ArticleJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2026
An observation of the relation between the cyst on magnetic resonance imaging at bare-area of humeral head and the adhesive capsulitis of the shoulder.
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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To investigate whether bare-area cysts of the humeral head, detected on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), are associated with adhesive capsulitis and to evaluate their diagnostic value compared with other imaging features. Methods: This retrospective study included 138 patients with adhesive capsulitis and 114 control subjects identified from hospital records (February 2021-May 2024). Only patients with primary idiopathic adhesive capsulitis were included in this study. Patients with secondary adhesive capsulitis related to trauma, surgery, rotator cuff tear, or other identifiable shoulder pathologies were excluded. The diagnosis of adhesive capsulitis was established based on clinical evaluation by experienced orthopedic specialists, including progressive shoulder pain and significant restriction of both active and passive range of motion. In particular, loss of external rotation at the side was considered a key diagnostic feature. Range of motion limitation was evaluated by comparison with the contralateral shoulder, and internal rotation was assessed using vertebral level measurements. MRI examinations were assessed for the presence, size, and signal characteristics of bare-area cysts. Two musculoskeletal radiologists independently reviewed the images. Interobserver agreement was analyzed using intraclass correlation coefficients for continuous variables and Cohen κ for categorical variables. Binary logistic regression identified predictors of adhesive capsulitis, reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Receiver operating characteristic analysis was used to evaluate diagnostic performance, including area under the curve, optimal cutoffs, sensitivity, and specificity. Continuous variables were expressed as mean ± standard deviation. Results: Bare area cysts were significantly more common and larger in the adhesive capsulitis group (mean size, 13.3 ± 15.1 mm) than in controls (1.8 ± 4.7 mm, Conclusion: Bare area cysts of the humeral head, particularly when enlarged or hyperintense, represent a useful MRI marker for adhesive capsulitis. Recognition of this feature may enhance diagnostic accuracy and facilitate differentiation from other shoulder disorders.
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.