Open Bankart Repair for the Treatment of Anterior Shoulder Instability without Substantial Osseous Glenoid Defects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neglected osseous glenoid defects are thought to be one of the reasons for the reported high rates of recurrent instability at long-term follow-up after Bankart repair. We hypothesized that open Bankart repair for the treatment of anterior glenohumeral instability in the absence of a substantial osseous glenoid defect would result in a lower long-term recurrence rate than has been reported in previous long-term studies. METHODS: Forty-seven patients were treated with a primary modified open Bankart repair for recurrent anterior shoulder instability between 1989 and 1994. Double-contrast computed tomography scanning was used to exclude patients with a substantial osseous glenoid defect. Forty patients (85.1%) were available for subjective and objective follow-up at a minimum of twenty years (maximum, twenty-five years). Twenty-six patients (65%) underwent clinical examination as well as bilateral shoulder radiography, and fourteen (35%) completed a self-assessment questionnaire and were interviewed by telephone. RESULTS: Seven patients (17.5%) had a recurrence of instability, and six of them had the instability occur after more than eight years without symptoms. The mean Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score (and standard deviation) was 256.7 ± 284.8 points; the mean Rowe score, 88.7 ± 12.0 points; and the mean Subjective Shoulder Value, 90.1% ± 10.5%.The mean range of motion of the affected shoulder was decreased by 4° of abduction (p = 0.009), two levels of internal rotation (p = 0.003), 5° of internal rotation in 90° of abduction (p = 0.005), 7° of external rotation in neutral position (p < 0.001), and 7° of external rotation in 90° of abduction (p = 0.004) compared with the contralateral side. The collective instability arthropathy (CIA) index was 0.92 for the affected side and 0.35 for the contralateral side. CONCLUSIONS: Open Bankart repair provides good results twenty years after surgery in terms of subjective and objective outcome measurements. However, the long-term failure rate remains high despite the exclusion of substantial osseous glenoid defects. Recurrence of instability seems to be associated with an increased shoulder-specific activity level. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 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".