MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046621789 · doi:10.1177/2325967120s00378

Risk Factors for Recurrent Anterior Glenohumeral Instability Following a Primary Latarjet Procedure: A Prospective Analysis of 358 Patients

2020· article· en· W3046621789 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Matthew T. Provencher, Liam A. Peebles, Nicola de Gasperis, Petar Golijanin, Paolo Scarso, Justin W. Arner, Giovanni DiGiacomo

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineLatarjet procedureShouldersAnterior shoulderSurgeryPhysical examination

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to identify historical and demographic risk factors influencing failure rates and inferior clinical outcomes in patients reporting recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability following a primary Latarjet procedure. It was hypothesized that patients who have a greater risk of recurrent instability and worse clinical outcomes following a primary Latarjet procedure can be preoperatively identified on the basis of clinical, demographic, and radiological criteria. Methods: Between 2004 and 2014, patients who were treated with a primary Latarjet by the senior author (GDG) for unidirectional anterior shoulder instability were reviewed. Further inclusion criteria were ≥ 2 traumatic or atraumatic anterior instability events and physical examination and imaging findings consistent with anterior instability. Patients were excluded if they underwent previous ipsilateral shoulder surgery, had a rotator cuff tear, or had voluntary and/or multidirectional instability. Gender, age at first dislocation, duration of instability symptoms, number of dislocation events, age at surgery, bilateral instability, mechanism of dislocation, and quantification of glenoid and humeral head bone loss were recorded. Western Ontario Score Index (WOSI) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) outcomes scores were collected at minimum five-year follow-up, along with clinical outcomes parameters including evidence of recurrent instability. Results: 358 consecutive patients (372 shoulders) with a mean age of 29.2 years (range = 16 to 68 years) met inclusion criteria at a mean follow-up of 75 months (range = 61 to 89 months). There were 299 men (83.5%) and 59 women (16.5%), of which 86 had bilateral dislocations (24%). Bilateral Latarjet procedures were performed on 14 patients (4.1%). There was a total of 173 patients (48.3%) with an on-track lesion and glenoid bone loss ≤ 13.5%, 154 patients (43%) with on-track lesion but glenoid bone loss >13.5%, and 31 patients (8.7%) with off-track lesions. 17 patients (4.9%) experienced an instability episode following treatment with primary Latarjet. The mean WOSI was 818.2 ± 156.9 for recurrent instability patients while it was 296.4 ± 207.3 for patients with no postoperative instability (F1,356 = 104.6, p < 0.05). SANE scores were also lower in cases of recurrence (65.9 ± 9.0) when compared to patients that did not report postoperative recurrence (85.8 ± 8.1) (F1,356 = 98.4 p < 0.05). The mean WOSI score of bilateral instability subjects (438.6 ± 205.8) was higher than those with unilateral instability (256.3 ± 189.6) (F2,339 = 427.0; p < 0.05), while SANE was similarly worse for bilateral subjects (79.7 ± 8.4) compared to unilateral subjects (87.6 ± 7.1) (F2,339=23168.9; p < 0.05). The patients with atraumatic dislocations reported WOSI scores that were, on average, higher than those reported for patients with traumatic ones (396.3 ± 216.3 versus 270.6 ± 197.2, respectively; F2,339 = 380.7; p < 0.05) and mean SANE scores that were lower than the others (81.7 ± 9.4 versus 86.9 ± 7.3, respectively; F2,339 = 20,722.3; p < 0.05). The mean postoperative WOSI for female patients in this cohort was higher than that of males (397.3±227.9 and 276.5±197.4 respectively; F2,339 = 372.9; p < 0.05), while SANE was lower (82.6 ± 8.4 for females and 86.5±7.8 for males; F2,339 = 19959.6; p < 0.05). The mean postoperative WOSI for subjects who were between 31 and 40 years old at the first instability episode was higher (366.5 ± 236.6) than who were less than 30 years old (F4,337 = 181.1; p < 0.05). There was no significant difference across age groups with respect to postoperative SANE scores. The mean WOSI score for patients over 40 years old at the time of the surgery was higher (347.2 ± 269.0) than for those under 22 years old (233.3 ± 217.7) and those between 23 and 30 years old (272.0 ± 182.5; (F4,337 = 181.9; p < 0.05)). SANE scores were not significantly different with respect to patient age at the time of treatment. There was found to be no correlation between the pattern of bone loss (OFF-track, ON-track < 13.5%, ON -track > 13.5%) recurrent instability and clinical outcomes. Conclusion: 4.9% of patients treated with primary Latarjet experienced recurrent anterior instability postoperatively. Preoperative risk factors included history of bilateral shoulder instability and atraumatic mechanism of dislocation. Poorer postoperative outcome scores independent of recurrent instability included age > 31 years, female gender, having more than seven instability events prior to surgery, bilateral instability, and atraumatic mechanism of first-time dislocation. This is the first clinical study to provide evidence behind specific demographic and historical factors that predispose patients to a greater risk of recurrent instability and inferior clinical outcomes following a Latarjet. This has implications on both clinical treatment and patient education to more accurately evaluate Latarjet candidates.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.272 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports MedicineSame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207