ReviewActa ortopedica brasileira2026
EVIDENCE-BASED REVIEW & RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE BRAZILIAN SOCIETY OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY: BANKART REPAIR WITH REMPLISSAGE FOR RECURRENT GLENOHUMERAL INSTABILITY WITH BONE LOSS.
Review in Acta ortopedica brasileira, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability with "on-track" Hill-Sachs lesions and subcritical glenoid bone loss remains a therapeutic challenge, with considerable failure rates following isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair (BR). The addition of the Remplissage procedure (BR-R) has been proposed to improve stability and shoulder function, however, its effectiveness in "on-track" lesions remains uncertain. Methods: An evidence-based review was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and BVS (search up to August 2025), including comparative clinical studies that evaluated BR-R versus isolated BR in patients with anterior instability, on-track Hill-Sachs lesions, and partial glenoid bone loss. Primary outcomes were recurrence of dislocation and shoulder function; secondary outcomes included residual apprehension, reoperation, and return to sport. Results: Four studies met the inclusion criteria (one systematic review of six cohort studies and three additional cohort studies; 537 patients in total). Across studies, BR-R showed lower recurrence rates (0-7.7% vs. 3.5-30%) and better functional scores (WOSI, SSV, SANE, ASES, ROWE), higher return-to-sport rates at preinjury level in athletes, and less residual apprehension, without clear increase in complications. Overall certainty of evidence was very low. Conclusions: Very low-quality evidence suggests that the addition of Remplissage to arthroscopic Bankart repair may improve stability and functional outcomes compared with isolated Bankart repair in patients with on-track bone loss.
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.