ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
Comparison of the clinical efficacy and prognosis of the two techniques for treating partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon tears under arthroscopy.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. 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.
- Transtendon repair vs. tear completion in partial-thickness rotator cuff tears: systematic review and meta-analysis.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAt present, shoulder arthroscopy is usually used for treatment of rotator cuff injuries. There is still debate over the precise technique of using shoulder arthroscopy to treat partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon injuries.
objectiveTo compare the clinical efficacy of the arthroscopic transtendon repair method and the arthroscopic full-thickness repair method in the treatment of patients with Ellman III partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon tears and to analyze the influencing factors of postoperative efficacy. STUDY
designCohort study; level of evidence,4.
methodsA total of 84 partial-thickness rotator cuff tear (PTRCT) patients with Ellman III injuries who underwent surgical treatment in our hospital between January 2017 and January 2020 were selected and divided into the arthroscopic trans-tenon repair group (32 cases) and the arthroscopic full-thickness repair group (52 cases). Shoulder joint pain and functional status were assessed by the Constant score, ASES score and VAS score; shoulder mobility was assessed by measuring shoulder ROM. The clinical outcomes of the two groups of patients were compared, and the factors affecting the postoperative efficacy of the patients were investigated.
resultsAll patients were followed up for at least 2 years. The Constant score, ASES score, and VAS score of the two groups of patients were all improved compared with those before surgery, and the differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the Constant score, ASES score, or VAS score between the two groups (P > 0.05). The results of binary logistic regression analysis showed that the preoperative ASES score and whether biceps tenotomy was performed were independent risk factors for satisfactory postoperative efficacy (P < 0.05).
conclusionFor patients with Ellman III partial articular-sided supraspinatus tendon tears, the arthroscopic transtendon repair method and the arthroscopic full-thickness repair method can both significantly improve the shoulder pain and function of the patient, but there is no significant difference between the efficacy of the two surgical methods. The preoperative ASES score and whether biceps tenotomy was performed were independent risk factors for satisfactory postoperative efficacy in PTRCT patients with Ellman III injury.
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.