ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2026
Addition of a second double-row reduces fragment micromotion and increases fixation strength in suture fixation of a bony Bankart injury: A biomechanical study.
Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Addition of a second double-row reduces fragment micromotion and increases fixation strength in suture fixation of a bony Bankart injury: A biomechanical study.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
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
Purpose: The purpose of the present study was to evaluate micromotion and failure load when the bony Bankart bridge (BBB) is performed with one versus two double-rows. It was hypothesized that the addition of a second double-row would reduce fragment micromotion and increase ultimate failure load. Methods: Seven pairs of fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders (age: 48 years [22-65 years], sex: 57.1% male) with bony Bankart lesions, with a defect width of 25% of the glenoid diameter, were tested in the present study. In a paired design, one shoulder underwent the BBB with one double-row, and the contralateral shoulder underwent the BBB with two double-rows. Micromotion of the bony Bankart fragment was tested by cyclic non-physiological point loading (5-20 N at 1 Hz for 50 cycles) using a dynamic tensile machine. Optical markers and a three-dimensional digitizer established fragment and glenoid coordinate systems, enabling precise tracking of translational and rotational displacements of the fragment. This was followed by failure testing, where the fragment was loaded to failure at 0.5 mm/s. Failure load and stiffness were recorded. Results: Under inferior point loading, the repair with one double-row demonstrated significantly greater rotation about the Conclusions: Fixation with two double-rows resulted in a significantly less fragment micromotion and a significantly greater failure strength compared with the BBB using one double-row. Level of Evidence: N/A.
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.