SynthesisKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2023
Arthroscopic approach does not yield better results than open surgery after subscapularis repair: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The bioinductive collagen implant yields positive histological, clinical and MRI outcomes in the management of rotator cuff tears: A systematic review.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2025Pooled it
- Arthroscopic repair versus open repair for subscapularis tears with or without concomitant supraspinatus tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2026Review
- Clinical and Structural Results Following Arthroscopic and Open Repair of Isolated Subscapularis Tears.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Article
- Clinical Outcomes and Tendon Healing After Arthroscopic Isolated Subscapularis Tendon Repair: Results at Midterm Follow-up.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study aimed to compare the long-term outcomes of arthroscopic versus mini-open repair in patients with isolated subscapularis tendon tears.
methodsGoogle Scholar, PubMed, and Embase databases were searched for studies evaluating isolated subscapularis tears subsequently treated by arthroscopic or mini-open repair. The inclusion criteria were clinical studies reporting isolated subscapularis lesions treated by arthroscopic or mini-open repair, a minimum follow-up of 12 months, and clinical and functional outcomes reported in the study results. Articles not reporting functional outcomes or studies that reported results for anterosuperior rotator cuff tears without a separate analysis of subscapularis tendon tears were excluded. Studies older than 20 years and studies with a minimum follow-up of less than 12 months were also excluded.
resultsA total of 12 studies met the inclusion criteria; 8 papers were included in the arthroscopic repair group, and 6 were included in the mini-open repair group (2 studies reported results for both techniques). The mean age reported was 49.3 years, and 85.1% of patients were male. The dominant limb was involved in 77.6% of the patients, and a traumatic onset of symptoms was verified in 76.3%. The mean time to surgery was 9.6 months. The Constant-Murley score showed positive results for the arthroscopic and mini-open groups, with mean postoperative values of 84.6 and 82.1, respectively. Promising results were also observed for pain, with a mean of 13.2 (out of 15) points for the arthroscopic group and 11.7 for the mini-open group. The long head of the biceps was involved in 78% of the patients, and LHB tenodesis or tenotomy were the most common concomitant procedures performed.
conclusionsThere was no significant difference in clinical and functional outcomes between open and arthroscopic repair. Moreover, the same complication rates were reported in both treatments, but arthroscopic repair led to less postoperative pain. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
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.