Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33116954›Full record

ReviewOrthopedic research and reviews2020

Biologics to Improve Healing in Large and Massive Rotator Cuff Tears: A Critical Review.

Brandon T Goldenberg, Lucca Lacheta, Travis J Dekker, James D Spratt, Philip C Nolte, Peter J Millett

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Orthopedic research and reviews, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors.

Brandon T GoldenbergSteadman-Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO 81657, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0323-3438
Lucca LachetaSteadman-Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO 81657, USA.
Travis J DekkerDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Eglin Air Force Base, Elgin, FL, USA.
James D SprattSteadman-Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO 81657, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0007-2456
Philip C NolteSteadman-Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO 81657, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2513-2723
Peter J MillettSteadman-Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO 81657, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Large and massive rotator cuff tears have the highest risk of retear. Common biologic modalities that can potentially reduce the retear rate and improve healing include platelet-rich plasma (PRP), scaffolds, and mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs). PRP has been studied for its role in improving rotator cuff healing and results of randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses show mixed results. Most studies in large and massivge tears show that PRP decreases the retear rate, but the connection between structural integrity and clinical outcomes is still unknown. Extracellular matrix (ECM) and synthetic scaffolds can increase healing in augmentation and bridging repair. Acellular dermal allografts have shown better healing rates and outcomes than xenografts in meta-analyses. Synthetic scaffolds augmented with bone marrow-derived stem cells have only been studied in vitro but are promising for the combination of mechanical stability and induction of a biological response. Superior capsule reconstruction is an exciting type of interposition graft reconstruction that has shown favorable early clinical outcomes for large and massive tears. Bone marrow-derived stem cells and adipose-derived stem cells improve the biomechanical characteristics of tendon repair and enhance the histological findings of the healing process in animal studies. However, evidence from human studies is lacking, especially in patients with large and massive tears. In summary, there are many biological options to augment rotator cuff repair in patients with large and massive tears. Due to mixed results and a lack of standardization in high-quality studies, we cannot recommend PRP at this time as an adjunct to rotator cuff repair. Both ECM and synthetic scaffolds, as well as SCR, can be used, especially in situations where native tendon is compromised, and additional mechanical augmentation is needed. Stem cells have been the least studied to date, so it is difficult to give recommendations for or against their use at this time.

Indexed as

biologicslarge rotator cuff tearsmassive rotator cuff tearsmesenchymal stem cellsplatelet-rich plasmascaffolds

Identifiers

PMID33116954
PMCPMC7568683

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.