Arthroscopic-Assisted Latissimus Dorsi Tendon Transfer for Massive Rotator Cuff Tears: A Systematic Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic-assisted latissimus dorsi tendon transfer (LDTT) has shown promising results with good outcomes in patients with massive rotator cuff tears (MRCTs), as reported by individual studies. However, to the best of the authors' knowledge, no systematic review has been performed to assess the collective outcomes of these individual studies. PURPOSE/HYPOTHESIS: The primary purpose of this study was to assess patient outcomes after arthroscopic-assisted LDTT for the management of MRCTs. The secondary objectives were to report on the management of MRCTs, including diagnostic investigations, surgical decision making, and arthroscopic techniques, as well as to evaluate the quality of evidence of the existing literature. It was hypothesized that nearly all patients were satisfied with arthroscopic-assisted LDTT and that they experienced improvements in pain symptoms, function, and strength after the procedure, with an overall complication rate of less than 10%. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 4. METHODS: The databases MEDLINE, Embase, and PubMed were searched from database inception (1946) until August 18, 2017, with titles, abstracts, and full-text articles screened independently by 2 reviewers. Inclusion criteria were English-language studies investigating arthroscopic-assisted LDTT for the management of MRCTs on patients of all ages. Conference papers, book chapters, review articles, and technical reports were excluded. The quality of the included studies was categorized by level of evidence and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) checklist. RESULTS: In total, 8 studies (7 case series [median MINORS score, 7 of 16] and 1 prospective comparative study [median MINORS score, 14 of 24]) were identified; the studies included 258 patients (258 shoulders) with MRCTs treated with LDTT using arthroscopic-assisted techniques. The decision to pursue surgery was based on both clinical findings and investigations in 5 studies, investigations only in 2 studies, and clinical findings only in 1 study. Overall, 88% of patients were satisfied with the results of surgery and experienced significant improvement in their symptoms, including shoulder pain, strength, range of motion, and overall function, over a mean follow-up period of 34.3 months. Overall, there was a low rate of complications (7%) associated with the procedure. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic-assisted LDTT for MRCTs provides patients with marked improvement in shoulder pain, strength, and function, and the procedure is associated with a low risk of complication. Further high-quality comparative studies are warranted to validate these findings in comparison with other operative techniques.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,008 | 0,034 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,009 | 0,007 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,010 | 0,011 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».