Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29537865›Full record

ArticleThe American journal of sports medicine2018

Critical Glenoid Bone Loss in Posterior Shoulder Instability.

Christopher Nacca, Joseph A Gil, Rohit Badida, Joseph J Crisco, Brett D Owens

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The American journal of sports medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Posterior shoulder instability: An overview.Bulletin of the Hospital for Joint Disease (2013) · 2025
    Review
  9. Arthroscopic posterior J-bone graft technique.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Christopher NaccaWarren Alpert School of Medicine, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Joseph A GilWarren Alpert School of Medicine, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Rohit BadidaWarren Alpert School of Medicine, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Joseph J CriscoWarren Alpert School of Medicine, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Brett D OwensWarren Alpert School of Medicine, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
Brown University · US

Funding

RI COBRE: REGULATION OF GROWTH PLATE DEVELOPMENT BYNUCLEAR/CYTOPLASMIC FACTORSP20RR024484 · NCRR · RHODE ISLAND HOSPITAL · PI BOSTOM, ANDREW G. · 2007 to 2011
$11.9M
Pilot Projects ProgramP30GM122732 · NIGMS · RHODE ISLAND HOSPITAL · PI CHEN, QIAN · 2017 to 2021
$6.6M
NCRR NIH HHS P20 RR024484NIGMS NIH HHS P30 GM122732
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThere is currently no consensus regarding the amount of posterior glenoid bone loss that is considered critical. Critical bone loss is defined as the amount of bone loss that occurs in which an isolated labral repair will not sufficiently restore stability. PURPOSE: The purpose is to identify the critical size of the posterior defect. STUDY

designControlled laboratory study.

methodsEleven cadaveric shoulders were tested. With the use of a custom robot device, a 50-N compressive force was applied to the glenohumeral joint, and the peak force that was required to translate the humeral head posteriorly and the lateral displacement that occurred with translation were measured. The defect size was measured as a percentage of the glenoid width. Testing was performed in 11 conditions: (1) intact glenoid and labrum, (2) simulated reverse Bankart lesion, (3) the reverse Bankart lesion repaired, (4) a 10% defect, (5) the reverse Bankart lesion repaired, (6) a 20% defect, (7) the reverse Bankart lesion repaired, (8) a 30% defect, (9) the reverse Bankart lesion repaired, (10) a 40% defect, and (11) the reverse Bankart repaired.

resultsForce and displacement decreased as the size of the osseous defect increased. The mean peak force that occurred with posterior displacement in specimens with a glenoid defect ≥20% and a reverse Bankart repair (13 ± 9 N) was significantly lower than the peak force that occurred in specimens with an isolated reverse Bankart repair (22 ± 10 N) ( P = .0451). In addition, the mean lateral displacement was significantly less in the specimens with a 20% glenoid defect and a reverse Bankart repair (0.61 ± 0.57 mm) compared with the lateral displacement that occurred in specimens with an isolated reverse Bankart repair (1.6 ± 0.78 mm) ( P = .0058).

conclusionAn osseous defect that is ≥20% of the posterior glenoid width remains unstable after isolated reverse Bankart repair. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: A bony restoration procedure of the glenoid may be necessary in shoulders with a posterior glenoid defect that is ≥20% of the glenoid width.

Indexed as

Bankart LesionsBiomechanical PhenomenaCadaverCompressive StrengthFemaleHumansJoint InstabilityMaleMiddle AgedShoulder DislocationShoulder Jointglenoid bone lossinstabilitylabral repairposterior shoulder instabilityshoulder pain

Identifiers

PMID29537865
PMCPMC6097190
OpenAlexW2793703995

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.