ArticleOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2021
Return to Activity After Gluteus Medius Repair in Active Patients Older Than 50 Years.
Article in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endoscopic gluteal tendon repair reduces complication rates while achieving outcomes comparable to open repair: A multilevel meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Pooled it
- Peritrochanteric Endoscopy Through Standard Hip Arthroscopy Portals: A Stepwise Approach for Diagnostic Evaluation.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Return to recreational activity after hip abductor repair: A systematic review.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Mini-Open Technique for Gluteus Medius Tendon Repairs Is Associated With Low Complication Rates and Sustained Improvement in Patient Reported Outcomes at 2-Year Follow-Up.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2024Article
- Defining the Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) and Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) at 2 years following open gluteus medius and/or minimus repair.Journal of hip preservation surgery · 2024Article
- Surgical Treatment and Outcomes for Gluteal Tendon Tears.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2024Review
- Repair of Full-Thickness Gluteus Maximus Tear With Suture Anchors.Arthroscopy techniques · 2024Article
- Outcomes of Isolated Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair Compared With Concomitant Endoscopic Gluteal Tendon Repair and Arthroscopic Hip Labral Repair: A Propensity-Matched Analysis With Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Recreational activity after open hip abductor repair.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Satisfactory results after endoscopic gluteus medius repair combined with selective gluteus maximus reflected tendon release for the treatment of a full-thickness tear of gluteus medius.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2023Article
- Endoscopic Gluteus Medius Repair.Arthroscopy techniques · 2022Article
- Gluteus Maximus Transfer following Total Hip Arthroplasty Does Not Improve Abductor Moment: A Case-Control Gait Analysis Study of 15 Patients with Gluteus Medius Disruption.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Maximal Outcome Improvement Willingness Thresholds Are Predictive of a Patient's Willingness to Undergo the Same Surgery, in Retrospect, Given the Known Outcome of Their Primary Hip Arthroscopy.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGluteus medius (GM) tears are a known cause of dysfunction and disability predominantly in older women. PURPOSE: To report on return to activity, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and a uniquely calculated minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at a minimum 2-year follow-up for active patients who had undergone either an endoscopic or an open GM repair. STUDY
designCase series; Level of evidence, 4.
methodsPatients were considered eligible if they (1) underwent a GM repair with or without concomitant central and peripheral compartment procedures; (2) had baseline preoperative and minimum 2-year scores for the modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Nonarthritic Hip Score (NAHS), Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Subscale (HOS-SSS), and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain; and (3) participated in a physical activity or sport within 1 year before their surgery. Return to activity was defined as the patient being able to participate in his or her activity at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively.
resultsOf 87 eligible patients, 84 (96.6%) met all inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up was at 44.5 months. Six patients (7.1%) underwent an open GM repair, while the remaining 78 (92.9%) underwent an endoscopic GM repair. Concomitant central and peripheral compartment arthroscopic procedures were performed in 69 patients (82.1%). All PROs significantly (
conclusionActive patients over the age of 50 years may benefit from endoscopic or open repair of GM tears, as the majority of patients in our cohort were able to return to their activity of choice. All measured PROs had significantly improved at a minimum 2-year follow-up, with high survivorship, satisfaction, and clinical effectiveness. Patients with partial-thickness tears compared with full-thickness tears and those who underwent isolated GM repair compared with GM repair with concomitant procedures had similar return to activity rates and PROs at the latest follow-up.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.