Arthroscopic Latarjet combined with remplissage and capsulolabral repair in the treatment of anterior shoulder instability—the quadruple effect. A prospective study of functional outcome in patients with 2-year follow-up
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: The Latarjet procedure is largely considered a successful procedure, however, evidenced by a nonnegligible failure rate in terms of residual apprehension, and subtle or frank instability. Despite conferring a triple block effect (improving glenoid width, capsulolabral repair and sling effect of split subscapularis), the procedure, however, fails to address Hill Sach's defect. Recent research on bipolar bone lesions in the setting of anterior instability has revealed the propensity of Latarjet to fail in the presence of larger Hill Sach lesions, which have higher chances of engagement of the anterior glenoid rim, emphasizing the need to treat these humeral bone defects. To this effect, remplissage has had a proven track record in combination with Bankart repair. Methods: The functional and clinical outcomes of patients having undergone arthroscopic Latarjet with remplissage with a minimum of 2 years and secondarily, the external rotation was assessed postoperatively. Results: In a total of 40 patients, there was a significant improvement in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Western Ontario Shoulder Index, and Rowe scores {Western Ontario Shoulder Index (1379/186.5), Rowe (19.69/91.41) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (44.5/93)} and external rotation. Visual analog score reduced significantly (6 - preoperative to 1 - postoperative). Though an external rotation deficit was observed, when compared to the opposite shoulder, the patients did not have any functional deficits in performing daily activities. Conclusion: Arthroscopic Latarjet combined with capsulolabral repair and remplissage yields good clinical and functional outcomes with no residual apprehension or instability recurrence in treating recurrent anterior instability at a 2-year minimum follow-up. The limitation of external rotation is minimal and clinically insignificant.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".