ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2023
Early revision rotator cuff repair: an analysis of outcomes and function.
Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Subcoracoid Cyst: A Possible Predictive Marker for Postoperative Retears of Rotator Cuff After Arthroscopic Repair.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRotator cuff repair (RCR) is commonly performed and can have good functional outcomes. However, failure of RCR surgery can be challenging for both patient and surgeon alike. This study examines the outcomes of early revision RCR for the management of clinically failed RCRs.
methodsThirty-six patients undergoing revision RCR within 1 year of primary surgery were evaluated. Range of motion (ROM) and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) were assessed at baseline, post-primary RCR, and post-revision RCR.
resultsPatients with a documented repair failure after primary RCR failed to improve in both ROM and PROMs compared to before primary RCR. Following early revision, RCR SANE (p = 0.024, p < 0.001), ASES (p = 0.004, p < 0.001), and SST (p < 0.001, p = 0.001) scores improved significantly compared to pre-primary and pre-revision scores, respectively. Documentation of a new traumatic injury did not affect clinical or functional outcomes compared to atraumatic re-tears. Number of tendons torn was positively correlated with higher SANE scores (r = 0.638, p = 0.008) and negatively correlated with SST score (r = -0.475, p = 0.03) and improvement in forward elevation (r = -0.368, p = 0.03) after primary RCR. There were significant correlations between number of tendons torn and improvement in SANE (r = 0.664, p = 0.007) and ASES scores (r = 0.468, p = 0.043) from post-primary RCR to post-revision RCR.
conclusionEarly revision after failed RCR can lead to clinically significant improvement in functional outcomes. The presence of a traumatic re-injury does not appear to affect revision RCR outcomes as it does in the primary setting. Patients with early clinical failures of primary RCR may benefit from early revision RCR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III: Retrospective Case Series.
Indexed as
Identifiers
35064337What 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.