ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2026
Evidence-Based Risk Factors for Failure of Arthroscopic Labral Repair.
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewArthroscopic labral repair, including Bankart and related capsulolabral and bony augmentation procedures, are the mainstay treatment for anterior shoulder instability in young, active patients but is limited by clinically meaningful failure rates. This review synthesizes contemporary evidence to define patient-, lesion-, and technique-related risk factors for failure after arthroscopic labral repair and links these risks to functional outcomes, return-to-sport (RTS), and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to guide counseling and procedure selection. RECENT
findingsRecurrent instability after modern arthroscopic Bankart repair ranges from approximately 15-30% at mid- to long-term follow-up, with age < 20 years emerging as a dominant predictor of failure. Glenohumeral bone loss, off-track or near-track Hill-Sachs lesions and joint hyperlaxity increase risk for failure. Technical factors such as using fewer than three anchors, and suboptimal anchor placement are linked to failure. Across adult, pediatric, and athletic cohorts, stable shoulders achieve good-to-excellent PROMs and high RTS rates, whereas recurrent instability worsens patient satisfaction. Failure after arthroscopic labral repair is driven by several patient- and surgical technique-specific risk factors. Quantification of bone loss and glenoid track, and incorporation of tools such as the Instability Severity Index Score and Pittsburgh Instability Tool can stratify risk and identify patients who may benefit from bone augmentation or remplissage. Despite high lifetime recurrence in some subgroups, most patients without failure achieve durable improvements in pain, function, and RTS, underscoring the importance of tailoring surgical strategy to individual risk profiles to optimize stability and PROMs over the long term.
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.