Reparación capsulolabral artroscópica en la inestabilidad glenohumeral anterior. Resultados a medio y largo plazo
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La estabilización artroscópica de la lesión de Bankart es una técnica ampliamente utilizada en la inestabilidad glenohumeral anterior con una tasa de recurrencia que puede variar, según la literatura, entre el cero y el 35%. El objetivo principal de este estudio es evaluar los resultados a medio-largo plazo de esta técnica, el objetivo secundario es identificar los posibles factores de riesgo asociados con la recidiva de la inestabilidad. Se incluyeron 41 pacientes diagnosticados con inestabilidad glenohumeral anterior e intervenidos mediante cirugía artroscópica entre los años 2001 y 2015. Se evaluaron diferentes variables como los datos epidemiológicos, la recidiva de la luxación (subluxación o luxación), la edad del primer episodio, el tipo de actividad deportiva previa a la primera luxación y el número de implantes empleados en la cirugía. Los resultados funcionales fueron evaluados mediante las escalas. Índice de inestabilidad de hombro de Western Ontario (WOSI), Rowe y Walch-Duplay y los resultados radiológicos a través de la escala de Samilson-Prieto. Se recogieron datos de la historia clínica con el fin de evaluar los posibles factores de riesgo. En el studio, se observó una tasa de reluxación del 9,4% con un seguimiento medio de 83 meses. El 54,3% de los pacientes alcanzó resultados excelentes/buenos en las escalas de valoración funcional. El rango de movilidad fue completo en el 90% de los casos. En un 4,88% se apreció artrosis avanzada en los estudios radiológicos. No se identificaron factores de riesgo relacionados con un peor resultado tras la cirugía. Consideramos que la estabilización artroscópica de la lesión de Bankart mediante anclajes de sutura es la técnica de elección en el tratamiento de la inestabilidad glenohumeral anterior primaria ya que consigue unos índices de recidiva razonables a medio-largo plazo (9%), con un índice de complicaciones bajo. Arthroscopic stabilization is a well-recognized surgical technique with a variable rate of failure reported between 0-35%. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of this technique and our second aim was to identify risk factors that could be associated to recurrence rate. 41 patients that underwent arthroscopic shoulder stabilization for glenohumeral instability between 2001-2015 were included. Different items such as epidemiologic, recurrence, age at first dislocation, preoperative sport practice, and number of fixation devices used were collected. The results were evaluated using functional scales (WOSI, Rowe y Walch-Duplay) and radiological study was assessed using the Samilson-Prieto score. Data from the medical history were recognized in order to assess possible risk factors. The overall redislocation rate was 9.4%. The average follow-up was 83 months. The 54.3% of the patients achieved excellent / good results in the functional assessment scales. The range of motion was complete in 90% of the cases. On the radiographs, only 4.88% of the patients present advanced osteoarthritis. It was not possible to identify risk factors related to a worse outcome after surgery. The arthroscopic Bankart repair with suture anchors is considered the gold standard for treatment of anterior glenohumeral instability. The long-term follow-up shows a favorable outcome, with a redislocation rate of 9% and low complication rate.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".