ArticleWorld journal of orthopedics2022
Accuracy of the rotator cuff reparability score.
Article in World journal of orthopedics, 2022. 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.
- Definition of irreparable rotator cuff tear: a scoping review of prospective surgical therapeutic trials to evaluate current practice.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe reparability of large or massive rotator cuff tears is difficult to determine pre-operatively. We previously identified age ≥ 65 years, acromiohumeral interval ≤ 6 mm, and anteroposterior tear size ≥ 22 mm as risk factors for rotator cuff repair failure. We therefore developed a rotator cuff reparability score where each of the above risk factors is assigned a score of one point.
aimTo determine the accuracy of a rotator cuff reparability score.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of recruited patients with large or massive rotator cuff tears treated at our institution between January 2013 and December 2019. Exclusion criteria were revision surgery and patients with contraindications for surgery. All patients underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair and were categorized into either complete or partial rotator cuff repair. Rotator cuff reparability scores were calculated for each patient. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive value, and positive and negative likelihood ratio were assessed. A receiver operating characteristic curve was plotted to determine the optimal cut-off rotator cuff reparability score.
resultsEighty patients (mean age, 61 years; range, 25-84 years; 41 females and 39 males) were recruited. Intra- and inter-observer reliabilities were good to excellent. The number of patients with 0, 1, 2, and 3 risk factors for rotator cuff repair failure were 24, 33, 17, and 6, respectively. Complete repair was performed in all patients without risk factors. Two of the 33 patients with one risk factor and seven of the 17 patients with two risk factors underwent partial repair. One of the six patients with three risk factors underwent complete repair. The area under the curve was 0.894. The optimal cut-off score was two points with a sensitivity of 85.71% and a specificity of 83.33%.
conclusionA rotator cuff reparability score of two was determined to be the optimal cut-off score for predicting the reparability of large or massive rotator cuff tears.
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.