Remplissage in Addition to Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Shoulder Instability With On‐Track Hill–Sachs Lesions Reduces Residual Apprehension Without External Rotation Limitation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of remplissage as an adjunct to Bankart repair in patients with recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation combined with on-track Hill-Sachs lesion. METHODS: Arthroscopic Bankart repair with remplissage data (December 2018-2020) were collected (BR group). Inclusion criteria were (1) recurrent anterior shoulder dislocation, (2) on-track Hill-Sachs lesion, (3) minimal/subcritical glenoid bone loss (<17%), and (4) postoperative follow-up >1 year. Exclusion criteria were (1) revision surgery, (2) first dislocation with acute glenoid rim fracture, and (3) combined with other surgery. The control group was identified in Bankart repair-only cohort (B group). All patients were evaluated preoperatively, and at 3 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, and then annually postoperatively. Visual analogue scale for pain, Self-Assessment Numerical Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder score, ROWE, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability were evaluated at preoperative and final follow-up. Residual apprehension experience and external rotation deficit were evaluated. Patients, who were followed-up for more than 1 year, were asked how often they experienced any subjective apprehension in 4 grades (1: always, 2: frequently, 3: occasionally, 4: never). Patients who had a history of recurrent dislocation or revision surgery were investigated. RESULTS: In total, 53 patients (B, 28; BR, 25) were included. At final follow-up, both groups showed improvement in 5 clinical scores postsurgery (P < .001). The BR group showed greater ROWE scores than the B group (B: 75.2 ± 13.6, BR: 84.4 ± 10.8; P = .009). Residual apprehension patient ratio (B: 71.4% [20/28], BR: 32% [8/25]; P = .004) and the mean subjective apprehension grade (B: 3.1 ± 0.6, BR: 3.6 ± 0.6; P = .005) showed statistically significant difference, whereas no patients in either group experienced external rotation deficit (B: 14.8 ± 12.9°, BR: 18.0 ± 15.2°, P = .420). Only 1 patient in the B group had not responded to surgery, with dislocation recurrence (P = .340). CONCLUSIONS: Remplissage with arthroscopic Bankart repair in on-track Hill-Sachs lesion has a role in reducing residual apprehension without external rotation limitation. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective comparative therapeutic 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".