ArticleJSES international2023
Kinematic analysis of damaged capsulolabral structure in patients with anterior shoulder instability using cine-magnetic resonance imaging.
Article in JSES international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Shoulder Pain Imaging: A Narrative Review of Current Practice and Emerging Trends.Current medical imaging · 2025Article
- Complex Labral Tears Are Not Predicted by Number of Preoperative Dislocations nor Time From Injury to Surgery in Patients Receiving Arthroscopic Anterior or Posterior Labral Repairs.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: We assessed damaged anterior capsulolabral motion during axial shoulder rotation in patients with anterior shoulder instability. Methods: Twenty-nine shoulders of 28 patients with anterior shoulder instability who underwent cine-magnetic resonance imaging during axial rotation of the adducted arm were included. The motion was captured after an intra-articular injection of saline solution (10-20 mL). During imaging, the shoulder was rotated passively from maximum internal rotation to maximum external rotation in the first 10 s and then back to maximum internal rotation in the subsequent 10 s. We assessed the rotational angles of the damaged labrum during compressing and pulling the humeral head against the glenoid. Evaluation of the rotational angles was performed on a series of axial images through the humeral head center. Results: The mean angles that damaged labrum compressed and pulled off against the glenoid were 12.0 ± 19.1° and 2.8 ± 21.2°, respectively. Additionally, seven of the 29 shoulders showed that the damaged labrum compressed on the glenoid rim before the rotational angle exceeded 0° during external rotation. In 13 shoulders, the damaged labrum could remain repositioned on the glenoid rim over the neutral position during internal rotation. In two shoulders, the damaged labrum was not compressed against the glenoid at the maximum external rotation. The injected saline moved from the posterior to the anterior side of the glenohumeral joint during internal rotation in each shoulder. Conclusion: The damaged labrum could be positioned on the glenoid when the arm was in a traditional internal immobilization.
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.