SynthesisInternational orthopaedics2026
Dynamic anterior stabilization for anterior shoulder instability: a meta-analysis and systematic review of clinical and biomechanical studies.
Synthesis in International orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundDynamic anterior shoulder stabilization (DAS) combined with Bankart repair (BR) has gained attention for treating anterior shoulder instability (ASI) with subcritical anterior glenoid bone loss (GBL). This study aims to evaluate the clinical and biomechanical outcomes of DAS combined with BR for ASI.
methodsA comprehensive search of PubMed, Embase, and Scopus through August 2024 identified biomechanical and clinical studies assessing DAS in ASI. Reviews, surgical techniques, case reports, and abstracts were excluded. A meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model, with using weighted mean differences (WMD) for continuous variables to compare pre-to-post treatment effects. MINORS and QuADS tools were used to assess the quality of the included studies.
resultsFive biomechanical studies (60 cadaveric shoulders, GBL 10%-20%) demonstrated that DAS significantly improved anterior glenohumeral stability and load-to-dislocation compared to isolated BR, particularly in models with < 20% GBL and on-track Hill-Sachs lesions (HSL). Three clinical studies (100 shoulders, mean age ranged from 23.4 to 21, GBL 8.2%-10.5%) revealed significant improvements in Rowe scores (mean difference [WMD] = 58.7; p < 0.001) and forward elevation (WMD = 4.8; p = 0.02), with no significant changes in external or internal rotation. Return-to-sport rates were high (90% at any level, 71% at the same level), with 8% experiencing recurrent instability and 2% requiring reoperation.
conclusionAvailable evidence suggests that DAS combined with BR offered significant biomechanical improvements, substantial patient-reported outcome improvements, better forward elevation, high return-to-sport rates, and a low complication profile for ASI with subcritical GBL. However, caution is advised in cases with off-track HSL and GBL of approximately 20%, where DAS offers less stability when compared to Remplissage and Latarjet and increased reoperations rates.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41247526What 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.