Does the Presence of Chondral Lesions Negatively Affect Patient-Determined Outcomes After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There are limited data available to guide patients to their prognosis when glenohumeral chondral lesions are found during arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Hypothesis: The primary hypothesis was that patients with glenohumeral chondral lesions will have inferior outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair compared with patients without chondral lesions. The secondary hypothesis was that patients with concomitant chondral lesions will have more severe preoperative symptoms compared with those without chondral lesions. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair between 2008 and 2012. We examined the effects of chondral lesions on patient-determined outcomes, which included the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and the Shoulder Activity Level (SAL). Shoulders without chondral lesions were compared with shoulders with chondral lesions to determine whether differences in severity of preoperative symptoms as well as postoperative improvements were statistically significant. Results: A total of 281 shoulders were included from 273 patients, with a mean follow-up of 3.7 years. In total, 90 shoulders (32%) had concomitant chondral lesions in the glenohumeral joint. The presence and degree of chondral damage were not associated with the severity of preoperative symptoms or the amount of improvement after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, as determined by patient outcome scores. Shoulders with bipolar chondral lesions had less postoperative improvement in their outcome scores compared with shoulders with unipolar lesions, with significant differences found in the SST ( P = .0005), the SANE ( P = .005), and the SAL ( P = .04). Regardless of this, the majority of shoulders with bipolar chondral lesions (80%-92%) had postoperative improvements that superseded the minimal clinically important difference of the ASES, WORC, and SANE. Conclusion: At a mean 3.7-year follow-up, the presence of chondral damage did not appear to negatively affect the improvement in patient-determined outcomes after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. However, improvement in outcomes was negatively affected by the presence of bipolar chondral lesions.
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 | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".