Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36452341›Full record

ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2022

Types of Retears After Knot-tying and Knotless Suture Bridge Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Niti Prasathaporn, Napatpong Thamrongskulsiri, Thun Itthipanichpong, Danaithep Limskul

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
–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

9 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

4 authors.

Niti PrasathapornDepartment of Orthopaedics, Ramkhamhaeng Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
Napatpong ThamrongskulsiriDepartment of Anatomy, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Thun ItthipanichpongDepartment of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.
Danaithep LimskulDepartment of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine, Chulalongkorn University, King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: In conventional double-row repair for rotator cuff tears, tying the medial row of anchor sutures can strangulate the tendon. The knotless medial row technique has been recommended to improve vascularity and reduce retear rates. The researchers divided the retear pattern into 2 categories: type 1 (failure at the tendon-bone interface) and type 2 (failure at the musculotendinous junction with healed footprint). Purpose: To compare studies on knot-tying versus knotless double-row repair for rotator cuff tears according to retear type and clinical and radiological outcomes. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A search of the PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane databases was performed following the 2020 Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Included were studies that directly compared the knot-tying and knotless double-row techniques and provided postoperative patient-reported outcomes and retear rates. The Methodology Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria were used for methodological quality assessment of the included studies. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) were calculated for continuous outcomes. Results: Included were 12 studies (n = 1411 shoulders); 1 study had level 1 evidence, 3 studies had level 2 evidence, and 8 studies had level 3 evidence. The MINORS score ranged from 15 to 19, indicating that the methodology was fair to good. There was no statistically significant difference in retear rate between techniques (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.67-1.47; Conclusion: There was no significant difference in overall retear rates between the knotless and knot-tying techniques, and both techniques demonstrated similar clinical outcomes. However, type 2 retear rates were significantly greater after knot-tying repair, and type 1 retear rates were significantly greater after knotless repair.

Indexed as

clinical outcomedouble-row repairfailureknotlessknottedknot-tyingretearrotator cuffsuture bridgesystematic review

Identifiers

PMID36452341
PMCPMC9703510

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.