ReviewOrthopaedic journal of sports medicine2023
Evidence for Utilization of Injectable Biologic Augmentation in Primary Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review of Data From 2010 to 2022.
Review in Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Ultrasound-guided platelet-rich plasma versus corticosteroid injection for supraspinatus tendinopathy: a randomized comparative study.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Trial
- Injection of autologous conditioned plasma combined with a collagen scaffold may improve the clinical outcome in shoulder impingement syndrome: a prospective study.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2023Trial
- Trans-Tendon Suture-Bridge Knotless Proximal Pulley Repair With Bioinductive Patch Augmentation for High-Grade Partial Hip Abductor Tendon Tears.Arthroscopy techniques · 2026Article
- Medical management of musculoskeletal pain in professional wheelchair basketball players: an evidence-based guide.Pain management · 2025Review
- Biological strategies in rotator cuff repair: a clinical application and molecular background.EFORT open reviews · 2024Review
- Optimizing Tissue Engineering for Clinical Relevance in Rotator Cuff Repair.Tissue engineering. Part B, Reviews · 2024Review
- Subscapularis Management With Biologic Augmentation in Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.Arthroscopy techniques · 2024Article
- Biomodulating healing after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: the protocol of a randomised proof of concept trial (BIOHACK).BMJ open · 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Biologic healing after rotator cuff repair remains a significant challenge. Injectable biologic augmentation may improve tissue quality at the suture-tendon interface. Purpose: To investigate the effect of injectable biologic supplementation in rotator cuff repair and to assess the quality and adherence to evolving reporting standards. Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A systematic review was conducted following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Included were 40 studies: 29 preclinical (in vivo animal models) and 11 clinical. Each clinical study was assessed for quality, risk of bias, and adherence to relevant MIBO (Minimum Information for Studies Evaluating Biologics in Orthopaedics) guidelines. The outcomes of interest were reported load to failure, load to gap, gap size, and stiffness in the preclinical studies, and healing rate and any patient-reported outcome measures in the clinical studies. Results: Injectables reported included growth factors (eg, transforming growth factor-beta 3, erythropoietin), bone marrow-derived mesenchymal stem cells and adipose-derived mesenchymal stem cells (ADSCs), and other agents such as platelet-rich plasma (PRP) and hyaluronic acid. The most common findings for preclinical injectables were increased load to failure (16/29 studies; 55.2%) and improved collagen histological quality (11/29 studies; 37.9%). All 11 clinical studies (10 PRP, 1 ADSC) indicated no adverse events, with similar or improved patient-reported outcomes compared with repairs in the control groups. In 1 study utilizing an innovative delivery technique, a concentrated PRP globule with fibrin matrix was shuttled over a suture to maintain concentrated PRP at the repair site and demonstrated a significant decrease in retears ( Conclusion: Approximately 83% of preclinical studies found a positive biomechanical or histological effect, with no studies showing an overall negative effect. Clinically, utilization of innovative delivery techniques may reduce the risk of arthroscopic washout of PRP and improve retear rates. ADSCs were shown to reduce retear rates at a 28-month follow-up.
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.