No Clinical or Radiographic Difference Seen in Arthroscopic Bankart Repair With Knotted Versus Knotless Suture Anchors: A Randomized Controlled Trial at Short‐Term Follow‐Up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to compare the clinical and radiographic results of patients undergoing arthroscopic repair of labral lesions using knotted and knotless anchors. METHODS: Sixty-four patients with anterior labral lesions (bone defects of the glenoid up to 13.5% or up to 20% if the instability severity index score was less than 4) and without other shoulder pathologies were randomly assigned to 2 groups, with 32 patients in each group. Clinical outcomes were assessed 6, 12, and 24 months after surgery by the Rowe score, Western Ontario shoulder instability index (WOSI), single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE), visual analog scale for pain (VASp), range of motion, and rate of postoperative recurrence. Postoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed, and the anterior and inferior labrum glenoid height indexes and anterior and inferior labral slopes were measured. The primary endpoint was the Rowe score at 24 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients, 24 in the knotted group and 27 in the knotless group, completed 24 months of follow-up. At 24 months, the Rowe scores were 81.7 ± 19.9 points and 85.9 ± 14 points, respectively (P = .623); the WOSI scores were 509.2 ± 480.1 points and 555.9 ± 393.6 points, respectively (P = .533); the SANE scores were 90.7 ± 18.7 points and 89.2 ± 14.8 points, respectively (P = .427); and the VASp scores were 1.7 ± 2.5 points and 2.5 ± 2.7 points, respectively (P = .275). There was no significant difference in range of motion, postoperative recurrence, or MRI parameters between the groups. All subjects (100%) in both groups exceeded the minimal clinically important difference of 9.7 for the Rowe score (P > .999). CONCLUSION: Repair of Bankart's lesion through the use of knotted and knotless suture anchors yielded similar clinical and radiographic results on analysis at 24 months after operation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I. Randomized controlled clinical trial.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".