ArticleJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2025
Outcomes of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair via single-row anchor technique versus transosseous anchorless technique: A randomized controlled trial.
Article in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Arthroscopic transosseous anchorless versus suture anchor repair for rotator cuff tears: a meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Pooled it
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
Background: Rotator cuff tears can be addressed using various repair techniques. This study sought to compare the clinical and radiologic outcomes and costs after arthroscopic single-row anchor repair and arthroscopic transosseous repair for small to medium-sized tears. Methods: The study was a prospective randomized clinical trial (registered as trial number PACTR202404475835971 in the Pan African Clinical Trial Registry, Apr 04, 2024) that included 62 patients, randomized into two equal groups. Group A: single-row anchor repair (n = 31) and Group B: transosseous repair (n = 31). Patients were clinically evaluated using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score and Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), in addition to evaluation of range of motion (ROM) of forward flexion, external rotation (ER), and internal rotation (IR). Total implant costs were calculated and compared. Results: In both groups, the ROM increased significantly, P < 0.001. The mean differences between preoperative and postoperative forward flexion, ER, and IR were comparable in both groups, P = 0.933, 0.817, and 0.151, respectively. The mean ASES score and OSS improved significantly in both groups at last follow-up, P < 0.001. The mean follow-up ASES score was 91.1 ± 3.5 in Group A and 90.8 ± 2.7 in Group B, P = 0.818. The mean follow-up OSS was 42.4 ± 2.1 in Group A and 41.5 ± 1.9 in Group B, P = 0.214. The average financial cost of operation was significantly lesser in the transosseous group than the anchors group, P < 0.001. Conclusion: Anchorless transosseous rotator cuff repair can achieve similar excellent functional outcomes as the single-row anchor repair, with equivalent tendon healing results. However, the transosseous technique has substantially lower costs.
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.