Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30197714›Full record

ArticleThe open orthopaedics journal2018

Treatment of Type Two Slap Lesion With Anatomic Suture Anchor Repair Without Biceps Tenotomy Or Tenodesis.

Chadwick C Prodromos, Susan Finkle, Alexander Dawes, Ji Young Baik

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The open orthopaedics journal, 2018. 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
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 41% of its field
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, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Chadwick C ProdromosThe Illinois Orthopaedic Foundation, Orthopaedic Surgery Rush University (Ret), Chicago, C.A, United States.
Susan FinkleThe Illinois Orthopaedic Foundation, Orthopaedic Surgery Rush University (Ret), Chicago, C.A, United States.
Alexander DawesThe Illinois Orthopaedic Foundation, Orthopaedic Surgery Rush University (Ret), Chicago, C.A, United States.
Ji Young BaikThe Illinois Orthopaedic Foundation, Orthopaedic Surgery Rush University (Ret), Chicago, C.A, United States.
Rush University · USOrthopaedic Research Foundation · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPoor results after repair of type 2 SLAP tears are relatively common and some have reported better results after biceps tenodesis or tenotomy than repair. In addition, some believe that the long head of the biceps is expendable. Therefore, many now favor biceps tenotomy or tenodesis over biceps anchor repair either in all patients or in older patients, reserving SLAP lesion repair only for young athletes. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that repair of the biceps anchor of the labrum would be effective in all patients regardless of age provided that care was taken not to overtighten the labrum and that rotator cuff pain as the primary pain generator had been ruled out.

methodsAll patients with type 2 SLAP lesion repair by the senior author since he began repairing them with suture anchors were prospectively evaluated. Patients with more than one other concomitant procedure, simultaneous rotator cuff repair or worker's compensation status were excluded.

results77% of patients were available for minimum two year followup. No patient had subsequent surgery or manipulation under anesthesis as a result of their SLAP repair. Standardized shoulder test score increased by 4 points. Mean SANE score decreased from 53 pre-op to 14 post-op. Results were the same in those over versus under 40 years of age.

conclusionAnatomic repair of Type 2 SLAP lesions at the biceps anchor without biceps tenodesis or tenotomy can produce good results in patients of all ages.

Indexed as

Biceps tenodesisBiceps tenotomyShoulderSLAP lesionSLAP repairSurgery

Identifiers

PMID30197714
PMCPMC6110052
OpenAlexW2810782581

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.