Concomitant rotator cuff repair and instability surgery provide good patient-reported functional outcomes in patients aged 40 years or older with shoulder dislocation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background Recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation in patients aged ≥ 40 years is not as rare as once thought. The mechanism of instability in this patient population is different—more likely to be attributed to rotator cuff pathology—compared with that in younger individuals. With an increasingly aging active population, surgical management has a rising role in preventing morbidity associated with recurrent instability. Our purpose was to evaluate outcomes of anterior shoulder instability repair (ie, Bankart or bony Bankart repair) with and without rotator cuff repair (RCR) in patients aged ≥ 40 years. Methods We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients aged ≥ 40 years who underwent surgical repair for anterior shoulder instability from 2008-2016. Patients were categorized into 4 cohorts: Bankart repair only, bony Bankart repair only, Bankart repair with concomitant RCR, and bony Bankart repair with concomitant RCR. Demographic and history-of-instability data were collected. Clinical and functional outcomes assessed included the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Penn Shoulder Score, visual analog scale score for pain, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score, and patient satisfaction score. Results A total of 146 patients were included in this study, with 103 patients (71%) having ≥2-year outcome scores. Outcome scores were not significantly different among groups. For patients who underwent Bankart repair only, bony Bankart repair only, Bankart repair with RCR, and bony Bankart repair with RCR, the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores were 80.8 ± 19.7, 90.0 ± 10.7, 79.3 ± 29.4, and 87.2 ± 10.6, respectively ( P = .284); American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores, 83.8 ± 19.7, 92.4 ± 17.4, 82.5 ± 25.6, and 85.6 ± 12.7, respectively ( P = .114); Penn Shoulder Scores for function, 84.5 ± 17.9, 90.9 ± 15.3, 83.6 ± 25.1, and 95.7 ± 13.0, respectively ( P = .286); and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index scores, 481.0 ± 519.5, 292.1 ± 414.3, 548.9 ± 690.5, and 320.6 ± 258.7, respectively ( P = .713). Age at the time of surgery significantly differed between cohorts ( P < .001). No patients had recurrence of instability during the study period. Conclusion Similar functional outcomes can be achieved in the surgical management of anterior instability in patients aged ≥ 40 years. Rotator cuff tears should be suspected and repaired in patients with anterior instability, especially those aged ≥ 50 years.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".