MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4306318706 · doi:10.1016/j.jse.2022.09.011

The relationship between preoperative Goutallier stage and retear rates following posterosuperior rotator cuff repair: a systematic review

2022· review· en· W4306318706 on OpenAlexaff
Saho Tsuchiya, Aaron J. Bois, Graeme Matthewson, Shin Oiwa, Kristie D. More, Ian K.Y. Lo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRotator cuffTearsStage (stratigraphy)Magnetic resonance imagingSurgeryRadiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: An association between higher preoperative Goutallier stage and higher retear rates following primary rotator cuff repairs has been previously reported. However, there are few reviews which have described clear retear rates for each repaired tendon classified according to preoperative Goutallier stage. The purpose of this study was therefore to systematically review the literature on the relationship between preoperative Goutallier stage and retear rates and provide predictable retear rates following primary repair of posterosuperior rotator cuff tears. METHODS: A systematic literature review was performed in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and checklist utilizing PubMed, MEDLINE, and Cochrane Library. English-language studies of Level I through IV evidence examining the clinical results of primarily repaired posterosuperior rotator cuff tears as a function of Goutallier stage using magnetic resonance imaging were included. The primary outcome of interest was retear rates according to preoperative Goutallier stage. As a secondary outcome, rotator cuff tears were divided into 2 subgroups (Goutallier stage 0-2 and 3-4) and retear rates were assessed between the 2 subgroups. A random effects model with binomial within-study variance was used for both outcomes. RESULTS: Nine studies (687 shoulders) satisfied all inclusion criteria and reported sufficient data for statistical analysis. In the supraspinatus muscle group, rotator cuff muscles with preoperative Goutallier stages of 0, 1, and 2 had retear rates of 19.1%, 27.8%, and 33.5%, respectively, with no significant differences between each category. In contrast, when preoperative Goutallier stage of 3 and 4 existed, significant differences compared to Goutallier 0, 1, and 2 were observed with a retear rate of 74.1% and 78.5%, respectively. In the infraspinatus muscle group, the retear rates following rotator cuff repairs were 20.0%, 32.1%, and 35.1% in Goutallier 0, 1, and 2, respectively, with no significant differences between each category. In Goutallier 3 and 4, the rate was 76.6% and 100.0%, respectively, with significant differences compared to Goutallier 0, 1, and 2. CONCLUSION: The results of this study have clearly demonstrated that retear rates following surgical repair of the rotator cuff increased in proportion to the preoperative Goutallier stage in both the supraspinatus and infraspinatus muscles.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.331
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations46
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Shoulder and Elbow SurgerySame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207