ArticleJSES international2024
Patient, imaging, and surgical factors associated with supraspinatus re-tear pattern after rotator cuff repair.
Article in JSES international, 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.
- Development and validation of a risk prediction model for re-tear after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.Scientific reports · 2025Article
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
Background: This study aimed to characterize patient, imaging, and surgical factors associated with re-tear patterns after rotator cuff repair, as well as to identify predictors of type 2 failure in a large patient cohort. Methods: A retrospective case-control study was performed at a single urban academic institution. All patients who underwent an arthroscopic rotator cuff repair by 2 fellowship-trained shoulder and elbow surgeons between 2005 and 2022 and were subsequently found to have a symptomatic re-tear on magnetic resonance imaging were included. Patients were characterized as either a type 1 (failure at bone-tendon interface) or type 2 (failure medial to the bone-tendon junction) re-tear based on the Cho classification. Chart review was performed to collect demographic, imaging, and intraoperative surgical factors. Multivariable analysis was performed to determine patient and imaging factors associated with type 2 failure. Results: Fifty-seven patients were included in the study. Overall, 33 (57.9%) patients were classified as a Cho 1 re-tear and 24 (42.1%) were classified as Cho 2 re-tear. No differences in preoperative tear characteristics (tear width, tear retraction, and tendon length) or fatty infiltration were found between Cho 1 and Cho 2 re-tears. Bivariate analysis comparing Cho 1 vs. Cho 2 found male sex was associated with a higher incidence of a Cho 2 re-tear (79.2% vs. 20.8%; Conclusion: Repair construct used during rotator cuff repair does not appear to influence re-tear pattern. Male sex was associated with a higher rate of type 2 failure.
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.