Arthroscopic knotless‐anchor rotator cuff repair: a clinical and radiological evaluation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The goal of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiological results of the arthroscopic knotless-anchor Speed-Bridge technique, in particular the pattern and the rate of retears. The results were compared with a modified Suture-Bridge knot-tying technique (mDR). The hypothesis is that arthroscopic knotless-anchor Speed-Bridge rotator cuff repair is a sufficient technique to address supraspinatus tears and differs in pattern of retears when compared to mDR. METHODS: This study includes twenty-two consecutive patients (8f/14m ø 63.3 ± 7.2 years) undergoing knotless-anchor Speed-Bridge repair. The subjective shoulder value (SSV), Constant score (CS) and Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) Score were used for clinical follow-up. MRI scans were conducted within 3 weeks post-operatively, after 1 and after 2 years for analysis of (a) tendon integrity (according to Sugaya), (b) muscle atrophy according to Thomazeau and (c) fatty infiltration. Results were compared with 20 patients operated in mDR (ø 61.2 ± 7.5 years). RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 24.4 ± 4.7 months. The average SSV was 88.7 ± 14.9 %, the CS was 78.2 ± 13.2 points (contralateral side 78.5 ± 16.6) and the WORC Score averaged 87.1 ± 18.2 %. On magnetic resonance imaging, the integrity failure rate was 22.7 % (n = 5). The pattern of retear was a medial cuff failure in 2/5 cases (mDR 4/5, n.s.). Muscular atrophy or fatty degeneration did not increase between surgery and follow-up (n.s.). Compared with mDR (25 %) reconstruction, no significant differences were obtained regarding integrity failure rate and muscular atrophy (n.s.). CONCLUSION: The modified knotless-anchor Speed-Bridge technique shows good to excellent clinical results as well as acceptable retear rates. This technique eliminates medial and lateral knot impingement. Concerning the potential reduction in the medial strangulation of the tendon, there is a need for further clinical research.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".