↓ Skip to main content

The results of using a tendon autograft as a new rotator cable for patients with a massive rotator cuff tear: a technical note and comparative outcome analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, February 2020
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
51 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The results of using a tendon autograft as a new rotator cable for patients with a massive rotator cuff tear: a technical note and comparative outcome analysis
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, February 2020
DOI 10.1186/s13018-020-1568-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Egbert J. D. Veen, Ronald L. Diercks, Ellie B. M. Landman, Cornelis T. Koorevaar

Abstract

Several surgical reconstructive options are available to treat massive rotator cuff tears (MRCTs). The rotator cable has an important function and we evaluated the clinical result after arthroscopic reconstruction of the rotator cable with an autograft tendon. A prospective pilot study was performed with inclusion of four patients, average age of 64 years, with an irreparable MRCT. The patients underwent an arthroscopic reconstruction of the rotator cable with the use of the long head of biceps tendon autograft, except for one which was reconstructed with a hamstring tendon. Pre- and postsurgically, the Constant-Murley Score (CMS), Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), visual analog scale (VAS) scores, and an MRI was performed. Clinical results of the study group were compared with clinical results of comparable cohort of patients with a MRCT, treated non-operatively with physiotherapy. The CMS score increased after surgery in three of the four patients. The improvement of CMS score was comparable to the improvement of the CMS score encountered in a comparable cohort. The MRI at 12 months follow-up showed that the reconstructed rotator cable was disintegrated in all patients and the rotator cuff was detached and retracted. In our pilot study, arthroscopic reconstruction of the rotator cable using a tendon autograft failed over time and showed no clinical benefit in comparison to the non-operative treatment with physiotherapy. The regional Medical Ethical Committee (Zwolle) gave approval at 14th of October 2016 and assigned no. 16.06100.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 51 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 51 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 20%
Student > Master 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Other 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 25 49%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 8 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 7 14%
Engineering 7 14%
Psychology 1 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 26 51%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 December 2020.
All research outputs
#18,716,467
of 23,198,445 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#977
of 1,419 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#334,357
of 456,505 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research
#34
of 42 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,198,445 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,419 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 456,505 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 42 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.