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 Healing Rates of Rotator Cuff Repair With & Without Bone Marrow Stimulation - Meta analysis

Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Share
Reprints
Cite This
About
+ Favorites
Ace Report Cover
November 2024

Similar Healing Rates of Rotator Cuff Repair With & Without Bone Marrow Stimulation - Meta analysis

Vol: 306| Issue: 11| Number:6| ISSN#: 2564-2537
Study Type:Therapy
OE Level Evidence:1
Journal Level of Evidence:1

Similar Healing Rates of Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair With and Without Bone Marrow Stimulation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Am J Sports Med . 2024 Jun;52(7):1855-1864.

Contributing Authors:
N Thamrongskulsiri D Limskul T Itthipanichpong T Tanpowpong S Kuptniratsaikul

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

Synopsis

5 studies including 499 patients with rotator cuff tears were included in this systematic review and meta-analysis comparing rotator cuff repair with vs. without bone marrow stimulation (BMS). Pooled outcomes of interest included healing rate, constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, forward flexion, and external rotation. There was no significant difference in any of the...

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