Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28255656›Full record

SynthesisKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2017

Influence of patient and diagnostic parameters on reported retear rates after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Andreas M Müller, Matthias Flury, Hasan N Alsayed, Laurent Audigé

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
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

4 authors.

Andreas M MüllerResearch and Development, Schulthess Clinic, Lengghalde 2, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland.
Matthias FluryUpper Extremities, Schulthess Clinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Hasan N AlsayedDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery and Traumatology, University Hospital of Basel, Basel, Switzerland.
Laurent AudigéResearch and Development, Schulthess Clinic, Lengghalde 2, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland. Laurent.Audige@kws.ch.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate patient and diagnostic parameters influencing the reported rates of recurrent rotator cuff defects after ARCR.

methodsPubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library and Scopus databases were searched for clinical studies on tendon defects after ARCR. Imaging modalities, definitions, detection time points, and other known patient risk factors (patient age, tear severity, grade of fatty infiltration, repair technique) as well as reported defect rates were extracted. A meta-analysis of proportion and meta-regression analysis were used to investigate independent variables influencing reported defect rates.

resultsOf 109 articles reviewed, the diagnostic studies used magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) only (n = 56), ultrasound (US) only (n = 28), MRI or computed tomography (CT) arthrography (CTA, n = 14) or a combination of US, MRI and CTA (n = 11) up to 57 months after ARCR. Definitions of tendon defects were highly variable, including those of partial tendon healing with insufficient thickness defined as either an acceptable outcome (n = 72) or a recurrent defect (n = 22). Reported defect rates demonstrated highly significant heterogeneity between studies and groups. Follow-up time and the evaluation of partial tendon healing were independent factors of the defect rate alongside age, tear severity and repair technique. The type of imaging did not significantly alter defect rates.

conclusionA number of specific factors significantly alter the rates of rotator cuff defects reported after ARCR. Standardized protocols in clinical practice are required for consistent diagnosis of recurrent defects after ARCR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Indexed as

ArthrographyArthroscopyHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingReoperationRotator Cuff InjuriesTomography, X-Ray ComputedUltrasonographyComplicationsMeta-analysisRecurrent rotator cuff defectsRetearShoulder, rotator cuff

Identifiers

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.