Welche Faktoren sind mit einer Reruptur nach superiorer Kapselrekonstruktion der Schulter mit autologer langer Bizepssehne assoziiert? – Ein systematischer Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on a systematic review, the present work analyses factors associated with the rerupture rate or non-healing after superior capsular reconstruction with autologous long biceps tendon in the reconstruction of the rotator cuff of the shoulder.A systematic review of the U.S. National Library of Medicine/National Institutes of Health (PubMed) database and the Cochrane Library was conducted in September 2021 using the PRISMA checklist. Articles were identified and analysed that contained data on the rerupture rate after superior capsular reconstruction with autologous long biceps tendon in reconstruction of the rotator cuff of the shoulder. The aim was to identify factors associated with rerupture or non-healing. The risk of bias was determined using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale.Primarily 86 hits could be generated. Seven articles from 2020 and 2021 met the inclusion criteria and were further analysed in terms of content. The evidence level was III to IV. Follow-up was between 12 (minimum) and 24 to 48 months. The risk of bias was not low. Factors that may be associated with rerupture or non-healing are diabetes mellitus and high-grade fatty degeneration of the subscapularis, infraspinatus, or teres minor as preoperative factors. Age, percent footprint coverage, tear size, symptom duration, number of bundles, acromioplasty performed, and tear configuration were not significant factors. Gender, degree of fatty degeneration of the supraspinatus and lesions of the subscapularis tendon were rated differently.According to the literature, but still currently with short-term observation periods, superior capsular reconstruction with an autologous long biceps tendon is another treatment option in the case of massive tears and elderly patients, if there is no high-grade fatty degeneration of the subscapularis, infraspinatus or teres minor. Diabetes mellitus has an unfavorable prognosis. Additional acromioplasty has so far not been associated with better outcomes.
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 | 0.011 | 0.054 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.011 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".