Peripheral-Track and Central-Track Hill-Sachs Lesions: A New Concept of Assessing an On-Track Lesion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: It has been demonstrated biomechanically that 25% is a critical size defect of the glenoid. However, a recent clinical study reported that a bone loss between 13.5% and 20% (subcritical bone loss) led to impairment of quality of life but not a recurrence of instability. Purpose: To clarify whether a subcritical bone loss exists in assessing a Hill-Sachs lesion via a disease-specific quality of life questionnaire. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Fifty patients (mean age, 27 years) with <25% glenoid defect who were treated with arthroscopic Bankart repair for recurrent anterior dislocation were assessed at a mean follow-up of 28 months. All had an on-track Hill-Sachs lesion. The Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) and Rowe scores were used for the clinical evaluation. The Hill-Sachs interval was measured on 3-dimensional computed tomography images and divided by the glenoid track width, defined as the Hill-Sachs occupancy (in percentages). The glenoid track was divided into 4 zones based on the percentage of the Hill-Sachs occupancy: zone 1, <25%; zone 2, 25% to <50%; zone 3, 50% to <75%; and zone 4, ≥75%. Results: The recurrence rate was 6% (3 of 50 shoulders). The Rowe score significantly improved from 45.2 ± 4.7 (mean ± SD) preoperatively to 92.3 ± 6.5 at the final follow-up ( P < .05). The WOSI score also significantly increased from 46.6% ± 19.3% preoperatively to 72.3% ± 21.0% at the final follow-up ( P < .001). The WOSI score of patients in zone 4 (peripheral-track lesion) (n = 10) was significantly lower than those in the other zones (central-track lesion) ( P = .0379). Of the 10 patients with the peripheral-track lesion, 5 had a <40% WOSI score, similar to the preoperative WOSI score (46.6%). Conclusion: Patients with on-track lesions can be divided into 2 subgroups: those with the Hill-Sachs occupancy ≥75% (peripheral-track lesion) showed significantly worse WOSI score without recurrent instability events than those with the Hill-Sacks occupancy <75% (central-track lesion).
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".