Arthroscopic Anterior Glenoid Reconstruction Using a Distal Tibial Allograft Positioned With an Intra‐Articular Guide and Secured With Double‐Button Fixation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recurrent shoulder instability and its role in bone loss from the anterior glenoid is well recognized throughout the literature. This technique paper presents an all-arthroscopic technique that uses distal tibial allograft and double-button suture fixation to address anterior recurrent shoulder instability. With the patient in the lateral decubitus position, we use the posterior portal to position the double-barrel drill guide tangential to the face of the glenoid, while viewing through the anterosuperolateral portal. We then use the "bullets," which are made through two percutaneous posterior skin incisions of the double-barreled drill. This guide ensures parallel drill tunnels are created 5 mm medial to the glenoid articular surface and 1 cm apart, minimizing risk to the suprascapular nerve caused by a straying medial. We prepare a bone block from allograft distal tibia and place two drill holes to match those drilled in the glenoid vault. The allograft is then shuttled arthroscopically using looped passing wires. Once the final position is confirmed, a tensiometer is used to tension the graft in place. We then reattach the labrum to the native glenoid rim. Our technique creates a reproducible, anatomic, glenoid surface reconstruction for anterior glenoid bone loss in recurrent instability.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".