{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,15]],"date-time":"2026-03-15T10:07:37Z","timestamp":1773569257830,"version":"3.50.1"},"reference-count":13,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"3","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,1]],"date-time":"2021-03-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1614556800000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,1]],"date-time":"2021-03-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1614556800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/doi.wiley.com\/10.1002\/tdm_license_1.1"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,1]],"date-time":"2021-03-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1614556800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.elsevier.com\/tdm\/userlicense\/1.0\/"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,1]],"date-time":"2021-03-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1614556800000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/www.elsevier.com\/legal\/tdmrep-license"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["arthroscopyjournal.org","clinicalkey.com","clinicalkey.com.au","clinicalkey.es","clinicalkey.fr","clinicalkey.jp","elsevier.com","sciencedirect.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["Arthroscopy"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,3]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n                  <jats:p>The pros and cons of open and arthroscopic shoulder stabilization procedures have been studied exhaustively. Yet, in many situations, the rates of recurrent instability and overall complications associated with these techniques remain unacceptably high. Perhaps paradoxically, the refinement of arthroscopic shoulder stabilization techniques has only intensified the debate between proponents of either open or arthroscopic approaches, and although significant (however \u201csignificant\u201d is defined), anteroinferior glenoid bone loss has historically been thought to constitute a relatively strong indication for an open bone augmentation procedure, surgeons, to their great credit, continue to push the limits of what can be accomplished arthroscopically. Arthroscopic glenoid reconstruction has emerged as a viable option that may\u00a0represent \u201cthe best of both worlds.\u201d Although modifications to the originally described arthroscopic glenoid reconstruction technique are promising, concerns persist regarding the fate of the graft and the durability of the procedure beyond short\u2010term follow\u2010up.<\/jats:p>","DOI":"10.1016\/j.arthro.2021.01.009","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,2]],"date-time":"2021-03-02T02:04:12Z","timestamp":1614650652000},"page":"834-836","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/elsevier_cm_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":3,"title":["<i>Editorial Commentary:<\/i>\n                    Arthroscopic Glenoid Reconstruction With Subscapularis Tenodesis Results in Promising Clinical Outcomes, but Concerns Regarding Graft Resorption Rates Persist: A Long Way Toward a More Perfect Union"],"prefix":"10.1002","volume":"37","author":[{"given":"Daniel J.","family":"Cognetti","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"San Antonio Texas"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Andrew J.","family":"Sheean","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"San Antonio Texas"}],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,3,1]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_2_2_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2012.09.009"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_3_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s12178-015-9258-y"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_4_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eats.2015.04.005"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_5_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546514544682"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_6_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.eats.2016.04.011"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_7_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546520960119"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_8_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.arthro.2020.11.037"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_9_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546520901538"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_10_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546515623929"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_11_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/0363546518789348"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_12_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.jse.2019.03.022"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_13_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1177\/2325967120964489"},{"key":"e_1_2_2_14_2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.arthro.2018.11.012"}],"container-title":["Arthroscopy"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S0749806321000232?httpAccept=text\/xml","content-type":"text\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/api.elsevier.com\/content\/article\/PII:S0749806321000232?httpAccept=text\/plain","content-type":"text\/plain","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/arthroscopyjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1016\/j.arthro.2021.01.009","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/arthroscopyjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1016\/j.arthro.2021.01.009","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/arthroscopyjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1016\/j.arthro.2021.01.009","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2026,3,15]],"date-time":"2026-03-15T08:58:43Z","timestamp":1773565123000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/arthroscopyjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1016\/j.arthro.2021.01.009"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,3]]},"references-count":13,"journal-issue":{"issue":"3","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,3]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1016\/j.arthro.2021.01.009"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.arthro.2021.01.009","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["0749-8063","1526-3231"],"issn-type":[{"value":"0749-8063","type":"print"},{"value":"1526-3231","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,3]]},"assertion":[{"value":"Elsevier","name":"publisher","label":"This article is maintained by"},{"value":"Editorial Commentary: Arthroscopic Glenoid Reconstruction With Subscapularis Tenodesis Results in Promising Clinical Outcomes, but Concerns Regarding Graft Resorption Rates Persist: A Long Way Toward a More Perfect Union","name":"articletitle","label":"Article Title"},{"value":"Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery","name":"journaltitle","label":"Journal Title"},{"value":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.arthro.2021.01.009","name":"articlelink","label":"CrossRef DOI link to publisher maintained version"},{"value":"simple-article","name":"content_type","label":"Content Type"},{"value":"Published by Elsevier on behalf of the Arthroscopy Association of North America","name":"copyright","label":"Copyright"}]}}