ReviewOrthopedic research and reviews2021
High-Grade Bursal Side Rotator-Cuff Repair: A Surgical Outcome Review.
Review in Orthopedic research and reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nondisruptive Full-Thickness Double-Row Repair Technique for Bursal-Sided Partial-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Partial Cuff Repair in Rotator Cuff Tears: Current Concepts and Clinical Considerations.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2025Review
- Switching Stick-Guided Spinal Needle Repair Technique for Small Size Rotator Cuff Tear.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Functional and MRI Outcomes After In Situ Repair Versus Tear Completion Before Repair of Bursal-Side Partial-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears.Orthopaedic surgery · 2023Article
- The pathology of oxidative stress-induced autophagy in a chronic rotator cuff enthesis tear.Frontiers in physiology · 2023Review
- Optimal Management of Partial Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears: Clinical Considerations and Practical Management.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWe aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes of high-grade bursal rotator cuff-tear repairs.
methodsThis systematic review was performed in May 2020 in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using PubMed. Inclusion criteria were English-language studies reporting the results of pain improvement, functional outcome scores, and radiographic examinations after repair of bursal side partial rotator-cuff tears at any time point in patients of any age and with all levels of evidence. Exclusion criteria were articles not in English, in vitro or animal studies, epidemiological studies, and such article types as technical notes or narrative reviews.
resultsOf 58 articles, five were included in this study, of which three and two had level III and IV evidence, respectively, four were comparative studies, and one was a case series. Visual analogue scales were used in four of the five studies, all showing improvement in pain assessment from 5.87 preoperatively to 1.02 postoperatively. All five studies showed significant improvement on each functional outcome score at the final follow-up. The retear rate for all studies was 10.97% (27 of 246).
conclusionHigh-grade bursal side partial-thickness rotator cuff-tear repair gave satisfactory results in terms of pain scores, range of motion, and functional outcomes. The retear rate was still considerably high (10.9%), necessitating better understanding of the basic science, such as molecular mechanisms during adaptation, to improve the surgical technique.
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.