ArticleClinics in shoulder and elbow2024
Surgical anatomical landmarks for arthroscopic repair of subscapularis tendon tears.
Article in Clinics in shoulder and elbow, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Diagnostic Challenges of the Digitation Sign for Subscapularis Tears: Impact of Observer Expertise.Arthroscopy, sports medicine, and rehabilitation · 2026Article
- Arm positions with increased risk of subscapularis external impingement at the subcoracoid arch.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2025Article
- Arthroscopic Subscapularis Retensioning Repair Using a Knotless-Type Anchor Shared With Supraspinatus Repair.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- A Narrative Review on the Double Pulley-Triple Row Technique for Large to Massive Rotator Cuff Repair.Clinics in orthopedic surgery · 2025Review
- The impact of supraspinatus tear on subscapularis muscle atrophy and fatty infiltration.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2024Article
- Improving arthroscopic subscapularis repair: the essential role of surgical anatomical landmarks.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSubscapularis repair has recently garnered significant interest. A thorough understanding of the tendon's anatomy is essential for precise and safe repair. Our objectives were to describe the anatomy of the subscapularis insertion, define its landmarks, and analyze nearby structures to guide arthroscopic repair.
methodsWe conducted an anatomical study, dissecting 12 shoulders. We evaluated the distance from the footprint to the axillary nerve, the dimensions, and shape of the footprint, and its relationship with the humeral cartilage.
resultsThe distance to the axillary nerve was 32 mm (standard deviation [SD], 3.7 mm). The craniocaudal length of the footprint was 37.3 mm (SD, 4.6 mm). Its largest mediolateral thickness was 16 mm (SD, 2.2 mm), wider at the top and narrower distally. The distance between the footprint and the cartilage varied, being 3.2 mm (SD, 1.2 mm) in the upper part, 5.4 mm (SD, 1.8 mm) in the medium, and 15.9 mm (SD, 2.9 mm) in the lower part.
conclusionsWhen performing a repair of the subscapularis tendon, the distance to the cartilage should be carefully evaluated as it varies proximally to distally, and the shape of the footprint (wider proximally, tapered distally) should be considered for implant positioning. The distance to the axillary nerve is approximately 30 mm. Anterior visualization guarantees direct control of all landmarks and allows accurate implant positioning with safe tendon release. 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.