Clinical Outcomes Following Revision Anterior Shoulder Stabilization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the clinical outcomes following revision anterior shoulder stabilization performed either via all-arthroscopic soft tissue repair or via Latarjet coracoid transfer. Methods: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data on 91 shoulders undergoing revision anterior shoulder stabilization was performed. All patients underwent prior soft tissue stabilization; those with prior open bone grafting procedures were excluded. For patients with 25% glenoid bone loss, Latarjet was performed (n=28). Patients were queried regarding recurrent instability (subluxation or dislocation). Clinical outcomes were evaluated using validated patient reported outcome questionnaires including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI). Results: A total of 63 shoulders in 62 patients (46 males, 16 females) with an average age of 23.2 ± 6.9 years were included in the revision arthroscopy group. At an average follow-up of 46.9 ± 16.8 months (range, 15 to 78), the mean WOSI score was 80.1 (range, 15.0 to 100), and there were significant improvements (p<0.001) in ASES (63.7 to 85.1), SST (6.2 to 9.1), and VAS pain scores (2.89 to 0.81). Recurrent instability occurred in 12 of 63 shoulders (19%); the number of prior surgeries and baseline hyperlaxity were significant risk factors for failure (p<0.001 and p=0.04, respectively). No patients developed clinical or radiographic evidence of arthritis. A total of 28 shoulders in 28 patients (21 male, 7 female) with an average age of 27.5 years (range 14 to 45) were included in the Latarjet group. Thirteen (46%) had more than one previous stabilization attempt. ), the average WOSI score was 71.9, and there were significant improvements (p<0.001) in ASES (65.7 to 87.0), SST (7.2 to 10.3), and VAS (3.1 to 1.1). Recurrent instability occurred in 2 of 28 shoulders (7%), including 1 patient with symptomatic subluxation and 1 patient with a recurrent dislocation resulting in rapid arthrosis requiring revision to hemiarthroplasty at 20 months after Latarjet. Conclusion: Both arthroscopic revision stabilization and Latarjet coracoid transfer result in satisfactory outcomes in patients who have failed previous arthroscopic capsulolabral repair. Recurrent instability rates were higher in the all-arthroscopic group (19% versus 7%). Longer-term studies are required to determine whether similar results are maintained over time, and to provide guidance on focused clinical indications for this challenging patient population.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".