ArticleJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2026
Predictors of outcomes following double-row rotator cuff repair: an assessment of all-suture or solid medial row anchor utilization at a single high-volume institution.
Article in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 2026. 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
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Use of all-suture soft anchors in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) has been shown to provide both biomechanical and functional advantages. However, predictors of clinical outcomes following RCR using all-suture anchors have not been well established. This study aimed to examine predictors of clinical outcomes following double-row suture bridge RCR using either all-suture or solid medial row anchors. Methods: We retrospectively identified patients at our institution who underwent arthroscopic RCR. Patients were eligible for inclusion if they underwent primary arthroscopic RCR using a double-row suture-bridge technique with either all-suture or solid medial row anchors, were between the ages of 18 and 85, and were at least 2 years postoperative. We collected demographic, clinical, and intraoperative data via electronic health record review. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated at follow-up using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Standardized Shoulder Assessment and visual analog scale (VAS). Proportions meeting Patient Acceptable Symptomatic State (PASS) thresholds for each were calculated. Within either anchor group, we used univariable linear and logistic regression to examine predictors of scores and meeting PASS thresholds at follow-up, respectively. Results: In total, 352 patients completed follow-up (mean age = 60.3 ± 10.0 years; 61% male; mean follow-up time = 3.0 ± 0.8 years). Within the all-suture anchor group (n = 280), male sex ( Conclusion: Following arthroscopic double-row suture-bridge RCR, longer follow-up time was associated with better patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in both anchor type groups. However, smaller tear size was associated with better PROs only within the solid anchor group, whereas male sex was associated with better PROs only within the all-suture anchor group.
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.