7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Superior capsule reconstruction, partial cuff repair, graft interposition, arthroscopic debridement or balloon spacers for large and massive irreparable rotator cuff tears: a systematic review and meta-analysis

      review-article

      Read this article at

          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Multiple non-arthroplasty surgical techniques are described for the management of large and massive irreparable rotator cuff tears. There is currently no consensus on the best management strategy. Our aim was to compare clinical outcomes following arthroscopic debridement, arthroscopic partial cuff repair, superior capsule reconstruction, balloon spacers or graft interposition for the management of large and massive irreparable rotator cuff tears.

          Methods

          A comprehensive search was performed of the following databases: Medline, Embase, CINAHL and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Data were extracted from relevant studies published since January 2000 according to the pre-specified inclusion criteria. The primary outcome was the post-operative improvement in shoulder scores. Meta-analysis of the primary outcome was performed. Secondary outcomes included retear rates and complications.

          Results

          Eighty-two studies were included reporting the outcomes of 2790 shoulders. Fifty-one studies were included in the meta-analysis of the primary outcome. The definition of an irreparable tear varied. All procedures resulted in improved shoulder scores at early follow-up. Shoulder scores declined after 2 years following balloon spacers, arthroscopic debridement and partial cuff repair. High retear rates were seen with partial cuff repairs (45%), graft interposition (21%) and superior capsule reconstruction (21%).

          Conclusions

          Large initial improvements in shoulder scores were demonstrated for all techniques despite high retear rates for reconstructive procedures. Shoulder scores may decline at mid- to long-term follow-up.

          Related collections

          Most cited references103

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found
          Is Open Access

          The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration.

          Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are essential to summarize evidence relating to efficacy and safety of health care interventions accurately and reliably. The clarity and transparency of these reports, however, is not optimal. Poor reporting of systematic reviews diminishes their value to clinicians, policy makers, and other users. Since the development of the QUOROM (QUality Of Reporting Of Meta-analysis) Statement--a reporting guideline published in 1999--there have been several conceptual, methodological, and practical advances regarding the conduct and reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Also, reviews of published systematic reviews have found that key information about these studies is often poorly reported. Realizing these issues, an international group that included experienced authors and methodologists developed PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) as an evolution of the original QUOROM guideline for systematic reviews and meta-analyses of evaluations of health care interventions. The PRISMA Statement consists of a 27-item checklist and a four-phase flow diagram. The checklist includes items deemed essential for transparent reporting of a systematic review. In this Explanation and Elaboration document, we explain the meaning and rationale for each checklist item. For each item, we include an example of good reporting and, where possible, references to relevant empirical studies and methodological literature. The PRISMA Statement, this document, and the associated Web site (http://www.prisma-statement.org/) should be helpful resources to improve reporting of systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Methodological index for non-randomized studies (minors): development and validation of a new instrument.

            Because of specific methodological difficulties in conducting randomized trials, surgical research remains dependent predominantly on observational or non-randomized studies. Few validated instruments are available to determine the methodological quality of such studies either from the reader's perspective or for the purpose of meta-analysis. The aim of the present study was to develop and validate such an instrument. After an initial conceptualization phase of a methodological index for non-randomized studies (MINORS), a list of 12 potential items was sent to 100 experts from different surgical specialties for evaluation and was also assessed by 10 clinical methodologists. Subsequent testing involved the assessment of inter-reviewer agreement, test-retest reliability at 2 months, internal consistency reliability and external validity. The final version of MINORS contained 12 items, the first eight being specifically for non-comparative studies. Reliability was established on the basis of good inter-reviewer agreement, high test-retest reliability by the kappa-coefficient and good internal consistency by a high Cronbach's alpha-coefficient. External validity was established in terms of the ability of MINORS to identify excellent trials. MINORS is a valid instrument designed to assess the methodological quality of non-randomized surgical studies, whether comparative or non-comparative. The next step will be to determine its external validity when used in a large number of studies and to compare it with other existing instruments.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Clinical results of arthroscopic superior capsule reconstruction for irreparable rotator cuff tears.

              The objective of this study was to investigate the clinical outcome and radiographic findings after arthroscopic superior capsule reconstruction (ASCR) for symptomatic irreparable rotator cuff tears.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                a.davies20@imperial.ac.uk
                Journal
                J Orthop Surg Res
                J Orthop Surg Res
                Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
                BioMed Central (London )
                1749-799X
                19 December 2022
                19 December 2022
                2022
                : 17
                : 552
                Affiliations
                [1 ]GRID grid.7445.2, ISNI 0000 0001 2113 8111, Cutrale Perioperative and Aging Group, Department of Bioengineering, , Imperial College London, ; 86 Wood Lane, London, W120BZ UK
                [2 ]GRID grid.417895.6, ISNI 0000 0001 0693 2181, Department of Orthopaedics, , Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, ; London, UK
                [3 ]GRID grid.419297.0, ISNI 0000 0000 8487 8355, Department of Orthopaedics, , Royal Berkshire NHS Foundation Trust, ; Reading, UK
                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2079-9919
                Article
                3411
                10.1186/s13018-022-03411-y
                9764484
                36536436
                b918290f-0f4c-4ecf-8804-64f8576d7e0a
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

                History
                : 11 November 2021
                : 16 November 2022
                Categories
                Systematic Review
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2022

                Surgery
                rotator cuff,rotator cuff tears,injuries, tendon,shoulder
                Surgery
                rotator cuff, rotator cuff tears, injuries, tendon, shoulder

                Comments

                Comment on this article