Short-term Outcomes of Arthroscopic Debridement and Selected Acromioplasty of Bursal- vs Articular-Sided Partial-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears of Less Than 50%
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: While it is believed that good results can be achieved by arthroscopic debridement of partial-thickness tears (PTTs) of <50% tendon thickness, few studies have directly compared the treatment of articular- versus bursal-sided PTTs of <50%. Purpose: To compare the postoperative outcomes of patients with articular- versus bursal-sided PTTs of <50% tendon thickness that were treated with arthroscopic debridement and selective acromioplasty (for type II or III acromions). Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: An analysis was performed with data from 76 consecutive patients diagnosed with a PTT <50% tendon width (Ellman grade II) who had undergone arthroscopic debridement and selective acromioplasty (for type II or III acromions). Outcome measures included the short version of the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and the relative Constant-Murley score, as well as strength of the affected shoulder. A statistical paired t test (preoperative vs 2 years postoperative) and an independent t test were utilized to compare outcomes between patients with bursal- and articular-sided tears. Results: Between 2001 and 2010, there were 40 (53%) articular- and 36 (47%) bursal-sided tears treated with debridement and selective acromioplasty. The mean patient age was 55 years (range, 36-77 years) for the bursal group and 56 years (range, 33-81 years) for the articular group. The mean follow-up was 24 months (range, 22-26 months). Both groups showed significant improvement in the short version of the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff index, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and relative Constant-Murley score 2 years after surgery ( P < .0001) as well as in strength ( P < .0001 for bursal tears, P = .006 for articular tears). There was no statistically significant difference between groups in any of the postoperative outcome measures at 2 years. Conclusion: The results of this study demonstrate that good outcomes can be achieved with arthroscopic debridement and selective acromioplasty among patients with articular- or bursal-sided PTT of <50% tendon thickness. No difference was observed between groups at 2-year follow-up.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".