Arthroscopic revision rotator cuff repair of large and massive retears using an interpositional bridging dermal allograft
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to report the clinical outcomes and retear rate following arthroscopic interpositional bridging dermal allograft for revision rotator cuff repair of large and massive retears.MethodsTwenty-three patients were retrospectively reviewed at a minimum follow-up of 24 (mean, 47; range, 24-77) months after revision rotator cuff repair using an interpositional bridging dermal allograft. There were 17 males and 6 females with a mean age of 56 (range, 40-74) years. Clinical outcomes were assessed using range of motion, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index. Graft integrity was assessed at 12-months using magnetic resonance imaging.ResultsThe interval between the primary rotator cuff repair and interpositional bridging graft was a mean of 82 (range, 7-192) months. Forward flexion improved from a mean of 145° (range, 60-180°) preoperatively to 152° (range, 135-170°) postoperatively (P = .3561). There was a decrease in external rotation from a mean of 50° (range, 20-80°) preoperatively to 37° (range, 0-45°) postoperatively (P = .0021). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved (P = .0196) from a mean of 50 (range, 10-88) to 69 (range, 22-97), and the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index improved (P = .0008) from a mean of 34 (range, 3-90) to 57 (range, 14-93). The graft was intact in 39% of patients. No patients underwent further surgery.ConclusionInterpositional bridging grafting for revision rotator cuff repair of large and massive retears leads to a significant improvement in functional outcome but is associated with a high retear rate. The purpose of this study was to report the clinical outcomes and retear rate following arthroscopic interpositional bridging dermal allograft for revision rotator cuff repair of large and massive retears. Twenty-three patients were retrospectively reviewed at a minimum follow-up of 24 (mean, 47; range, 24-77) months after revision rotator cuff repair using an interpositional bridging dermal allograft. There were 17 males and 6 females with a mean age of 56 (range, 40-74) years. Clinical outcomes were assessed using range of motion, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index. Graft integrity was assessed at 12-months using magnetic resonance imaging. The interval between the primary rotator cuff repair and interpositional bridging graft was a mean of 82 (range, 7-192) months. Forward flexion improved from a mean of 145° (range, 60-180°) preoperatively to 152° (range, 135-170°) postoperatively (P = .3561). There was a decrease in external rotation from a mean of 50° (range, 20-80°) preoperatively to 37° (range, 0-45°) postoperatively (P = .0021). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved (P = .0196) from a mean of 50 (range, 10-88) to 69 (range, 22-97), and the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index improved (P = .0008) from a mean of 34 (range, 3-90) to 57 (range, 14-93). The graft was intact in 39% of patients. No patients underwent further surgery. Interpositional bridging grafting for revision rotator cuff repair of large and massive retears leads to a significant improvement in functional outcome but is associated with a high retear rate.
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 distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 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 tête enseignante, 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 ».