Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 176
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once
Background: Arthroscopic repair of large to massive rotator cuff tears commonly retear. To improve healing rates, a number of different approaches have been utilized, including the use of grafts, which may enhance the biomechanical and biologic aspects of the repair construct. However, the outcomes after the use of grafts are diverse.
Purpose: To systematically review the literature for large to massive rotator cuff tears to determine whether the use of grafts generally provides superior tendon healing and clinical outcomes to the repairs without grafts.
Study Design: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3.
Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed. Clinical studies comparing the repairs with (graft group) and without grafts (control group) were included and analyzed. The primary outcome was tendon healing on either magnetic resonance imaging or ultrasound. The secondary outcome measures included visual analog scale for pain, University of California at Los Angles (UCLA) score, and forward elevation range. Differences between groups in all outcome measures were statistically analyzed.
Results: Six comparative studies (level of evidence 2 or 3) with 13 study groups were included. A total of 242 repairs in the graft group (mean age, 62.5 ± 4.6 years) and 185 repairs in the control group (mean age, 62.5 ± 5.0 years) were analyzed. The graft types utilized included autograft (fascia lata) in 1 study, allograft (human dermis) in 2 studies, xenograft (bovine pericardium, porcine small intestine submucosa) in 2 studies, synthetic graft (polypropylene) in 1 study, and a combination of autograft (the long head of biceps) and synthetic graft (polypropylene) in 1 study. The overall mean follow-up time was 28.4 ± 9.0 months. When 1 or 2 studies/study groups were excluded due to practical or statistical reasons, the graft group demonstrated significantly improved healing (odds ratio, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.58-3.90; < .0001) and all clinical outcome measures at final follow-up ( ≤ .02).
Conclusion: The use of grafts generally provides superior tendon healing and clinical outcomes compared to repairs without grafts, except for some specific graft types (eg, porcine small intestine submucosa, bovine pericardium). Further investigations are required to determine the benefits of the use of grafts.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5298461 | PMC |
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2325967116674191 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!