SynthesisPloS one2026
Application of musculoskeletal ultrasound in postoperative rehabilitation assessment and monitoring after rotator cuff repair: A systematic review.
Synthesis in PloS one, 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe development of rehabilitation protocols after rotator cuff repair has long lacked objective benchmarks. Traditional time‑based regimens are limited by considerable inter‑individual variability and an increased risk of re‑tear. Musculoskeletal ultrasound allows dynamic assessment of tendon healing and muscle morphology, yet evidence for directly linking its use to rehabilitation decisions remains scarce.
objectiveTo systematically synthesize the evidence on the use of musculoskeletal ultrasound monitoring to inform rehabilitation decision‑making after rotator cuff repair.
methodsFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‑Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched PubMed, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and Wanfang Data from January 2020 to April 2026. Original studies were included if they involved patients who had undergone rotator cuff repair, used musculoskeletal ultrasound (including gray‑scale ultrasound, elastography, etc.) to evaluate the rotator cuff tendons or shoulder muscles, and reported at least one parameter related to rehabilitation decision-making or functional outcomes.
resultsEleven studies were included. Shear wave velocity (SWV), cross‑sectional area (CSA), and echo intensity (EI) were the most frequently reported ultrasound parameters. Available evidence indicated that SWV increased progressively after surgery, with an overall increase of approximately 22% to 25% from one week to 12 months postoperatively. This dynamic trajectory may serve as a reference baseline for judging rehabilitation progress. An abnormally elevated SWV in the early postoperative period was associated with an increased risk of re‑tear, suggesting that a more conservative rehabilitation strategy should be adopted. Tendon stiffness measured at 12 weeks after surgery independently predicted long‑term return to sport. Regarding muscle parameters, changes in CSA and EI were positively correlated with shoulder function scores, and the combination of these two parameters effectively identified patients with rehabilitation bottlenecks.
conclusionMusculoskeletal ultrasound parameters are associated with the initiation of active movement, adjustment of exercise load, prediction of return‑to‑sport prognosis, and identification of retear risk. Among these, SWV shows particular promise as an objective monitoring parameter for supporting rehabilitation assessment after rotator cuff repair. Future randomized controlled trials are needed to determine whether ultrasound-informed assessment can improve rehabilitation outcomes compared with traditional time-based regimens, and to establish standardized measurement protocols and clinically applicable reference values. Key findings of this review are summarized in S1 File.
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.