Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34977622›Full record

ArticleArthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation2021

Isolated Endoscopic Gluteus Medius Repair Can Achieve Successful Clinical Outcomes at Minimum 2-Year Follow-up.

Mitchell B Meghpara, Mitchell J Yelton, Rachel M Glein, Mohammad S Malik, Philip J Rosinsky, Jacob Shapira, David R Maldonado, Hari K Ankem, Ajay C Lall, Benjamin G Domb

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Endoscopic Gluteus Medius Repair.Arthroscopy techniques · 2022
    Article
  11. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Mitchell B MeghparaAmerican Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Mitchell J YeltonAmerican Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Rachel M GleinAmerican Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Mohammad S MalikUniversity of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Philip J RosinskyAmerican Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Jacob ShapiraAmerican Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
David R MaldonadoAmerican Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Hari K AnkemAmerican Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Ajay C LallAmerican Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
Benjamin G DombAmerican Hip Institute Research Foundation, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.
American Hip Institute · USAmita Health · USUniversity of Illinois Chicago · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo report on clinical presentations and outcomes in patients who underwent an isolated endoscopic gluteus medius (GM) repair.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed and prospectively collected data on patients who underwent a primary isolated endoscopic GM repair. Patients were included if the following patient-reported outcome scores were obtained preoperatively and at minimum 2-year follow-up: modified Harris Hip Score (mHHS), Non-arthritic Hip Score (NAHS), and visual analog scale (VAS) score. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the mHHS, NAHS, and Hip Outcome Score-Sports Specific Scale was uniquely calculated for this study. Patients who underwent concomitant procedures including hip arthroplasty and hip arthroscopy were excluded.

resultsA total of 26 hips met all inclusion and exclusion criteria, of which 23 hips (88.5%) (22 patients) had a minimum 2-year follow-up. Nineteen hips had a partial-thickness GM tear; 17 (89.5%) were high-grade partial-thickness tears treated with a side-to-side repair through a transtendinous window. Four full-thickness tears with no retraction or fatty infiltration were able to be repaired endoscopically. The mHHS, NAHS, and VAS score all significantly improved (

conclusionsAppropriately selected patients without concomitant intra-articular hip pathology may achieve successful outcomes at a minimum 2-year follow-up after an isolated endoscopic GM repair. Most isolated endoscopic GM repairs were performed for partial-thickness GM tears. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case-series study.

Identifiers

PMID34977622
PMCPMC8689210
OpenAlexW3198106798

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.