Paper 49: Bridging Reconstruction for Large-to-Massive Rotator Cuff Tears Has a Low Rate of Cuff Arthropathy Progression at A Minimum Five-Year Follow-Up
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objectives: Rotator cuff tears cause pain, muscle weakness, and difficulty with overhead activity. While smaller tears are easier to repair, large-to-massive cuff tears (>3 cm in size) are considered irreparable. For patients with large-to-massive cuff tears, surgical options include maximal repair, superior capsular reconstruction, bridging reconstruction, tendon transfers and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). Bridging reconstruction was developed to improve outcomes and to avoid the morbidity associated with other technique. Bridging reconstruction, also known as graft interposition, has been shown to have superior outcomes as compared to maximal repair with better patient-reported outcomes at two-years post-operatively as recently demonstrated in a randomized controlled trial. These positive results are maintained at five years, however the midterm changes in progression of rotator cuff arthropathy and conversion to rTSA have not been assessed. The purpose is to assess the progression of rotator cuff arthropathy in bridging reconstruction patients at a five-year follow-up. Methods: Forty-four patients who underwent bridging reconstruction between 2012 and 2017 for large-to-massive rotator cuff tears were included. All patients had a minimum five-year follow-up. Data collected included demographics, pre- and post-operative Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) Index, conversion to rTSA, and X-ray readings (including acromiohumeral distance (as measured on anterior-posterior pre/post-operative radiographs) and Hamada grades for rotator cuff arthropathy). Furthermore, a sub-group analysis was performed on post-operative MRIs for graft status. Results: The mean age at surgery was 59.9± 10.8 years with a mean follow-up of 7.3±1.4 years. The population was mostly male (70.5%). Pre-operatively, seven patients had mild rotator cuff arthropathy with Hamada grade 2-3, and one patient had Hamada grade 4B. The rest of the patients had Hamada grade one preoperatively. At a minimum five-year postoperative follow-up, only one patient had a rTSA, resulting in a survivorship rate of 98%. Two patients (4.6%) had post-operative Hamada grade 4. One patient had progression of cuff arthropathy from pre-operative Hamada 3 to post-operative Hamada 4A. The other patient maintained Hamada grade 4B from pre-operative to post-operative. Patients with progression of cuff arthropathy (i.e. higher post-operative Hamada grade) appear to have a higher possibility of complete post-operative graft tears. [SS1] [JM2] There were no correlations between progression of cuff arthropathy and WORC score at five years. Conclusions: At a minimum 5-year with a mean follow-up of 7.3 years, bridging reconstruction showed 98% survivorship rate with a low rate of conversion to rTSA and a low progression of cuff arthropathy with only 4.6% of patients having advanced RCA with Hamada grade 4.
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 | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| 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) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
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 ».