Long‐Term Functional Outcomes of Glenohumeral Arthrodesis Following Oncologic Resection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Glenohumeral arthrodesis is a demanding surgical procedure. However, it is an option for reconstruction an oncologic resection, especially for patients in whom the axillary nerve is compromised. METHODS: We reviewed 26 (12 male:14 female) glenohumeral arthrodeses (14 primary:12 revision) following an oncologic resection. The most common method of reconstruction was a free vascularized fibula autograft with a bulk allograft (n = 18). The median follow-up was 22 years (IQR 19 years). RESULTS: Median Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Scores and Toronto Extremity Salvage Scores at final follow-up were 86% and 80%. MSTS scores were similar in patients receiving arthrodesis for primary versus secondary reconstruction. Fifteen (58%) patients had postoperative complications requiring reoperation. Most reoperations occurred with-in the first 5 years postoperative, with two procedures occurring after 10-years. Three patients were diagnosed with metastatic disease, one of which also had a local recurrence. CONCLUSION: Glenohumeral arthrodesis provides satisfactory long-term outcomes for primary and secondary management of shoulder girdle tumors. While early complication rates were high, long-term complications were rare.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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 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".