Clinical Outcomes Following the Latarjet Procedure in Contact and Collision Athletes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Few studies have evaluated the success of the Latarjet procedure for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability in the contact or collision athlete. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the return-to-sport and functional results of the Latarjet procedure in this select group. METHODS: One hundred and nine consecutive contact or collision athletes (112 shoulders) treated with an open Latarjet procedure for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability were retrospectively identified. Seventy-three shoulders in 73 patients (67%) were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 52 months (range, 24 to 120 months). The average age at surgery was 25.8 years (range, 15 to 54 years). The primary outcomes were the scores on the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI), the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) questionnaire, a visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and return to sport. Predictors of return to sport were analyzed. RESULTS: Six (8%) of the 73 patients experienced ≥1 postoperative dislocations. Ten additional patients (14%) experienced a perception of instability without a dislocation. The median postoperative WOSI and ASES scores were 382 (range, 0 to 2,016) and 93.3 (range, 21.7 to 100), respectively. The median postoperative VAS pain score was 0 (range, 0 to 10). Forty-nine percent (36) of the 73 patients returned to their preoperative sports level, 14% (10) decreased their activity level in the same sport, 12% (9) changed sports, and 25% (18) decreased their level of activity and changed sports or stopped participating in sports altogether. Patients with ≥2 stabilization procedures prior to the Latarjet procedure demonstrated a lower likelihood of returning to their original sport (p = 0.019; relative risk = 2.84; 95% confidence interval = 1.34 to 6.06). The percentage of glenoid bone loss showed no association with the return-to-sport rate (p = 0.507). CONCLUSIONS: The outcome of the Latarjet procedure in high-risk contact or collision athletes is variable. Patients who have fewer prior stabilization surgical procedures are more likely to successfully return to their original sport. 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".