ArticleJSES international2026
Arthroscopic double-screw Latarjet versus arthroscopic button-fixed Latarjet with Bankart repair.
Article in JSES international, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The arthroscopic double-screw (DS) Latarjet procedure has been associated with low recurrence rates, a high sports return rate (SRR), and favorable clinical scores. Arthroscopic button-fixed Latarjet with Bankart repair (BB Latarjet) has been reported recently. Our hypthesis was that there were no statistically significant differences in the graft union rate, SRR, and complication rate between the arthroscopic BB Latarjet and the arthroscopic DS Latarjet, which has been considered advantageous because of its higher initial fixation strength using 2 screws. Methods: Between 2019 and 2023, 32 patients underwent the arthroscopic BB Latarjet procedure (mean follow-up: 2.5 ± 0.5 years), and 39 patients underwent the arthroscopic DS Latarjet procedure (mean follow-up: 4.4 ± 1.4 years). Clinical outcomes, including visual analog scale scores for pain and instability, Rowe score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, University of California, Los Angeles score,Subjective Shoulder Value, and ranges of external rotation, incidence of graft malpositioning, neurological complications, and progression of osteoarthritis, were compared between the 2 groups at the 2-year post-operative time point. Graft union rate and SRR were compared at 3-month, 6-month, 9-month, and 2-year post-operative time point. Results: Neither group experienced redislocation by the 2-year post-operative time point. No significant differences were observed at 2 years in visual analog scale scores for instability ( Conclusion: There were no significant differences between BB Latarjet and DS Latarjet in terms of osseous union rate, SRR, recurrent instability rate, and overall complication rate at 2-year post-operative time point.
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.