MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392256901 · doi:10.1016/j.asjsur.2024.02.094

A systematic review on sonoelastography for rotator-cuff post-repair assessment

2024· review· en· W4392256901 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ting-Yu Lin, Ke‐Vin Chang, Wei‐Ting Wu, Levent Özçakar

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Journal of Surgery · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicShoulder Injury and Treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science and Technology Council
KeywordsMedicineRotator cuffSupraspinatus muscleTearsTendonSurgeryRotator cuff injuryCochrane LibraryStructural integrity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Surgical repair of rotator cuff tears is performed routinely; however, the risks of re-tears and the associated consequences are significant. Sonoelastography, an imaging modality that evaluates the mechanical properties of tissues, can examine the dynamic transitions in rotator cuff stiffness following retear and investigate the relationship between these changes and the occurrences of retears. This systematic review aimed to summarize the role of perioperative sonoelastography in repaired rotator cuffs. A comprehensive search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted, covering studies published until June 19, 2023. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale was used for quality assessment. The key information extracted from each study included the injury/surgery type, follow-up duration, sonoelastography mode, and main sonoelastographic findings. Eleven eligible studies comprising 355 patients were included. All studies focused on supraspinatus muscles and tendons with previous arthroscopic repairs. During the postoperative 1st - 6th months, muscle stiffness increased in the supraspinatus and decreased in the ipsilateral deltoid. Failure to recover supraspinatus muscle elasticity might be indicative of potential tendon re-tear; however, it is imperative to first establish correlations with other imaging modalities. Conflicting findings have been observed regarding stiffening or softening of the supraspinatus tendon after surgical repair. The preoperative stiffness of the supraspinatus tendon did not correlate with postoperative tendon integrity or function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0070.007
Bibliometrics0.0120.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.396
Teacher spread0.331 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Journal of SurgerySame topicShoulder Injury and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207