Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42662985›Full record

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.

Leonardo Zanesco, Gustavo de Mello Ribeiro Pinto, Marcus Vinícius Galvão Amaral, João Artur Bonadiman, Kaleu Costa Neri, Flávio de Oliveira França, Marcelo Costa de Oliveira Campos, Eduardo Angeli Malavolta

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Leonardo ZanescoUniversidade de Sao Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina, Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3554-7298
Gustavo de Mello Ribeiro PintoUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4079-3100
Marcus Vinícius Galvão AmaralInstituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia Jamil Haddad, Centro de Cirurgia do Ombro e Cotovelo, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7301-3644
João Artur BonadimanHospital Sao Vicente de Paulo, Instituto de Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Passo Fundo, RS, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8613-4461
Kaleu Costa NeriPoliclinica Medica do Corpo de Bombeiros Militar do Distrito Federal, Brasilia, DF, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5773-1339
Flávio de Oliveira FrançaHospital Ortopedico de Belo Horizonte, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2775-2312
Marcelo Costa de Oliveira CamposUniversidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4498-2360
Eduardo Angeli MalavoltaUniversidade de Sao Paulo, Faculdade de Medicina, Hospital das Clinicas HCFMUSP, Sao Paulo, SP, Brazil.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1956-6445

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

ArthroscopyBankart LesionsGlenohumeral JointHill Sachs LesionsJoint InstabilityShoulder Dislocation

Identifiers

PMID42662985
PMCPMC13521583

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.