Patient‐Reported Outcomes After Use of a Bioabsorbable Collagen Implant to Treat Partial and Full‐Thickness Rotator Cuff Tears
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: To collect outcomes data on patients treated with a bioinductive collagen implant designed to induce rotator cuff healing in partial- and full-thickness cuff tears and to assess the safety and efficacy of the device. METHODS: Fifteen surgeons in 15 centers in the United States enrolled patients between April 2016 and August 2017 and collected standardized outcomes data. Patients 21 years of age and older, able to read and speak English, and with partial- or full-thickness tears of the rotator cuff documented by magnetic resonance imaging were included in the study. Patients were assessed preoperatively with visual analogue scale (VAS), single-assessment numeric evaluation (SANE), Veterans RAND 12-Item (VR-12), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) outcomes measures. Postoperative assessment was made at 2, 6, and 12 weeks, 6 months, and 1 year. Patients underwent a standardized operative procedure with the implant. Patient demographics, comorbidities, tear types, and concomitant operative procedures were recorded. RESULTS: Patients in both groups experienced statistically significant improvement in VAS, SANE, VR-12 PCS, ASES, and WORC scores (mean values 1.1, P < .001; 86.0, P < .001; 49.7, P < .001; 85.6, P < .001; and 84.4, P < .001 for partial tears and 1.2, P < .001; 80.7, P < .001; 45.7, P < .001; 83.8, P < .0001; and 80.1, P < .001 for full-thickness tears, respectively). For the partial tear group, average times for return to driving, work, and nonoverhead athletic activity were 14.6, 37.3, and 65.6 days, and for the full-thickness group, 24.5, 50.7, and 119.2 days, respectively. In the partial-thickness group, 84% and 83% of patients reported improvement in their VAS pain and ASES scores, respectively, that met or exceeded each measure's minimal clinically important difference. In the full-thickness group, 72% and 77% of the patients met or exceeded the minimal clinically important differences for VAS pain and ASES, respectively. CONCLUSION: Outcomes after repair of partial- and full-thickness rotator cuff tears using a bioinductive implant show safety and efficacy at 1-year follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective case series, level IV evidence.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".