ArticleScientific reports2025
Superior fulcrum reconstruction improve tendon-to-bone healing in irreparable massive rotator cuff tears compared with superior capsule reconstruction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- An Arthroscopic Upper Superior Capsule Reconstruction Using a U-Fold Long Head of the Biceps Tendon Autograft for the Treatment of Irreparable Massive Rotator Cuff Tears.Arthroscopy techniques · 2025Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Recently, superior capsule reconstruction (SCR) has achieved some results in the treatment of irreparable massive rotator cuff tears (IMRCT), but the incidence of various postoperative complications is high. The study aims to establish a model of IMRCT in rabbits, and compare the histomorphology and molecular biology differences between superior fulcrum reconstruction (SFR) and SCR, so as to provide a new and effective treatment method for the clinical treatment of IMRCT. Thirty-six mature New Zealand white rabbits were required for the experiment to build the model of IMRCT. The supraspinatus and subscapular muscle of the thirty-six rabbits were cut off and randomly divided into two groups of eighteen rabbits in each group, with SFR and SCR. Six rabbits in each group were sacrificed at 4, 8, and 12 weeks after surgery for histological and molecular assessment. Macroscopically, no retear occurred in SFR group and SCR group after surgery. The results of molecular biological showed that the expression levels of COL1, BMP2, SCX and SOX9 in the SFR group were significantly higher than those in the SCR group at 4 and 8 weeks (P < 0.05), while the expression of COL3 was lower than that in the SCR group. There was no significant difference in the expression of Aggrecan between the two groups at 4 weeks (P > 0.05). At 12 weeks after surgery, the expression levels of COL1, BMP2 and Aggrecan in the SFR group were significantly higher than those in the SCR group (P < 0.05), while COL3, SCX and SOX9 were not significantly difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). Histologically, collagen fiber maturity and fibrocartilage regeneration in the SFR group were superior to those in the SCR group at 8 and 12 weeks (P < 0.05). However, at 4 weeks, there was no significant difference between the two groups (P > 0.05). In an IMRCT rabbit model, healing processes of SFR and SCR are different, but both repair techniques were effective. SFR outperformed SCR in collagen fiber maturity, fibrocartilage regeneration, and tendon regeneration.
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.