MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3046687774 · doi:10.1177/2325967120s00417

Minimum 2 Years Outcomes of Powerlifters and Bodybuilders with advanced Glenohumeral arthritis, managed with Stemless aspherical humeral head resurfacing and inlay glenoid

2020· article· en· W3046687774 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
John W. Uribe, Zvijac Luis Vargas John

Bibliographic record

VenueOrthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineShouldersElbowPhysical therapyVisual analogue scaleArthroplastyRange of motionSurgery

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: Symptomatic glenohumeral arthritis (GHA) among high-level bodybuilders and powerlifters is relatively common. Once conservative management fails, the surgical options for these athletes are limited and pose challenges due to their relatively young age and the desire to continue their activities of weightlifting. The benefits of arthroscopic management are limited and short-lived. Hemi or Total shoulder arthroplasty remains controversial, and glenohumeral stresses upon return to even moderate lifting present an added risk for failure. A series of competitive or high-level recreational bodybuilders and powerlifters with advanced GHA who expressed a strong desire to continue their sport were managed utilizing a novel stemless aspherical resurfacing of the humeral head (HHR) combined with an inlay glenoid (IG). To our knowledge, there are no published studies documenting the efficacy of this unique approach. Methods: Our series consists of 18 shoulders corresponding to 14 male athletes with an average age of 45.6 years, range 25-57, who were prospectively followed. Pre- and postoperative evaluations included physical examination, radiographic assessment, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, the Western Ontario 0steoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS), pain visual analog scale (VAS-P), forward flexion (FF), external rotation (ER), internal rotation (IR) and patient satisfaction rating questionnaires. Results: All procedures were performed on an outpatient basis. No intraoperative complications were encountered, and no blood transfusions were required. The mean follow-up was 38 months, with a range (25-51). The mean ASES score improved from 26 to 93, and the mean WOOS score improved from 18 to 87. The mean VAS-P decreased from 9 to 1, mean FF increased from 115° to 145°, mean ER improved from 30 ° to 60° and IR improved from the level of the sacrum to L3. Eleven of the fourteen patients rated their preoperative shoulder satisfaction as poor. At last follow-up, all patients rated their shoulder as good to excellent. Radiographic follow-up revealed no evidence of component loosening, glenoid migration, or evidence of device failure. All patients were satisfied with the procedure and 12 / 14 returned to a moderate or higher level of weight lifting activities. One patient required an arthroscopic capsular release for arthrofibrosis which significantly improved function. Four of these patients requested contralateral surgery within six months of initial procedure. Conclusion: Stemless aspherical humeral head resurfacing combined with inlay glenoid replacement provides substantial pain relief and functional improvement and is a promising option for the management of symptomatic osteoarthritis in this challenging patient population. The procedure allows for a return to activities without restrictions and leaves multiple arthroplasty options if revision becomes necessary. Our results need to be reconfirmed in a larger cohort with longer follow-up.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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