Arthroscopic anterior glenoid reconstruction using distal tibial allograft with suture button fixation: 2-year postoperative clinical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Anterior glenohumeral instability is a common cause of shoulder instability. Bony reconstruction with distal tibial allograft (DTA) is a relatively new technique with promising results. Screw fixation of the graft comes with certain risks including hardware complications requiring revision surgery, so a novel technique, arthroscopic DTA with double suture-button fixation, has been proposed. The purpose of our study was therefore to report the outcomes of arthroscopic DTA anterior glenoid reconstruction with double suture-button fixation. Methods: A single-surgeon, single-center, mixed retrospective/prospective cohort review of patients who underwent arthroscopic DTA glenoid reconstruction with double-button suture anchor fixation between 2018 and 2022 in Alberta, Canada, was performed. The study included adult patients at least 18 years old at time of study with at least 13% glenoid bone loss and 2 years of follow-up. Chart reviews and telephone interviews were completed to assess for radiographic and clinical outcomes. Primary outcomes were failure rate, complication rate including infection, neurovascular injury, revision rate, reoperation rate, and patient-reported outcome measures. Results: = .81). Twenty-three participants (53%) completed a telephone interview with the following results: subjective persistent instability 9 (39%), chronic stiffness 9 (39%), mechanical symptoms 16 (70%), overall Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score 87 ± 9, average Visual Analog Score 1.1 ± 1.5, and 20 (87%) were 'satisfied' or 'very satisfied' with their surgery. Conclusion: The rate of recurrent instability is 21% in this challenging population. Reoperation rate for symptomatic hardware was 2%, and the other complication rate was 2%. While DTA reconstruction with suture button fixation can be considered an option in patients with risk factors for failure, patients should be counseled on the risk of recurrent instability and need for reoperation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".