ArticleBMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies2025
Safety of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair: using a core event set for clinician and patient assessment of risks in a multicenter cohort study.
Article in BMJ surgery, interventions, & health technologies, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objectives: Reporting standards for adverse events (AEs) in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) vary. A standardized "core event set" (CES) was developed to enhance AE documentation. This study describes AE risks in a large Swiss-German ARCR cohort, evaluates concordance between patient-reported and clinician-reported events, and investigates AE variability according to tear severity. Design: Prospective multicenter cohort study. Setting: Between June 2020 and November 2021, 973 patients were enrolled across 19 orthopedic centers and followed for 24 months. Participants: Adult patients with a rotator cuff tear. Interventions: Primary ARCR. Main outcome measures: AEs were documented using a structured CES and classified into five severity grades. AE reporting was compared between patients and clinical staff. AE cumulative risks (CR) were calculated by occurrence period, severity grade, and tear severity. Results: A total of 342 AEs were documented in 314 patients within 2 years. Of these, 41% were reported only by clinical staff, 40% only by patients, and 19% by both. The 2-year CR of AEs was 29.1%, with persistent pain (12.2%) and deep soft tissue complications (10.6%) being most common. Severity classification revealed 61.7% grade I, 24.3% grade II, 13.2% grade III, and 0.9% grade IV. Tear severity was inversely associated with overall AE risk, ranging from 41.5% in partial tears to 28% in massive tears. Conclusions: Standardized AE documentation using CES identified pain, deep soft tissue complications, and rotator cuff issues as the most frequent local AEs. Both clinicians and patients should be involved in AE reporting. Most AEs were mild, and tear severity predicted AE risk, highlighting the need for tailored postoperative strategies and further research on preventive measures.
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.