To unlock this feature and to subscribe to our weekly evidence emails, please create a FREE orthoEvidence account.

SIGNUP

Already Have an Account?

Loading...
Visit our Evidence-Based Covid-19 Website and Stay Up to Date with the latest Research.
Ace Report Cover

Similar Clinical Outcome with Single and Double-Row Suture Bridge Fixation for Partial RC Tear

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
October 2020

Similar Clinical Outcome with Single and Double-Row Suture Bridge Fixation for Partial RC Tear

Vol: 9| Issue: 10| Number:12| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Arthroscopic repair of partial-thickness articular surface rotator cuff tears: single-row transtendon technique versus double-row suture bridge (transosseous equivalent) fixation: results from a prospective randomized study.

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2020 Aug;140(8):1065-1071

Contributing Authors:
M Zafra P Uceda F Muñoz-Luna RC Muñoz-López P Font

Did you know you're eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report? Click Here

Synopsis

Fifty patients who had scheduled for arthroscopic repair of a partial-thickness articular-sided rotator cuff tear of >50% thickness were randomized to receive a single-row (n=25) or double-row (n=25) suture bridge fixation. Outcomes of interest included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score (ASES), Constant Shoulder scores, pain on a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), and the incidence of re-tear. ...

CME Image

Did you know that you’re eligible to earn 0.5 CME credits for reading this report!

LEARN MORE

Join the Conversation

Please Login or Join to leave comments.

Learn about our AI Driven
High Impact Search Feature

High Impact Icon

Our AI driven High Impact metric calculates the impact an article will have by considering both the publishing journal and the content of the article itself. Built using the latest advances in natural language processing, OE High Impact predicts an article’s future number of citations better than impact factor alone.

Continue