ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2026
Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair with Versus Without Acromioplasty: A Comparative Clinical Outcome Study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 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
Introduction: Arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) is a widely accepted treatment for symptomatic rotator cuff tears. Acromioplasty is frequently performed to reduce subacromial impingement; however, its routine use remains controversial. The purpose of this study was to compare the functional and clinical outcomes of ARCR performed with and without acromioplasty. Materials and Methods: This is a prospective comparative study that involved 50 participants who had tears in their rotator cuff muscles. These were grouped into two equal numbers: Group A, consisting of ARCR with acromioplasty (n = 25), and Group B, consisting of ARCR without acromioplasty (n = 25). The participants were aged between 30 and 70 years and had tears in their rotator cuff muscles confirmed by a magnetic resonance imaging scan and had failed conservative management. Patients were followed for 6 months postoperatively. The results were evaluated using Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score for pain, Constant-Murley Score, University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder Score, and range of motion (ROM). Results: The majority of patients were aged 41-60 years (60%), with male predominance (66%). Pre-operative VAS scores were comparable (7.8 ± 0.9 vs. 7.6 ± 1.0; P = 0.42). At 6 months, significant pain reduction was observed in both groups (VAS: 2.1 ± 0.8 vs. 2.3 ± 0.9; P = 0.38). Functional outcomes improved substantially, with Constant scores increasing to 78.6 ± 6.3 in Group A and 76.9 ± 6.8 in Group B (P = 0.29), and UCLA scores of 30.2 ± 3.5 and 29.5 ± 3.8, respectively (P = 0.47). ROM improved in both groups without significant differences. Complication rates were similar, with re-tear observed in 8% of cases in each group. Conclusion: Both techniques resulted in significant improvement in pain and function. Routine acromioplasty did not provide additional clinical benefit and should be considered selectively.
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.