MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1967721817 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2014.08.020

Comparison of Functional Gains After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair in Patients Over 70 Years of Age Versus Patients Under 50 Years of Age: A Prospective Multicenter Study

2014· article· en· W1967721817 on OpenAlexaff
Constantina Moraiti, Pablo Valle, Ali Maqdés, O. Boughebri, Chourky Dib, Giannis Giakas, Jean Kany, Kamil Elkholti, Jérôme Garret, Denis Katz, Franck Marie Leclère, Philippe Valenti

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre de Santé et de Services Sociaux de la Montagne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRotator cuffSurgeryMagnetic resonance imagingProspective cohort studyTearsArthroscopyGroup BIncidence (geometry)Rotator cuff injuryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To assess rotator cuff rupture characteristics and evaluate healing and the functional outcome after arthroscopic repair in patients older than 70 years versus patients younger than 50 years. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, prospective, comparative study of 40 patients younger than 50 years (group A) and 40 patients older than 70 years (group B) treated with arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Patients older than 70 years were operated on only if symptoms persisted after 6 months of conservative treatment, whereas patients younger than 50 years were operated on regardless of any persistent symptoms. Imaging consisted of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging and postoperative ultrasound. Preoperative and postoperative function was evaluated with Constant and modified Constant scores. Patient satisfaction was also assessed. The evaluations were performed at least 1 year postoperatively. RESULTS: No patient was lost to follow-up. The incidence of both supraspinatus and infraspinatus tears was greater in group B. Greater retraction in the frontal plane and greater fatty infiltration were observed in group B. The Constant score was significantly improved in both groups (51 ± 12.32 preoperatively v 77.18 ± 11.02 postoperatively in group A and 48.8 ± 10.97 preoperatively v 74.6 ± 12.02 postoperatively in group B, P < .05). The improvement was similar in both groups. The modified Constant score was also significantly improved in both groups (57.48 ± 18.23 preoperatively v 81.35 ± 19.75 postoperatively in group A and 63.09 ± 14.96 preoperatively v 95.62 ± 17.61 postoperatively in group B, P < .05). The improvement was greater for group B (P < .05). Partial rerupture of the rotator cuff occurred in 2 cases in group A and 5 cases in group B. Complete rerupture was observed in 2 patients in group B. In group A, 29 patients (72.5%) were very satisfied, 8 (20%) were satisfied, and 3 (7.5%) were less satisfied. In group B, 33 patients (82.5%) were very satisfied, 6 (15%) were satisfied, and only 1 (2.5%) was less satisfied. CONCLUSIONS: Rotator cuff tears are characterized by greater retraction in the frontal plane and greater fatty infiltration in patients older than 70 years compared with patients younger than 50 years. After arthroscopic repair, healing is greater for patients younger than 50 years. Functional gain is at least equal between the 2 groups. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.290 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgerySame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207