fixation and ultimate strength.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".