“Postage Stamp” Fractures: A Systematic Review of Patient and Suture Anchor Profiles Causing Anterior Glenoid Rim Fractures After Bankart Repair
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To systematically review patient and technical risk factors for anterior glenoid rim fractures through suture anchor points (i.e. "postage stamp") after arthroscopic Bankart repair. METHODS: An independent, duplicate search of Embase, Medline, and Web of Science databases, in addition to the past 5-year annual meeting abstracts of several prominent shoulder meetings, was conducted according to R-AMSTAR and Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines to identify English-language studies reporting this complication. RESULTS: A screen of 2,833 studies yielded 6 for inclusion herein. Data across 43 patients, aged 14 to 61 years (mean 24.4), 5% female, and who were followed for 4 to 108 months postoperatively, were reviewed. Only 1 of 6 studies (n = 2) reported postage stamp fracture in female patients. Median time from initial surgery to fracture ranged from 12 to 24 months. Five of 6 studies (n = 32) reported a median age at initial surgery of 25 years or younger (range 17-35). Four of 6 studies (n = 30) reported fracture mostly after sport involvement. All studies (n = 35) reported initial fixation with a median of 3 anchors or more, 3 of 5 studies (n = 26) reported fracture entirely after conventional knot-tying anchors, and 5 of 6 studies (n = 24) reported more fractures after absorbable suture anchor use. Fractures occurred entirely through anchor holes in 5 of 6 studies (n = 29) and mostly after osteolysis in 3 of 4 studies (n = 19). Management strategies after fracture included revision arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Bristow/Latarjet procedures. CONCLUSION: Postage stamp fractures were reported frequently in patients who were male, age 25 years or younger, and participants in sporting activities and in fractures initially stabilized with 3 or more anchors or conventional knot-tying anchors or that experienced osteolysis around anchor sites. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of level III and IV studies.
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 | 0.009 | 0.034 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".