ArticleThe American journal of sports medicine2025
A Quantitative Fatty Infiltration Evaluation of the Supraspinatus Muscle: Enhanced Clinical Relevance and Improved Diagnostic Value on Predicting Retear Compared With the Goutallier Classification.
Article in The American journal of sports medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A CT-Based scoring system for predicting degenerative posterosuperior rotator cuff tears: a risk stratification tool for patients with contraindications to MRI.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Quantitative assessment of supraspinatus fatty infiltration on a novel MRI section: comparison with conventional methods.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Validation of Three-Dimensional Magnetic Resonance Imaging-Based Volumetric Quantification for Fatty Infiltration in a Rabbit Model of Chronic Rotator Cuff Tears.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreoperative assessment of fatty degeneration is important for managing rotator cuff tears. The Goutallier classification is semiquantitative and observer dependent. Discrepancies among surgeons can be prominent. A quantitative method may improve accuracy and reliability in evaluating the exact percentage of fatty infiltration (Fat%). HYPOTHESIS/PURPOSE: This study aimed to investigate the correlation between the new quantitative method and the Goutallier classification in assessing fatty infiltration (FI) of the supraspinatus muscle and to explore the use of this method in predicting retear after rotator cuff repair. It was hypothesized that the new method would significantly correlate with the Goutallier classification and be more sensitive to retear. STUDY
designCohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence; 3.
methodsThis study included 105 patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair for large to massive tears. All patients underwent routine preoperative and 1-year postoperative magnetic resonance imaging and were divided into 2 groups according to tendon healing. Preoperative quantitative Fat% of the supraspinatus muscle was evaluated based on the signal intensity (SI) of the T1-weighted sequence. The Fat% was calculated using the following equation: SI
resultsThe mean preoperative Fat% of the supraspinatus muscle was 23.77 ± 15.96. A significant correlation was found between the Fat% and the Goutallier grade of the supraspinatus muscle (
conclusionAlthough the quantitative method for assessing Fat% of the supraspinatus muscle significantly correlated with the Goutallier classification, the quantitative method is more clinically relevant to retear. Fat% of the supraspinatus muscle >33.2% possessed higher diagnostic value than the Goutallier grades in predicting retear.
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.