A novel arthroscopic transosseous suture-button fixation technique for anterior glenoid fractures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background This study evaluated the clinical and radiological results of a new transosseous suture-button fixation technique for anterior glenoid fractures. Methods From March 2017 to May 2021, 23 patients with anterior glenoid fractures were treated with the new technique. Demographic data, active shoulder function, and several shoulder scores were evaluated after a minimum of 6 months. Fracture reduction and button placement were assessed via computed tomography, while fracture healing and onset or progression of glenohumeral osteoarthritis were evaluated with X‑rays. Results Overall, 57% of the patients had relevant concomitant intra-articular injury. Clinical follow-up was performed for 22 patients (19 male, 3 female) at 15 months (6.0–34.5) after surgery. The average Constant Score was 83.2 ± 16.7 points (93.4% ± 18.8% vs. the contralateral side), the Rowe Score, 90.7 ± 10.4 points, the Melbourne Instability Shoulder Score (/100), 88.3 ± 14.5 points, the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (%), 82.9 ± 16.7, and the Subjective Shoulder Value (%), 86.9 ± 16.1. Average range of motion was 171.4 ° ± 22.7 ° of flexion (contralateral side, 180 ° ± 0 °; p = 0.11) and 170.5 ° ± 23.6 ° of abduction (contralateral side, 179.6 ± 2.1; p = 0.07). No complications occurred and no revision surgery was required. The postoperative step-off of the glenoid averaged 1.55 ± 1.05 mm (0–4 mm). Radiological follow-up of 19 patients showed fracture consolidation in all cases, without secondary dislocation of the fracture or of heterotopic ossification. There was no sign hardware impingement or dislocation. There was new-onset osteoarthritis in 3 cases (15.8%). We found no correlation between the step-off and radiological signs of osteoarthritis. Conclusion Anterior glenoid fractures were treated safely and reproducibly with the novel arthroscopic double-button-suture technique, but long-term results are still needed.
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) | 0.001 | 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".