ArticleJournal of orthopaedics2018
Functional outcome of arthroscopic double row repair for Bankart lesion.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 5 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety, Efficacy, and Cost-Effectiveness of Simultaneous Bilateral Arthroscopic Bankart Repair for Bilateral Shoulder Instability.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
- Anchor placement to glenoid rim during Bankart repair recreates contact area of anterior capsulolabral complex on glenoid better than onto articular surface.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2020Article
- Anterior Glenohumeral Capsular Reconstruction Using a Human Acellular Dermal Allograft.Arthroscopy techniques · 2018Article
- Arthroscopic repair is sufficient for treating recurrent shoulder instability in patients with bipolar bone defects and minor glenoid bone loss.Journal of orthopaedicsArticle
- Arthroscopic Repair of the Bankart Lesion Using Dual-Row Labral Repair.Video journal of sports medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe shoulder joint is the most common major joint to dislocate. Population aged younger than 20 years, recurrent dislocation rates have been reported to be as high as 90%. For those individuals that continue to experience dislocations surgery is often a good decision. The goal of the Bankart surgery is to reconnect the torn labrum to the glenoid fossa. Double-row Bankart repair can both achieve anatomic reduction and enhance fixation stability. The purpose of our study is to assess the clinical outcome of arthroscopic double row repair.
methods49 cases with Bankart lesion operated by double row repair were studied. Functional outcome and retear were assessed after at least 6 months of surgery using scores and MRI.
resultsSignificant improvement in functional outcome after repair by double row Bankart repair. No retear or redislocation seen.
conclusionDouble row repair technique improves function of shoulder significantly and potentially minimizes future re-injury or recurrence risk.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.