Anterior glenohumeral instability treated with arthroscopic Bankart operation – a retrospective 5-year follow-up study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This retrospective study investigated 5-year results of primary arthroscopic operation for anterior glenohumeral instability (AI) with special interest in patients aged<25 years and gender. HYPOTHESIS: Recurrence of AI is higher in male patients aged<25 years than older patients or females. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Primary arthroscopic Bankart repair was performed between January 2009 and December 2015 on 156 shoulders [154 patients, 104/156 (67%) males]. The mean follow-up was 5.6 (SD 2.1, range 0.4-8.9) years. Outcome measures, including re-dislocation, fear of dislocation, Western Ontario instability index, Subjective shoulder value and pain Numerical rating scale scores, the number of revision surgeries and satisfaction with the result of surgical treatment, were assessed for 130 shoulders [82/130 (63%) males]. AI recurrence was defined as a dislocation or a fear of such. RESULTS: The Kaplan-Meier analysis estimates for the cumulative survival of stable shoulders were 28% at 8.8 years for patients aged<25 years (SE 0.4, CI 95% 5.5-7.2) and 53% at 8.9 years for patients aged ≥25 years (SE 0.2, CI 95% 7.2-8.0; p=0.005). The Kaplan-Meier estimates for the cumulative survival of stable shoulders were 50% at 8.9 years for males (SE 0.3, CI 95% 6.8-7.8) and 37% at 8.6 years for females (SE 0.3, CI 95% 6.5-7.7; p=0.8). Mean time to revision was 2.4 (SD 1.7, range 0.4-5.3) years. DISCUSSION: Recurrence of AI was higher in the patients aged<25 years (p=0.005), but gender was not a risk factor. Re-operation rate due to recurrent AI was 10% in this 5-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III; case-control study.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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".