ArticleTrials2025
Treatment of degenerative massive rotator cuff tears: a study protocol for a randomized non-inferiority comparative surgical trial.
Article in Trials, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05807854 (Treatment of Degenerative Massive Rotator Cuff Tears), which is not on this 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.
Treatment of Degenerative Massive Rotator Cuff Tears: a Multicenter, Randomized Comparative Surgical Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Radiographic comparison of humeral and glenoid lateralization and distalization between onlay and inlay reverse total shoulder arthroplasty designs in Japanese shoulders.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 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
Abstract
backgroundMassive degenerative rotator cuff tears (MRCTs) represent a persistent challenge in shoulder surgery. While arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) remains a widely accepted treatment with good functional outcomes, it is associated with a risk of retear and progression to cuff tear arthropathy. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has emerged as a viable alternative, particularly in cases where the reparability of the cuff is uncertain, offering pain relief and functional improvement. However, the optimal treatment approach for repairable MRCT in patients aged 60 to 80 years remains debated. This trial aims to assess whether RSA provides non-inferior outcomes to ARCR in patients with degenerative MRCTs, with a particular focus on function, pain, and quality of life.
methodsThis is a prospective, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial. A total of 145 patients with symptomatic, repairable MRCT will be enrolled and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either ARCR or RSA. The primary outcome is the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score at 24 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes include ASES at 6 weeks and 6 months; Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE); Constant score; range of motion (ROM) in flexion, extension, and internal/external rotation; repair integrity (ultrasound for ARCR, radiographs for RSA); and complication rates. PROMs will be assessed at baseline, 1.5, 6, and 24 months. All adverse events and complications will be systematically recorded. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide robust comparative data to assess whether RSA is non-inferior to ARCR at two years postoperatively in terms of shoulder function and patient-reported outcomes in patients with repairable MRCT. The results aim to support evidence-based decision-making in clinical practice.
trial registrationThe protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee Board (CCER 2023-00111) in March 2023 and by ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT05807854).
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.