ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Suture tape anchors for enhancing healing in rotator cuff tears: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The efficacy of kinesiology tape for rotator cuff injuries: a meta-analysis of randomized trials.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Pooled it
- Single-row suture repair combined with tension-reducing augmentation versus double-row suture bridge repair for medium-to-large u-shaped supraspinatus tears: a retrospective cohort study with 2-year follow-up.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- A comparative study of the clinical value of PRP and microfracture techniques in the repair of rotator cuff injuries.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Reply to Sun et al.: Methodological clarifications regarding "Ultratape and sutures combination versus conventional sutures in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: a 6-month retrospective matched cohort study".Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundRotator cuff injuries are common, particularly among older adults, and are often treated with arthroscopic repair. However, retear rates remain high. This study compares clinical and structural outcomes between arthroscopic double-row suture bridge repairs using either suture tape anchors (STAs) with knotless medial fixation, or traditional knotted suture anchors (TSAs) with knotted medial fixation.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study compared arthroscopic double-row suture bridge repairs performed from January 2021 to July 2023 using either knotless STAs or knotted TSAs. Eligible patients had medium (1-3 cm), large (3-5 cm), or massive (> 5 cm) full-thickness rotator cuff tears (DeOrio-Cofield classification) with no greater than Goutallier grade 3 fatty infiltration. Clinical outcomes were measured using VAS, Constant, UCLA, and ASES scores, both preoperatively and at 1-year postoperative follow-up. Muscle strength was assessed using manual muscle testing (0-5 scale) with the arm positioned at 30° scapular elevation. Structural outcomes were evaluated via MRI, where two trained surgeons assessed tendon thickness using the Sugaya classification and identified retears according to the Cho classification. Statistical analysis was conducted using SPSS.
resultsThe study included 86 consecutive patients undergoing arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, with 36 patients in the STA group (median follow-up 15.0 months, range 12-19 months) and 50 patients in the traditional suture anchor (TSA) group (median follow-up 16.5 months, range 12-20 months). Both groups showed significant improvements in functional scores (VAS, Constant, UCLA, ASES) postoperatively (P < 0.05), with no significant differences between the two groups (P > 0.05). The STAs group had significantly lower tendon thinning and higher tendon thickness and supraspinatus muscle strength compared to the TSAs group (P < 0.05). The retear rate was similar between the two groups (12.0% for TSAs and 11.1% for STAs, P > 0.05).
conclusionsAt 1 year, both STAs and TSAs showed favorable clinical outcomes, but STAs were more effective in preserving tendon thickness and improving muscle strength. Although retear rates were similar, STAs may offer advantages in tendon healing and functional recovery. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Not applicable.
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.