FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W2886308785> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W2886308785 endingPage "2724" @default.
• W2886308785 startingPage "2717" @default.
• W2886308785 abstract "The Latarjet procedure for autograft transposition of the coracoid to the anterior rim of the glenoid remains the most common procedure for reconstruction of the glenoid after shoulder instability. The anatomic glenoid reconstruction using distal tibial allograft has gained popularity and is suggested to better match the normal glenoid size and shape. However, concerns about decreased healing and increased resorption arise when an allograft bone is used.To use radiological findings to evaluate the arthroscopic reconstruction of the glenoid with respect to the size, shape, healing, and resorption of coracoid autograft versus distal tibial allograft.Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.A retrospective review was performed of 48 consecutive patients who had an arthroscopic bony reconstruction of the glenoid (12 coracoid autograft, 36 distal tibial allograft), diagnosed anterior shoulder instability, and computed tomography (CT)-confirmed glenoid bone loss more than 20%. Coracoid autograft was performed only when tibial allograft was not accessible from a bone bank. Two fellowship-trained musculoskeletal radiologists reviewed pre- and postoperative CT scans at a minimum follow-up of 6 months for the following: graft position, glenoid concavity, cross-sectional area, width, version, total area, osseous union, and graft resorption. Clinical outcome was noted in terms of instability, subluxation, and dislocation at a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Simple logistic regression, 2-tailed independent-sample t tests, paired t tests, and Fisher exact tests were performed.Graft union was seen in 9 of the 12 patients (75%) who had coracoid autograft and 34 of the 36 patients (94%) who had tibial allograft (odds ratio, 5.66; 95% CI, 0.81-39.20; P = .08). The odds ratio comparing allograft to coracoid for overall resorption was 7.00 (95% CI, 1.65-29.66; P = .008). Graft resorption ≥50% was seen in 3 (8%) of the patients who had tibial allograft and none of the patients who had coracoid autograft. Graft resorption less than 50% was seen in the majority of patients in both groups: 27 (73%) patients with tibial allograft and 5 (42%) patients with coracoid autograft. No statistically significant difference was found between the 2 procedures regarding anteroposterior diameter of graft ( P = .81) or graft cross-sectional area ( P = .93). However, a significant difference was observed in step formation between the 2 procedures ( P < .001). Two patients experienced subluxations in the coracoid group (16%) as well as 2 patients in the tibial allograft group (6%) with a P value of .25.Arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction via distal tibial allograft showed similar bony union but higher resorption compared with coracoid autograft. Even so, no statistically significant difference was found between the 2 procedures regarding final graft surface area, the size of grafts, and the anteroposterior dimensions of the reconstructed glenoids. These short-term results suggest that distal tibial allografts can be used as an alternative to coracoid autograft in the recreation of glenoid bony morphologic features." @default.
• W2886308785 created "2018-08-22" @default.
• W2886308785 creator A5023223877 @default.
• W2886308785 creator A5048372652 @default.
• W2886308785 creator A5052720117 @default.
• W2886308785 creator A5082294041 @default.
• W2886308785 creator A5090466093 @default.
• W2886308785 date "2018-08-10" @default.
• W2886308785 modified "2023-09-30" @default.
• W2886308785 title "Radiographic Analysis of Glenoid Size and Shape After Arthroscopic Coracoid Autograft Versus Distal Tibial Allograft in the Treatment of Anterior Shoulder Instability" @default.
• W2886308785 cites W112970385 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W1513673091 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W1693307748 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W1769567006 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2000002304 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2073846686 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2080979790 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2083610038 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2093378114 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2115410998 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2117498332 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2133387059 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2149421718 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2150935493 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2158580991 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2163926010 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2282627556 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2321801605 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2561883334 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2562022424 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2607490633 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W2620689254 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W4252530191 @default.
• W2886308785 cites W4299673826 @default.
• W2886308785 doi "https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546518789348" @default.
• W2886308785 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30095986" @default.
• W2886308785 hasPublicationYear "2018" @default.
• W2886308785 type Work @default.
• W2886308785 sameAs 2886308785 @default.
• W2886308785 citedByCount "39" @default.
• W2886308785 countsByYear W28863087852019 @default.
• W2886308785 countsByYear W28863087852020 @default.
• W2886308785 countsByYear W28863087852021 @default.
• W2886308785 countsByYear W28863087852022 @default.
• W2886308785 countsByYear W28863087852023 @default.
• W2886308785 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W2886308785 hasAuthorship W2886308785A5023223877 @default.
• W2886308785 hasAuthorship W2886308785A5048372652 @default.
• W2886308785 hasAuthorship W2886308785A5052720117 @default.
• W2886308785 hasAuthorship W2886308785A5082294041 @default.
• W2886308785 hasAuthorship W2886308785A5090466093 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConcept C126249036 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConcept C142724271 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConcept C204787440 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConcept C2776824190 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConcept C2777307732 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConcept C2778436160 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConcept C36454342 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConceptScore W2886308785C126249036 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConceptScore W2886308785C141071460 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConceptScore W2886308785C142724271 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConceptScore W2886308785C204787440 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConceptScore W2886308785C2776824190 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConceptScore W2886308785C2777307732 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConceptScore W2886308785C2778436160 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConceptScore W2886308785C36454342 @default.
• W2886308785 hasConceptScore W2886308785C71924100 @default.
• W2886308785 hasIssue "11" @default.
• W2886308785 hasLocation W28863087851 @default.
• W2886308785 hasLocation W28863087852 @default.
• W2886308785 hasOpenAccess W2886308785 @default.
• W2886308785 hasPrimaryLocation W28863087851 @default.
• W2886308785 hasRelatedWork W131655121 @default.
• W2886308785 hasRelatedWork W1568012834 @default.
• W2886308785 hasRelatedWork W2048858659 @default.
• W2886308785 hasRelatedWork W2087670840 @default.
• W2886308785 hasRelatedWork W2290214106 @default.
• W2886308785 hasRelatedWork W2319941283 @default.
• W2886308785 hasRelatedWork W2361047178 @default.
• W2886308785 hasRelatedWork W2919427746 @default.
• W2886308785 hasRelatedWork W3145943210 @default.
• W2886308785 hasRelatedWork W4308806266 @default.
• W2886308785 hasVolume "46" @default.
• W2886308785 isParatext "false" @default.
• W2886308785 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W2886308785 magId "2886308785" @default.
• W2886308785 workType "article" @default.