ArticleClinical interventions in aging2025
The Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Tenotomy versus Tenodesis with Medium-to-Massive Rotator Cuff Tear in the Elderly: A Retrospective Study.
Article in Clinical interventions in aging, 2025. 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.
- Comparison of subacromial volume and clinical parameters of patients who underwent biceps tenotomy or tenodesis due to long head of biceps tendon pathologies during rotator cuff repair surgery.Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2026Article
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
Purpose: Shoulder arthroscopic repair of rotator cuff tears with simultaneous treatment of lesions of the long head of the biceps tendon has become increasingly accepted. However, the clinical outcomes between tenotomy and tenodesis remain unclear. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of tenotomy and tenodesis combined with rotator cuff repair in elderly patients with medium-to-massive rotator cuff tears. Patients and Methods: We conducted a retrospective trial of patients aged > 60 years with medium-to-massive rotator cuff tears who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair with tenotomy or tenodesis. This study included 96 patients: 47 in the tenotomy group and 49 in the tenodesis group. At 3 and 6 months after surgery and at the last follow-up, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Constant-Murley score (CS score), anterior shoulder pain (VAS score), elbow flexion strength and supination strength, and complications were recorded. Results: At 3 months postoperatively, ASES score, CS score and strength of elbow flexion of the tenodesis group were significantly better than those of the tenotomy group. In addition, the VAS score is 4.4 ± 1.4 and 3.3 ± 1.3 in the tenodesis and tenotomy respectively (p = 0.039). At the final follow-up, despite no significant statistical differences in ASES scores, CS scores, VAS scores, and flexion strength between the two groups, the variation in the above items in the tenodesis group was statistically lower than that in the tenotomy group. No difference was observed in the rates of complications and revision between the groups. Conclusion: For people over 60 years of age with medium to massive rotator cuff tears, postoperative shoulder function of tenodesis is superior to tenotomy, and functional recovery is relatively more stable after tenodesis than after tenotomy.
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.