Skip to content

Latarjet

Surgeon-side topic for latarjet. Backed by 392 articles from the corpus, retrieved via combined MeSH + title-text matching.

Overview

The open Latarjet procedure is a viable alternative to Bankart repair for recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability, offering greater stability with no significant increase in complication rates [25]. While primary Latarjet presents reduced infection rates compared to revision procedures, primary and salvage Latarjet yield comparable efficacy regarding clinical outcomes, overall complications, range of motion, reoperations, return to sport metrics, pain, and function [2, 19]. Primary Latarjet demonstrates lower recurrence rates (4.7%) compared to salvage Latarjet (20.7%) [7, 8]. The overall complication rate for open Latarjet is 18.6%, with class 3 adverse events requiring additional surgery or long-term treatment occurring in 4.9% of cases [3].

Outcomes at a mean of >6 years following primary Latarjet for anterior instability are very good, though a minority of patients experience poorer outcomes predictable from pre-existing demographic factors rather than instability severity [1, 7]. Female gender is not a contraindication, as female patients show similar 90-day complication rates and 2-year secondary surgery rates to matched male cohorts; however, female patients face a greater risk of emergency department visits, and selection may require more stringent criteria [4, 12]. Open Latarjet is favored over Bankart repair for revision cases due to improved pain relief and functional scores [26]. Further research is required to better define criteria for return to play after arthroscopic Bankart repair and Latarjet procedures [46].

Anatomy & Pathophysiology

Kinematics

The modified scapular position is maintained throughout the entire range of motion following the Latarjet procedure, indicating a shoulder-stabilizing kinematic effect alongside bony, sling, and bumper mechanisms [29]. Glenoid and acromial malalignment alone are associated with pathological posterior translation of the humeral head across the glenoid during simulated active elevation [36]. Posture types and scapulothoracic orientation play an important role in optimal implant configuration, positioning, and clinical outcomes [55]. There is insufficient evidence to support changing surgical techniques to preserve soft tissues based on kinematic concerns regarding scapular dyskinesia after the Latarjet procedure [45].

Osseous Remodeling and Function

Bone remodeling contributes to the recovery of the normal anatomy of the anteroinferior glenoid following the Latarjet procedure [48]. The procedure results in a restricted range of motion of the shoulder without loss of muscle strength [44]. Significant between-limb differences exist in both internal and external rotator strength and functional performance at 4 to 6 months following shoulder stabilization surgery [47]. Return to sport testing at six months after shoulder stabilization reveals functional deficits, with the investigational arm showing statistically significant improvement above the clinically meaningful threshold compared to the control arm [56]. A substantial number of athletes do not meet expected goals for operative shoulder function and strength compared with the contralateral shoulder at 6 months postoperatively [57]. A substantial number of athletes in a cohort do not meet expected goals for their operative shoulder in achieving appropriate strength, particularly in external rotation, nor arc of motion compared to the contralateral shoulder [58].

Classification

Outcomes and Demographics: Most patients treated by an open Latarjet procedure achieve excellent outcomes at mid-term follow-up, though a minority experience poorer outcomes [1]. These poorer outcomes are primarily predictable from pre-existing demographic factors rather than measures of instability severity [1]. Female gender is not a contraindication to the procedure, but patient selection in female patients may require more stringent criteria [4]. Approximately 98% of patients return to work by 2.7 ± 3.0 months postoperatively [6]. In an active-duty military cohort, recurrent instability occurred in 8.7% of cases, while 89.1% returned to full-duty status [61]. Long-term follow-up indicates that arthritis may develop or progress in 23.5% of cases twenty years after the procedure, though the majority of this arthritis is mild [5].

Primary versus Revision: Primary Latarjet procedures present reduced infection rates compared to revision Latarjet procedures [2]. However, primary and revision Latarjet procedures demonstrate similar clinical outcome measures, overall complication rates, and range of motion measurements [2]. Primary Latarjet also exhibits lower recurrence rates compared with salvage Latarjet procedures (9.1% versus 20.7%) [8].

Complication Profiles: The overall complication rate reported in an open Latarjet series is 18.6% [3]. The rate of class 3 adverse events requiring additional surgery or long-term medical treatment after open Latarjet is 4.9% [3]. The incidence of complications following the primary Latarjet procedure for shoulder instability ranges from 0% to 25.7% [21]. Complication rates are higher in low-volume practitioners due to a steep learning curve [62].

Technique and Training: Latarjet and coracoid transfer surgery vary greatly in indications, technique, and postoperative care [14]. Open and arthroscopic Latarjet techniques show excellent and comparable clinical results [27]. However, the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure is very difficult with significant problems and complications [28]. Consequently, the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure should be performed only by orthopaedic surgeons specifically trained in it [28]. Both the arthroscopic Latarjet and arthroscopic Bristow procedures led to good clinical scores with no new dislocation episodes [60].

Other Considerations: Registry and cohort data indicate that while open Latarjet is standard, the arthroscopic approach remains a specialized subset requiring specific training to mitigate its inherent difficulty and complication profile.

Clinical Presentation

Patient selection for the Latarjet procedure relies heavily on demographic factors rather than instability severity to predict outcomes, as a minority of patients experience poorer results [1]. While female gender is not a contraindication, patient selection in this group may require more stringent criteria, despite similar complication rates to males [4][31]. However, female patients demonstrate a greater rate of emergency department visits postoperatively compared to male patients [31]. The procedure is particularly indicated for adolescents, who face a high risk of treatment failure after Bankart repair, warranting strong consideration of the Latarjet as a primary procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability [40].

Clinical outcomes vary by surgical approach and history. Primary Latarjet procedures present reduced infection rates compared to revision Latarjet procedures performed after failed prior operative treatment, yet both demonstrate similar clinical outcome measures, overall complications, and range of motion [2]. Primary Latarjet yields excellent clinical results with a low recurrence rate of 4.7% at a mean of >6 years [7], whereas revision Latarjet provides excellent functional outcomes, low recurrence rates, and low complication rates [24]. Open Latarjet specifically results in excellent clinical outcomes and low recurrence rates for primary instability, recurrent instability, and failed prior instability surgery [22]. Arthroscopic Latarjet provides good clinical and radiologic results at short-term follow-up [11] and satisfactory results at a minimum 2-year follow-up [13], appearing reproducible after a short learning curve [15]. Long-term data confirms that Bristow-Latarjet surgery demonstrates excellent clinical results in most patients after 30 years of follow-up [9].

Functional recovery and return to activity are generally robust. Approximately 98% of patients returned to work by 2.7 ± 3.0 months postoperatively [6]. By 8 months, 73% of patients had resumed their main sport depending on preoperative SIRSI and Rowe scores [10]. Overall, 97% of patients returned to sport following the open Latarjet procedure [23], and a large majority return to sport following the procedure generally [35]. However, sports ability outcomes are distributed evenly: approximately one-third of patients see improvement, one-third remain the same, and one-third experience a decrease [20]. Some patients experience limitations with throwing or returning to sport at the preinjury level [35]. A failed Latarjet can be treated with various revision procedures, resulting in improvements in patient-reported outcome measures, pain, return to sports, and decreased recurrent instability, though with a moderate complication rate [18].

Long-term sequelae primarily involve degenerative changes. Twenty years after the Latarjet procedure, arthritis may develop or progress in 23.5% of cases [5]. The majority of arthritis developing or progressing twenty years after the Latarjet procedure is mild [5]. Despite these long-term risks, the open Latarjet procedure led to significant improvements in all patient-reported outcomes (PROs) [23].

Investigations

Plain radiography: While plain radiography is a standard initial tool, the severity of instability measured on these images does not predict outcomes as reliably as pre-existing demographic factors, which are the primary predictors of poorer results in a minority of patients treated with open Latarjet [1].

CT: Computed tomography is critical for assessing glenoid bone defects and Hill-Sachs lesions. The Latarjet procedure effectively restores stability in athletes with glenoid bone defects greater than 25% and off-track Hill-Sachs lesions without the need for remplissage [68]. Furthermore, the procedure converts all off-track Hill-Sachs lesions to on-track lesions as measured on CT [68].

Other Considerations: Pre-operative planning and prognostic factors significantly influence surgical decision-making and outcomes. Female gender should not be a contraindication to the Latarjet procedure, though patient selection in this group may require more stringent criteria [4]. Primary Latarjet procedures present reduced infection rates compared to revision Latarjet performed after failed prior operative treatment, although primary and revision cases show similar clinical outcome measures, overall complication rates, and range of motion measurements [2]. Long-term follow-up indicates that Bristow-Latarjet surgery demonstrates excellent clinical results in most patients after 30 years [9]. Approximately 98% of patients return to work by 2.7 ± 3.0 months postoperatively [6], and by 8 months, 73% of patients have resumed their main sport, a return dependent on preoperative SIRSI and Rowe scores [10]. Regarding long-term joint health, arthritis may develop or progress in 23.5% of cases twenty years after the procedure, though the majority of this arthritis is mild [5].

Technique-Specific Outcomes: The open Latarjet procedure led to significant improvements in all patient-reported outcomes (PROs) [23], with an overall 97% return to sport rate [23]. The open and arthroscopic Latarjet techniques show excellent and comparable clinical results [27]. However, the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure is technically difficult with significant problems and complications, and should be performed only by orthopaedic surgeons specifically trained in it [28]. Despite these challenges, the arthroscopic approach provides good clinical and radiologic results at short-term follow-up [11] and satisfactory results at a minimum 2-year follow-up [13]. After a short learning curve, clinical outcomes of the Latarjet procedure appear satisfactory and reproducible [15]. At a mean 6-year follow-up, the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure yields excellent clinical outcomes, radiological results, few complications, high rates of satisfaction, high rates of return to work and sport, and low sports anxiety [65]. Comparative data indicates that patients undergoing open Latarjet had less recurrent instability and better Rowe scores over a mean 6-year follow-up compared to those undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repair [63]. Additionally, arthroscopic Latarjet procedures are associated with less early post-operative pain but require increased operative time compared to other techniques [64].

Sports and Functional Status: Following the Latarjet procedure, sports ability improves in approximately one-third of patients, remains the same in approximately one-third, and decreases in approximately one-third [20]. The classic and congruent-arc Latarjet techniques restore both shoulder stability and motion in cases of considerable bone loss [69].

Graft Biology: In the Latarjet procedure, the proximal-medial part of the coracoid graft demonstrates the most evident stress shielding [70]. This stress shielding may play an important role in postoperative osteolysis [70].

Treatment

Operative

Indications: The Latarjet procedure is a viable alternative to Bankart repair, offering greater stability and possibly superior outcomes without a significant increase in complication rates [25]. It is indicated as a primary treatment for anterior shoulder instability in contact athletes, including those in mixed martial arts, where the procedure provides the necessary specifications for high-demand sports [38]. While female gender should not be a contraindication, patient selection may require more stringent criteria [4]. Shoulder hyperlaxity is not necessarily an exclusion criterion, as outcomes, persistent instability rates, and functional scores do not differ between patients with and without hyperlaxity [54].

Surgical Approach / Technique: The Latarjet procedure can be performed via open or arthroscopic approaches; the arthroscopic technique yields good clinical and radiologic results at short-term follow-up [11] and provides satisfactory clinical results overall [13]. The procedure involves coracoid transfer, though indications, techniques, and postoperative care vary significantly across different methods [14]. Capsular repair to the coracoacromial ligament during the procedure leads to no restriction of external rotation with the arm adducted and only a clinically insignificant restriction with the arm abducted [73]. Functional outcomes after Latarjet with capsular repair are similar to those without capsular repair in non-overhead athletes [73].

Postoperative Management: Absence of sling immobilization does not increase complication rates after open Latarjet, rendering sling immobilization optional [66]. Approximately 98% of patients return to work by 2.7 ± 3.0 months postoperatively [6], and by 8 months, 73% of patients have resumed their main sport [10].

Outcomes: Most patients treated with an open Latarjet procedure achieve excellent outcomes at mid-term follow-up, though a minority experience poorer outcomes primarily predictable from pre-existing demographic factors rather than instability severity [1]. Long-term data show excellent clinical results after 30 years of follow-up [9], with very good outcomes at a mean of >6 years for primary anterior instability [7]. The overall recurrence rate following a primary Latarjet for anterior instability is 4.7% [7], and the rate of recurrent instability is inherently low [72]. Open Latarjet results in excellent clinical outcomes and low recurrence rates for patients with primary instability, recurrent instability, and those undergoing the procedure for failed prior instability surgery [22].

Complications: The overall complication rate reported in an open Latarjet series is 18.6%, with a class 3 adverse event rate requiring additional surgery or long-term treatment of 4.9% [3]. Primary Latarjet presents reduced infection rates compared to revision Latarjet, though clinical outcomes, overall complication rates, and range of motion measurements are similar between primary and revision procedures [2]. Revision procedures for a failed Latarjet result in improvements in patient-reported outcome measures, pain, return to sports, and decreased recurrent instability, despite a moderate complication rate [18].

Primary vs. Salvage: Primary Latarjet demonstrates better stability and less than one half the recurrence rate compared to salvage Latarjet procedures performed after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair [43]. However, primary and salvage Latarjet may yield comparable efficacy regarding complications, reoperations, the rate and time to return to sport, pain, shoulder function, and range of motion [19]. Primary Latarjet also presents lower recurrence rates compared with salvage Latarjet procedures (9.1% versus 20.7%) [8].

Complications

Infection (PJI): Primary Latarjet procedures demonstrate reduced infection rates compared to revision Latarjet procedures performed after failed prior operative treatment [2].

Instability: The overall recurrence rate following a primary Latarjet for anterior shoulder instability is 4.7% at a mean of >6 years [7]. Primary Latarjet procedures exhibit lower recurrence rates compared with salvage Latarjet procedures (9.1% versus 20.7%) [8]. The open Latarjet procedure provides a low rate of recurrent instability in the long term for skeletally immature patients [30].

Arthritis: Twenty years after the procedure, arthritis may develop or progress in 23.5% of cases, though the majority of these cases are mild [5].

General Complications: The overall complication rate for open Latarjet series ranges from 0% to 25.7%, with specific series reporting rates of 18.6% [3], 16.1% [16], 7.5% [34], and 6%-7% [32]. Osseous stabilization using original or modified Bristow and Latarjet procedures has been associated with a 30% complication rate [50]. The rate of class 3 adverse events requiring additional surgery or long-term medical treatment is 4.9% [3]. Serious complications at short-term follow-up appear rare [16]. The most common complication following the procedure is graft-related [32].

Demographic Factors: A minority of patients treated by open Latarjet have poorer outcomes, which are mainly predictable from pre-existing demographic factors rather than measures of instability severity [1]. Female patients undergoing the procedure for recurrent shoulder instability showed similar 90-day complication and 2-year secondary surgery rates to a matched cohort of male patients [12]. However, female patients demonstrated a greater risk of emergency department visits compared with male patients [12], and the 90-day complication rate was higher in female patients than in male patients [17].

Other Considerations: Primary and revision Latarjet procedures present similar clinical outcome measures, overall complication rates, and range of motion measurements [2]. The Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability results in a reoperation rate of 2.6% [16].

Recovery

Light activity (weeks): Most patients achieve clinically significant outcomes within 6 months, with the majority (57.5%) benefiting by this time point [71]. The overall median time to achievement of clinically significant outcomes is 5.5 months, while the overall average time is 7.4 months [71]. Approximately 98% of patients returned to work by 2.7 ± 3.0 months postoperatively [6].

Full activity (months): By 8 months following the procedure, 73% of patients had resumed their main sport [10]. Revision Latarjet provides a high rate of return to sport among athletes [24]. The procedure results in excellent functional outcomes and a high rate of return to sport among athletes at long-term follow-up [39]. The majority of studies showed no significant difference in rates of return to play or timing following arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Latarjet procedure [67].

Complete recovery / outcome plateau (months): Outcomes at a mean of >6 years following a primary Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability were very good, with an overall recurrence rate of 4.7% [7]. Bristow-Latarjet surgery demonstrates excellent clinical results in most patients after 30 years of follow-up [9]. Twenty years after the Latarjet procedure, arthritis may develop or progress in 23.5% of cases, though the majority of this arthritis is mild [5].

Rehabilitation protocol: After a short learning curve, the clinical outcomes of the Latarjet procedure appear to be satisfactory and reproducible [15]. The arthroscopic Latarjet procedure provides good clinical and radiologic results at short-term follow-up [11]. Open Latarjet should be favored over Bankart repair for revision cases due to improved pain relief and functional scores [26].

Functional milestones: Female patients undergoing the Latarjet procedure for recurrent shoulder instability showed similar 90-day complication and 2-year secondary surgery rates to a matched cohort of male patients [12]. A minority of patients treated by an open Latarjet procedure have poorer outcomes, which are mainly predictable from pre-existing demographic factors rather than measures of the severity of instability [1].

Other Considerations: The overall complication rate reported in an open Latarjet series is 18.6% [3], while the Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability results in an overall complication rate of 16.1% and a reoperation rate of 2.6% [16]. The rate of class 3 adverse events requiring additional surgery or long-term medical treatment after open Latarjet is 4.9% [3]. Serious complications at short-term follow-up after the Latarjet procedure appear rare [16]. The 90-day complication rate after the Latarjet procedure was 10.9% [17], and this rate was higher in female patients than in male patients [17].

Key Evidence

  • [L3] Although most patients treated by an open Latarjet procedure have excellent outcomes at mid-term follow-up, a minority have poorer outcomes, which are mainly predictable from pre-existing demographic factors, rather than measures of the severity of instability. (10.1302/0301-620x.105b4.bjj-2022-1049.r1)
  • [L1] Based on the current evidence, primary Latarjet presents reduced infection rates but similar clinical outcome measures, overall complication, and range of motion measurements than revision Latarjet performed after failed prior operative treatment. (10.1016/j.jse.2023.07.002)
  • [L4] The overall complication rate reported in this open Latarjet series is 18.6%; however, the rate of class 3 adverse events that required additional surgery or long-term medical treatment was only 4.9%. (10.1016/j.jse.2022.06.004)
  • [L4] Whereas female gender should not be a contraindication to the Latarjet procedure, selection of patients in this group may need to be more stringent. (10.1016/j.jse.2017.07.030)
  • [L4] Twenty years after the Latarjet procedure, arthritis may develop or progress in 23.5% of cases, but the majority of arthritis is mild. (10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.015)
  • [L4] Approximately 98% of patients who underwent Latarjet returned to work by 2.7 ± 3.0 months postoperatively. (10.1016/j.arthro.2021.06.027)
  • [L4] Outcomes at a mean of >6 years following a primary Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability were very good, with an overall recurrence rate of 4.7%. (10.2106/jbjs.19.01235)
  • [L3] Primary Latarjet was found to have lower rates of recurrence compared with salvage Latarjet procedures (9.1% versus 20.7%). (10.1016/j.arthro.2021.04.059)
  • [L4] Bristow-Latarjet surgery demonstrates excellent clinical results in most patients after 30 years of follow-up. (10.1016/j.jseint.2024.08.192)
  • [L4] By 8 months following the Latarjet procedure, 73% of patients had resumed their main sport. (10.1007/s00167-021-06475-1)
  • [L3] This study confirms that the arthroscopic Latarjet procedure provides good clinical and radiologic results at short-term follow-up. (10.1016/j.arthro.2019.07.007)
  • [L3] Female patients undergoing the Latarjet procedure for recurrent shoulder instability showed similar 90-day complication and 2-year secondary surgery rates to a matched cohort of male patients. (10.1016/j.arthro.2024.02.043)
  • [L4] Arthroscopic Latarjet procedures provide satisfactory clinical results. (10.1016/j.jse.2019.05.027)
  • [L4] Latarjet and coracoid transfer surgery varies greatly in its indications, technique, and postoperative care. (10.1016/j.arthro.2021.09.020)
  • [L4] After a short learning curve, the clinical outcomes of the Latarjet procedure appear to be satisfactory and reproducible. (10.1007/s00167-015-3900-5)
  • [L4] The Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability results in an overall complication rate of 16.1% and a reoperation rate of 2.6%, though serious complications at short-term follow-up appear rare. (10.1177/03635465211042314)
  • [L4] The 90-day complication rate after the Latarjet procedure was 10.9% and was higher in female patients than in male patients. (10.1016/j.jse.2022.11.015)
  • [L1] A failed Latarjet procedure can be treated with various revision procedures, which result in improvements in patient-reported outcome measures, pain, return to sports, and decreased recurrent instability with a moderate complication rate. (10.1016/j.jse.2024.07.031)
  • [L1] Primary and salvage Latarjet may yield comparable efficacy in terms of complications, reoperations, the rate of return to sport, the time to return to sport, pain, shoulder function, and range of motion. (10.1186/s12891-024-07593-w)
  • [L5] After the Latarjet procedure, sports ability improves in approximately one-third of patients, remains the same in one-third, and decreases in one-third. (10.1016/j.arthro.2025.05.029)
  • [L3] The incidence of complications following the primary Latarjet procedure for shoulder instability was variable, ranging from 0% to 25.7%. (10.1016/j.arthro.2023.05.024)
  • [L3] Open Latarjet results in excellent clinical outcomes and low recurrence rates for those with primary shoulder instability, those with recurrent instability and those undergoing OL for failed prior instability surgery. (10.1016/j.arthro.2021.03.062)
  • [L4] The open Latarjet procedure led to significant improvements in all PROs, and overall, 97% of patients returned to sport. (10.1016/j.jse.2022.01.139)
  • [L4] This review shows that the revision Latarjet provides excellent functional outcomes, low rates of recurrence and complications, and a high rate of return to sport among athletes. (10.1007/s00167-020-06155-6)
  • [L1] The Latarjet procedure is a viable and possibly superior alternative to the Bankart repair, offering greater stability with no significant increase in complication rate. (10.1016/j.jse.2015.11.001)
  • [L3] Open Latarjet should be favored over Bankart repair for revision cases due to improved pain relief and functional scores. (10.1177/2325967119s00272)
  • [L3] The open and arthroscopic Latarjet techniques showed excellent and comparable clinical results. (10.1007/s00167-015-3978-9)
  • [L5] The arthroscopic Latarjet procedure is very difficult with significant problems and complications, and should be performed only by orthopaedic surgeons who are specifically trained in it. (10.1016/j.arthro.2016.06.038)
  • [L3] The modified position of the scapula was maintained during the entire range of motion, suggesting a shoulder-stabilizing kinematic effect in addition to the bony, sling and bumper effects. (10.1016/j.jse.2024.02.022)
  • [L4] The open Latarjet procedure provides a low rate of recurrent instability with acceptable complication rates in the long term for skeletally immature patients. (10.1016/j.jse.2019.09.039)
  • [L5] Female patients undergoing the Latarjet procedure have similar complication rates to male patients but a greater rate of emergency department visits postoperatively, warranting specific attention during the postoperative period. (10.1016/j.arthro.2024.04.018)
  • [L4] The overall complication rate following the Latarjet procedure was 6%-7%, with the most common complication being graft-related. (10.1016/j.jse.2021.01.024)
  • [L4] The overall 90-day complication rate following the Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder stabilization was 7.5%. (10.1016/j.jse.2018.06.022)
  • [L4] Although a large majority of patients were able to return to sport following the Latarjet procedure, some patients experienced limitation with throwing and return to sport at the preinjury level. (10.1016/j.jse.2021.04.020)
  • [L5] Glenoid as well as acromial malalignment alone is associated with pathological posterior translation of the humeral head across the glenoid upon simulated active elevation. (10.1177/03635465251411312)
  • [Commentary] The Latarjet procedure, when properly performed, offers the specifications required for MMA contact athletes, and the indication for such a bony procedure should be strongly considered as a primary treatment. (10.1016/j.arthro.2025.08.016)
  • [L4] The Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability results in excellent functional outcomes at long-term and a high rate of return to sport among athletes. (10.1016/j.jse.2018.08.028)
  • [L3] Adolescents are at a high risk for treatment failure after Bankart repair, and, therefore, the Latarjet procedure should be strongly considered as a primary procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability in this population. (10.2106/jbjs.21.01050)
  • [Commentary] Primary Latarjet procedures demonstrate better stability with less than one half the recurrence rate compared to salvage Latarjet procedures performed after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair. (10.1016/j.arthro.2021.07.035)
  • [L3] The Latarjet procedure results in a restricted range of motion of the shoulder, but there is no loss of muscle strength. (10.1007/s00167-020-06414-6)
  • [L5] There is insufficient evidence to support changing surgical techniques to preserve soft tissues based on kinematic concerns. (10.1016/j.arthro.2024.05.017)
  • [L4] Further research is required to better define criteria for return to play after arthroscopic Bankart repair and Latarjet procedures. (10.1016/j.jse.2021.01.026)
  • [L2] This study demonstrates that significant between-limb differences exist in both internal and external rotator strength and functional performance at 4 to 6 months following shoulder stabilization surgery. (10.1177/2325967125s00069)
  • [L4] Furthermore, the bone remodeling process contributes to the recovery of the normal anatomy of the anteroinferior glenoid. (10.1016/j.arthro.2022.01.020)
  • [L4] Osseous stabilization shoulder surgery using original or modified Bristow and Latarjet procedures has a 30% complication rate. (10.1016/j.jse.2012.09.009)
  • [L2] Therefore, our findings suggest that shoulder hyperlaxity may not necessarily be an exclusion criterion for performing the Latarjet procedure. (10.1097/corr.0000000000003485)
  • [L5] Posture types and scapulothoracic orientation play an important role in optimal implant configuration, positioning, and clinical outcomes, and should be considered during patient selection, preoperative planning, and implantation of a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. (10.1530/eor-2024-0040)
  • [L3] Return to sport testing at six months after shoulder stabilization reveals functional deficits, with the investigational arm showing statistically significant improvement above the clinically meaningful threshold compared to the control arm. (10.1016/j.arthro.2020.12.045)
  • [L4] A substantial number of athletes do not meet expected goals for operative shoulder function and strength compared with the contralateral shoulder at 6 months postoperatively. (10.1016/j.jse.2020.04.035)
  • [L3] A substantial number of athletes in our cohort do not meet the expected goals for their operative shoulder in achieving appropriate strength, particularly in ER, nor arc of motion compared to the contralateral shoulder. (10.1177/2325967119s00375)
  • [L3] Both the arthroscopic Latarjet and arthroscopic Bristow procedures led to good clinical scores with no new dislocation episodes. (10.1016/j.arthro.2023.05.022)
  • [L4] In our active-duty military cohort, we found an 8.7% rate of recurrent instability after a Latarjet procedure, and 41 patients (89.1%) were able to return to full-duty status. (10.1016/j.jse.2021.08.015)
  • [Commentary] The Latarjet procedure is a necessary tool to treat shoulder instability, but it has higher complication rates in low-volume practitioners due to a steep learning curve; better training and exposure are needed to perform the procedure more safely. (10.1016/j.arthro.2020.12.202)
  • [L3] Patients who had the open Latarjet procedure had less recurrent instability and better Rowe scores over a mean 6-year followup. (10.1007/s11999-014-3550-9)
  • [L2] Arthroscopic Latarjet procedures are associated with less early post-operative pain but require increased operative time. (10.1186/s12891-018-2188-2)
  • [L3] At a mean 6-year follow-up time, excellent clinical outcomes, and radiological results, with few complications, high rates of satisfaction and return to work and sport and low sports anxiety can be expected after arthroscopic Latarjet procedure. (10.1016/j.arthro.2022.04.004)
  • [L1] Absence of sling immobilization did not increase complication rates after open Latarjet, making sling immobilization optional. (10.1177/2325967123s00002)
  • [L2] Overall, the majority of studies showed no significant difference in rates of return to play or timing following arthroscopic Bankart repair or open Latarjet procedure. (10.1016/j.arthro.2023.04.017)
  • [L4] Moreover, the Latarjet procedure converted all off-track Hill-Sachs lesions to on-track Hill-Sachs lesions as measured on CT. (10.1016/j.arthro.2021.03.048)
  • [L5] The classic and congruent-arc Latarjet techniques restore shoulder stability and motion in cases of considerable bone loss. (10.1016/j.arthro.2012.09.007)
  • [L5] In the Latarjet procedure, the proximal-medial part of the coracoid graft demonstrated the most evident stress shielding, which may play an important role in postoperative osteolysis. (10.1016/j.jse.2020.03.037)
  • [L3] The majority of patients (57.5%) undergoing open Latarjet achieved benefit within 6 months of surgery (overall median: 5.5 months; overall average: 7.4 months), with diminishing proportions at later timepoints. (10.1177/2325967124s00097)
  • [L1] The rate of recurrent instability following the Latarjet procedure is inherently low. (10.1016/j.jse.2024.08.054)
  • [L3] Capsular repair to the coracoacromial ligament in the Latarjet procedure leads to a clinically insignificant restriction of external rotation (with the arm abducted), no restriction of external rotation (with the arm adducted), but functional outcomes similar to those after Latarjet without a capsular repair in a nonoverhead athlete. (10.1016/j.jse.2021.10.030)

See Also

References

[1] Factors affecting a patient’s experience following the open Latarjet procedure to treat recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The Bone & Joint Journal. 2023. DOI: 10.1302/0301-620x.105b4.bjj-2022-1049.r1

[2] Outcomes of primary Latarjet vs. revision Latarjet after prior surgery for anterior shoulder instability: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2023.07.002

[3] Low rates of serious complications after open Latarjet procedure at short-term follow-up. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2022.06.004

[4] The modified Latarjet procedure in female patients: clinical outcomes and complications. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2018. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.07.030

[5] Long-term results of the Latarjet procedure for anterior instability of the shoulder. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2014. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.015

[6] High Rate of Return to Work by 3 Months Following Latarjet for Anterior Shoulder Instability. Arthroscopy. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.06.027

[7] Risk Factors for Recurrent Anterior Glenohumeral Instability and Clinical Failure Following Primary Latarjet Procedures. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2020. DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.19.01235

[8] Latarjet After Failed Arthroscopic Bankart Repair Results in Twice the Rate of Recurrent Instability Compared With Primary Latarjet. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.04.059

[9] Clinical and radiological evaluation of the Bristow–Latarjet procedure in patients with 30 or more years of follow-up. JSES International. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.jseint.2024.08.192

[10] Latarjet procedure enables 73% to return to play within 8 months depending on preoperative SIRSI and Rowe scores. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2021. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-021-06475-1

[11] Arthroscopic Latarjet Stabilization: Analysis of the Learning Curve in the First 90 Primary Cases: Early Clinical Results and Computed Tomography Evaluation. Arthroscopy. 2019. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.07.007

[12] Female Patients Undergoing Latarjet Surgery Show Similar 2‐Year Secondary Surgery Rates but Greater Risk of Emergency Department Visits Compared With a Matched Cohort of Male Patients. Arthroscopy. 2024. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.02.043

[13] Subscapularis structural integrity and function after arthroscopic Latarjet procedure at a minimum 2-year follow-up. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.05.027

[14] Shoulder Latarjet Surgery Shows Wide Variation in Reported Indications, Techniques, Perioperative Treatment, and Definition of Outcomes, Complications, and Failure: A Systematic Review. Arthroscopy. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.09.020

[15] Is the Latarjet procedure risky? Analysis of complications and learning curve. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2016. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-015-3900-5

[16] Complications Related to Latarjet Shoulder Stabilization: A Systematic Review. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2021. DOI: 10.1177/03635465211042314

[17] Ninety-day complication rate based on 532 Latarjet procedures in Dutch hospitals with different operation volumes. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2022.11.015

[18] Surgical options and clinical outcomes following a failed Latarjet procedure: a systematic review. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2024. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2024.07.031

[19] Salvage Latarjet may provide worse outcomes in terms of recurrent instability and returning to sports compared to primary Latarjet: a systematic review of comparative studies. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2024. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-024-07593-w

[20] Editorial Commentary: Sports Ability After Latarjet Procedure Improves in Approximately One‐Third of Patients, Shows No Change in One‐Third, and Decreases in One‐Third. Arthroscopy. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2025.05.029

[21] Isolated Primary Latarjet Procedures for Anterior Shoulder Instability Results in High Rates of Graft Resorption and Glenohumeral Degenerative Changes With Low Rates of Failure at a Minimum 2‐Year Follow‐Up: A Systematic Review. Arthroscopy. 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2023.05.024

[22] Open Latarjet Procedure in Athletes Following Failed Prior Instability Surgery Results in Lower Rates of Return to Play. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.03.062

[23] High rate of return to sport and excellent patient-reported outcomes after an open Latarjet procedure. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2022.01.139

[24] Low rate of recurrent instability following the open Latarjet procedure as a revision procedure for failed prior stabilization surgery. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2020. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-020-06155-6

[25] A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and patient-reported outcomes following two procedures for recurrent traumatic anterior instability of the shoulder: Latarjet procedure vs. Bankart repair. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2016. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.11.001

[26] Postoperative Recovery Comparisons of Arthroscopic Bankart to Open Latarjet for the Treatment of Anterior Glenohumeral Instability. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2019. DOI: 10.1177/2325967119s00272

[27] Open Latarjet versus arthroscopic Latarjet: clinical results and cost analysis. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2016. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-015-3978-9

[28] Editorial Commentary: Not for The Faint of Heart: The Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure, A North American Experience. Arthroscopy. 2016. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2016.06.038

[29] Kinematic stabilization after the Latarjet procedure: beyond the triple blocking effect. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2024. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2024.02.022

[30] Clinical and radiographic outcomes of the open Latarjet procedure in skeletally immature patients. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.09.039

[31] Editorial Commentary: Latarjet for Anterior Shoulder Instability Literature Shows Limited Reporting of Outcomes in Female Patients: Female Patients Show Similar Outcomes but Greater Rate of Emergency Department Visits and Possible Greater of Complications. Arthroscopy. 2024. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.04.018

[32] Short-term complications of the Latarjet procedure: a systematic review. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2021.01.024

[34] Ninety-day complications following the Latarjet procedure. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2019. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2018.06.022

[35] Return to sport following Latarjet glenoid reconstruction for anterior shoulder instability. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2021.04.020

[36] Scapular Morphology and Posterior Shoulder Stability: Biomechanical Evidence From an Advanced Cadaveric Shoulder Simulator. The American Journal of Sports Medicine. 2026. DOI: 10.1177/03635465251411312

[38] Editorial Commentary: Don’t Beat Around The Bush, Consider Going Straight to the Latarjet Procedure in Martial Arts Contact Athletes With Anterior Shoulder Instability!. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2025.08.016

[39] Long-term outcomes of the Latarjet procedure for anterior shoulder instability: a systematic review of studies at 10-year follow-up. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2019. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2018.08.028

[40] Long-Term Results and Failure Analysis of the Open Latarjet Procedure and Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Adolescents. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. 2022. DOI: 10.2106/jbjs.21.01050

[43] Editorial Commentary: Better Stability Found With Primary Latarjet Compared With Those Performed After a Failed Arthroscopic Bankart Repair: Should We Be Doing More Primary Latarjet Procedures?. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.07.035

[44] Decreased motion with normal strength after Latarjet procedure has minimal impact on return to activity. Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy. 2021. DOI: 10.1007/s00167-020-06414-6

[45] Editorial Commentary: Evidence That the Shoulder Latarjet Procedure Results in Scapular Dyskinesia Is Not Compelling. Arthroscopy. 2024. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2024.05.017

[46] Return to play criteria among shoulder surgeons following shoulder stabilization. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2021.01.026

[47] Paper 12: Strength and functional performance following shoulder stabilization surgery: implications for rehabilitation and return to sport. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2025. DOI: 10.1177/2325967125s00069

[48] Clinical and Radiologic Outcomes of All‐Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure With Modified Suture Button Fixation: Excellent Bone Healing With a Low Complication Rate. Arthroscopy. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2022.01.020

[50] Complications and re-operations after Bristow-Latarjet shoulder stabilization: a systematic review. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2013. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.09.009

[54] No Difference in Outcome Scores or Persistent Instability After Latarjet Procedure for Anterior Instability in Patients With Shoulder Hyperlaxity Versus Those Without Hyperlaxity. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research. 2025. DOI: 10.1097/corr.0000000000003485

[55] The scapulothoracic conundrum in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: where do we stand and what is yet to expand?. EFORT Open Reviews. 2025. DOI: 10.1530/eor-2024-0040

[56] Return To Sport Testing At Six Months After Shoulder Stabilization Reveals Functional Deficits. Arthroscopy. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.12.045

[57] Return to sport testing at 6 months after arthroscopic shoulder stabilization reveals residual strength and functional deficits. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.04.035

[58] Return To Sport Testing At 6 Months After Arthroscopic Shoulder Stabilization Demonstrates Residual Functional Deficits. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2019. DOI: 10.1177/2325967119s00375

[60] The Arthroscopic Bristow Procedure Is Superior to the Arthroscopic Latarjet Procedure in Return to Sports but Inferior in Graft Healing: A Comparative Study With 3.4‐Year Follow‐Up. Arthroscopy. 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2023.05.022

[61] Surgical treatment of anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss with the Latarjet procedure in active-duty military service members. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2021.08.015

[62] Editorial Commentary: The Latarjet: Increased Shoulder Stability, and Increased Risk of Complications in Low Volume Practitioners. Arthroscopy: The Journal of Arthroscopic & Related Surgery. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2020.12.202

[63] The Open Latarjet Procedure Is More Reliable in Terms of Shoulder Stability Than Arthroscopic Bankart Repair. Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research. 2014. DOI: 10.1007/s11999-014-3550-9

[64] Open versus arthroscopic Latarjet procedures for the treatment of shoulder instability: a systematic review of comparative studies. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders. 2018. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-018-2188-2

[65] Arthroscopic Latarjet for Primary Shoulder Instability With Off‐Track Lesions or Revision Surgery Yields Satisfactory Clinical Results and Reliable Return to Sport and Work at Minimum 3‐Year Follow‐Up. Arthroscopy. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2022.04.004

[66] Paper 02: Is There a Benefit of Sling Immobilization After Open Latarjet Surgery for Anterior Shoulder Instability™ A Randomized Control Trial. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2023. DOI: 10.1177/2325967123s00002

[67] Majority of Studies Show Similar Rates of Return to Play After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair or Latarjet Procedure: A Systematic Review. Arthroscopy. 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2023.04.017

[68] The Latarjet Procedure Without Remplissage Is Effective to Restore Stability in Athletes With Glenoid Bone Defects Greater Than 25% and Off‐Track Hill‐Sachs Lesions. Arthroscopy. 2021. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2021.03.048

[69] Classic Versus Congruent Coracoid Positioning During the Latarjet Procedure: An In Vitro Biomechanical Comparison. Arthroscopy. 2013. DOI: 10.1016/j.arthro.2012.09.007

[70] Proximal-medial part in the coracoid graft demonstrates the most evident stress shielding following the Latarjet procedure: a simulation study using the 3-dimensional finite element method. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2020. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.03.037

[71] Poster 128: Time to Achievement of Clinically Significant Outcomes Following Open Latarjet. Orthopaedic Journal of Sports Medicine. 2024. DOI: 10.1177/2325967124s00097

[72] Risk factors for recurrence after Latarjet procedure: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2025. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2024.08.054

[73] Capsular repair is not an important part of the Latarjet-Walch procedure. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery. 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2021.10.030

Creative Commons BY-NC 4.0

CC Creative Commons licence
BY Attribution — you must credit the source
NC NonCommercial — not for commercial use

Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International

Creative Commons Corporation ("Creative Commons") is not a law firm and does not provide legal services or legal advice. Distribution of Creative Commons public licenses does not create a lawyer-client or other relationship. Creative Commons makes its licenses and related information available on an "as-is" basis. Creative Commons gives no warranties regarding its licenses, any material licensed under their terms and conditions, or any related information. Creative Commons disclaims all liability for damages resulting from their use to the fullest extent possible.

Using Creative Commons Public Licenses

Creative Commons public licenses provide a standard set of terms and conditions that creators and other rights holders may use to share original works of authorship and other material subject to copyright and certain other rights specified in the public license below. The following considerations are for informational purposes only, are not exhaustive, and do not form part of our licenses.

Considerations for licensors: Our public licenses are intended for use by those authorized to give the public permission to use material in ways otherwise restricted by copyright and certain other rights. Our licenses are irrevocable. Licensors should read and understand the terms and conditions of the license they choose before applying it. Licensors should also secure all rights necessary before applying our licenses so that the public can reuse the material as expected. Licensors should clearly mark any material not subject to the license. This includes other CC- licensed material, or material used under an exception or limitation to copyright. More considerations for licensors: wiki.creativecommons.org/Considerations_for_licensors

Considerations for the public: By using one of our public licenses, a licensor grants the public permission to use the licensed material under specified terms and conditions. If the licensor's permission is not necessary for any reason--for example, because of any applicable exception or limitation to copyright--then that use is not regulated by the license. Our licenses grant only permissions under copyright and certain other rights that a licensor has authority to grant. Use of the licensed material may still be restricted for other reasons, including because others have copyright or other rights in the material. A licensor may make special requests, such as asking that all changes be marked or described. Although not required by our licenses, you are encouraged to respect those requests where reasonable. More considerations for the public: wiki.creativecommons.org/Considerations_for_licensees

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License

By exercising the Licensed Rights (defined below), You accept and agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International Public License ("Public License"). To the extent this Public License may be interpreted as a contract, You are granted the Licensed Rights in consideration of Your acceptance of these terms and conditions, and the Licensor grants You such rights in consideration of benefits the Licensor receives from making the Licensed Material available under these terms and conditions.

Section 1 -- Definitions.

a. Adapted Material means material subject to Copyright and Similar Rights that is derived from or based upon the Licensed Material and in which the Licensed Material is translated, altered, arranged, transformed, or otherwise modified in a manner requiring permission under the Copyright and Similar Rights held by the Licensor. For purposes of this Public License, where the Licensed Material is a musical work, performance, or sound recording, Adapted Material is always produced where the Licensed Material is synched in timed relation with a moving image.

b. Adapter's License means the license You apply to Your Copyright and Similar Rights in Your contributions to Adapted Material in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Public License.

c. Copyright and Similar Rights means copyright and/or similar rights closely related to copyright including, without limitation, performance, broadcast, sound recording, and Sui Generis Database Rights, without regard to how the rights are labeled or categorized. For purposes of this Public License, the rights specified in Section 2(b)(1)-(2) are not Copyright and Similar Rights.

d. Effective Technological Measures means those measures that, in the absence of proper authority, may not be circumvented under laws fulfilling obligations under Article 11 of the WIPO Copyright Treaty adopted on December 20, 1996, and/or similar international agreements.

e. Exceptions and Limitations means fair use, fair dealing, and/or any other exception or limitation to Copyright and Similar Rights that applies to Your use of the Licensed Material.

f. Licensed Material means the artistic or literary work, database, or other material to which the Licensor applied this Public License.

g. Licensed Rights means the rights granted to You subject to the terms and conditions of this Public License, which are limited to all Copyright and Similar Rights that apply to Your use of the Licensed Material and that the Licensor has authority to license.

h. Licensor means the individual(s) or entity(ies) granting rights under this Public License.

i. NonCommercial means not primarily intended for or directed towards commercial advantage or monetary compensation. For purposes of this Public License, the exchange of the Licensed Material for other material subject to Copyright and Similar Rights by digital file-sharing or similar means is NonCommercial provided there is no payment of monetary compensation in connection with the exchange.

j. Share means to provide material to the public by any means or process that requires permission under the Licensed Rights, such as reproduction, public display, public performance, distribution, dissemination, communication, or importation, and to make material available to the public including in ways that members of the public may access the material from a place and at a time individually chosen by them.

k. Sui Generis Database Rights means rights other than copyright resulting from Directive 96/9/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 1996 on the legal protection of databases, as amended and/or succeeded, as well as other essentially equivalent rights anywhere in the world.

l. You means the individual or entity exercising the Licensed Rights under this Public License. Your has a corresponding meaning.

Section 2 -- Scope.

a. License grant.

1. Subject to the terms and conditions of this Public License, the Licensor hereby grants You a worldwide, royalty-free, non-sublicensable, non-exclusive, irrevocable license to exercise the Licensed Rights in the Licensed Material to:

a. reproduce and Share the Licensed Material, in whole or in part, for NonCommercial purposes only; and

b. produce, reproduce, and Share Adapted Material for NonCommercial purposes only.

2. Exceptions and Limitations. For the avoidance of doubt, where Exceptions and Limitations apply to Your use, this Public License does not apply, and You do not need to comply with its terms and conditions.

3. Term. The term of this Public License is specified in Section 6(a).

4. Media and formats; technical modifications allowed. The Licensor authorizes You to exercise the Licensed Rights in all media and formats whether now known or hereafter created, and to make technical modifications necessary to do so. The Licensor waives and/or agrees not to assert any right or authority to forbid You from making technical modifications necessary to exercise the Licensed Rights, including technical modifications necessary to circumvent Effective Technological Measures. For purposes of this Public License, simply making modifications authorized by this Section 2(a) (4) never produces Adapted Material.

5. Downstream recipients.

a. Offer from the Licensor -- Licensed Material. Every recipient of the Licensed Material automatically receives an offer from the Licensor to exercise the Licensed Rights under the terms and conditions of this Public License.

b. No downstream restrictions. You may not offer or impose any additional or different terms or conditions on, or apply any Effective Technological Measures to, the Licensed Material if doing so restricts exercise of the Licensed Rights by any recipient of the Licensed Material.

6. No endorsement. Nothing in this Public License constitutes or may be construed as permission to assert or imply that You are, or that Your use of the Licensed Material is, connected with, or sponsored, endorsed, or granted official status by, the Licensor or others designated to receive attribution as provided in Section 3(a)(1)(A)(i).

b. Other rights.

1. Moral rights, such as the right of integrity, are not licensed under this Public License, nor are publicity, privacy, and/or other similar personality rights; however, to the extent possible, the Licensor waives and/or agrees not to assert any such rights held by the Licensor to the limited extent necessary to allow You to exercise the Licensed Rights, but not otherwise.

2. Patent and trademark rights are not licensed under this Public License.

3. To the extent possible, the Licensor waives any right to collect royalties from You for the exercise of the Licensed Rights, whether directly or through a collecting society under any voluntary or waivable statutory or compulsory licensing scheme. In all other cases the Licensor expressly reserves any right to collect such royalties, including when the Licensed Material is used other than for NonCommercial purposes.

Section 3 -- License Conditions.

Your exercise of the Licensed Rights is expressly made subject to the following conditions.

a. Attribution.

1. If You Share the Licensed Material (including in modified form), You must:

a. retain the following if it is supplied by the Licensor with the Licensed Material:

i. identification of the creator(s) of the Licensed Material and any others designated to receive attribution, in any reasonable manner requested by the Licensor (including by pseudonym if designated);

ii. a copyright notice;

iii. a notice that refers to this Public License;

iv. a notice that refers to the disclaimer of warranties;

v. a URI or hyperlink to the Licensed Material to the extent reasonably practicable;

b. indicate if You modified the Licensed Material and retain an indication of any previous modifications; and

c. indicate the Licensed Material is licensed under this Public License, and include the text of, or the URI or hyperlink to, this Public License.

2. You may satisfy the conditions in Section 3(a)(1) in any reasonable manner based on the medium, means, and context in which You Share the Licensed Material. For example, it may be reasonable to satisfy the conditions by providing a URI or hyperlink to a resource that includes the required information.

3. If requested by the Licensor, You must remove any of the information required by Section 3(a)(1)(A) to the extent reasonably practicable.

4. If You Share Adapted Material You produce, the Adapter's License You apply must not prevent recipients of the Adapted Material from complying with this Public License.

Section 4 -- Sui Generis Database Rights.

Where the Licensed Rights include Sui Generis Database Rights that apply to Your use of the Licensed Material:

a. for the avoidance of doubt, Section 2(a)(1) grants You the right to extract, reuse, reproduce, and Share all or a substantial portion of the contents of the database for NonCommercial purposes only;

b. if You include all or a substantial portion of the database contents in a database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights, then the database in which You have Sui Generis Database Rights (but not its individual contents) is Adapted Material; and

c. You must comply with the conditions in Section 3(a) if You Share all or a substantial portion of the contents of the database.

For the avoidance of doubt, this Section 4 supplements and does not replace Your obligations under this Public License where the Licensed Rights include other Copyright and Similar Rights.

Section 5 -- Disclaimer of Warranties and Limitation of Liability.

a. UNLESS OTHERWISE SEPARATELY UNDERTAKEN BY THE LICENSOR, TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, THE LICENSOR OFFERS THE LICENSED MATERIAL AS-IS AND AS-AVAILABLE, AND MAKES NO REPRESENTATIONS OR WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND CONCERNING THE LICENSED MATERIAL, WHETHER EXPRESS, IMPLIED, STATUTORY, OR OTHER. THIS INCLUDES, WITHOUT LIMITATION, WARRANTIES OF TITLE, MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NON-INFRINGEMENT, ABSENCE OF LATENT OR OTHER DEFECTS, ACCURACY, OR THE PRESENCE OR ABSENCE OF ERRORS, WHETHER OR NOT KNOWN OR DISCOVERABLE. WHERE DISCLAIMERS OF WARRANTIES ARE NOT ALLOWED IN FULL OR IN PART, THIS DISCLAIMER MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.

b. TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, IN NO EVENT WILL THE LICENSOR BE LIABLE TO YOU ON ANY LEGAL THEORY (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, NEGLIGENCE) OR OTHERWISE FOR ANY DIRECT, SPECIAL, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE, EXEMPLARY, OR OTHER LOSSES, COSTS, EXPENSES, OR DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THIS PUBLIC LICENSE OR USE OF THE LICENSED MATERIAL, EVEN IF THE LICENSOR HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH LOSSES, COSTS, EXPENSES, OR DAMAGES. WHERE A LIMITATION OF LIABILITY IS NOT ALLOWED IN FULL OR IN PART, THIS LIMITATION MAY NOT APPLY TO YOU.

c. The disclaimer of warranties and limitation of liability provided above shall be interpreted in a manner that, to the extent possible, most closely approximates an absolute disclaimer and waiver of all liability.

Section 6 -- Term and Termination.

a. This Public License applies for the term of the Copyright and Similar Rights licensed here. However, if You fail to comply with this Public License, then Your rights under this Public License terminate automatically.

b. Where Your right to use the Licensed Material has terminated under Section 6(a), it reinstates:

1. automatically as of the date the violation is cured, provided it is cured within 30 days of Your discovery of the violation; or

2. upon express reinstatement by the Licensor.

For the avoidance of doubt, this Section 6(b) does not affect any right the Licensor may have to seek remedies for Your violations of this Public License.

c. For the avoidance of doubt, the Licensor may also offer the Licensed Material under separate terms or conditions or stop distributing the Licensed Material at any time; however, doing so will not terminate this Public License.

d. Sections 1, 5, 6, 7, and 8 survive termination of this Public License.

Section 7 -- Other Terms and Conditions.

a. The Licensor shall not be bound by any additional or different terms or conditions communicated by You unless expressly agreed.

b. Any arrangements, understandings, or agreements regarding the Licensed Material not stated herein are separate from and independent of the terms and conditions of this Public License.

Section 8 -- Interpretation.

a. For the avoidance of doubt, this Public License does not, and shall not be interpreted to, reduce, limit, restrict, or impose conditions on any use of the Licensed Material that could lawfully be made without permission under this Public License.

b. To the extent possible, if any provision of this Public License is deemed unenforceable, it shall be automatically reformed to the minimum extent necessary to make it enforceable. If the provision cannot be reformed, it shall be severed from this Public License without affecting the enforceability of the remaining terms and conditions.

c. No term or condition of this Public License will be waived and no failure to comply consented to unless expressly agreed to by the Licensor.

d. Nothing in this Public License constitutes or may be interpreted as a limitation upon, or waiver of, any privileges and immunities that apply to the Licensor or You, including from the legal processes of any jurisdiction or authority.

Creative Commons is not a party to its public licenses. Notwithstanding, Creative Commons may elect to apply one of its public licenses to material it publishes and in those instances will be considered the “Licensor.” The text of the Creative Commons public licenses is dedicated to the public domain under the CC0 Public Domain Dedication. Except for the limited purpose of indicating that material is shared under a Creative Commons public license or as otherwise permitted by the Creative Commons policies published at creativecommons.org/policies, Creative Commons does not authorize the use of the trademark "Creative Commons" or any other trademark or logo of Creative Commons without its prior written consent including, without limitation, in connection with any unauthorized modifications to any of its public licenses or any other arrangements, understandings, or agreements concerning use of licensed material. For the avoidance of doubt, this paragraph does not form part of the public licenses.

Creative Commons may be contacted at creativecommons.org.