Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34494901›Full record

Trial reportThe American journal of sports medicine2021

Bridging Allograft Reconstruction Is Superior to Maximal Repair for the Treatment of Chronic, Massive Rotator Cuff Tears: Results of a Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial.

Ivan Wong, Sara Sparavalo, John-Paul King, Catherine M Coady

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in The American journal of sports medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01987973 (Arthroscopic Repair of Chronic Two-tendon Rotator Cuff Tears by Human Dermal Allograft), which is not on this map. Cited by 15 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT01987973 nacompletednot on this map

Arthroscopic Repair of Chronic Two-tendon Rotator Cuff Tears by Human Dermal Allograft

TypeinterventionalSponsorIvan WongRan2015 to 2021Enrolled29ConditionsRotator Cuff Syndrome, Rotator Cuff Injury, Disorder of Rotator Cuff, Full Thickness Rotator Cuff TearArmsPartial Rotator Cuff Repair, Partial Rotator Cuff Repair with Allograft Augmentation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

15 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Interpretation of the 2025 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) on Management of Rotator Cuff Injuries Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline].Zhongguo xiu fu chong jian wai ke za zhi = Zhongguo xiufu chongjian waike zazhi = Chinese journal of reparative and reconstructive surgery · 2026
    Article
  5. Rotator cuff repair and biologic augmentation-what do we know?JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ivan WongDalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Sara SparavaloDalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
John-Paul KingDalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.
Catherine M CoadyDalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite advances in surgical techniques, the use of maximal repair to treat large or massive rotator cuff tears results in a high retear rate postoperatively. Currently, no randomized controlled trials have compared the outcomes of maximal repair with interposition dermal allograft bridging reconstruction. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesized that large or massive rotator cuff tendon tears reconstructed using bridging dermal allograft would have better clinical outcomes 2 years postoperatively, as measured using the Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) index, than would those receiving the current gold standard treatment of debridement and maximal repair alone. We also expected that patients treated via bridging reconstruction using dermal allograft would have fewer postoperative failures as assessed using postoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans. STUDY

designRandomized controlled trial; Level of evidence 1.

methodsA sample size of 30 patients (determined using a priori sample size calculation) with massive, retracted rotator cuff tears were randomly allocated to 1 of 2 groups: maximal repair or bridging reconstruction using dermal allograft. All patients completed questionnaires (WORC and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand [DASH]) preoperatively and postoperatively at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, and 2 years. The primary outcome of this study was the WORC index at 2 years. Secondary outcomes included healing rate, progression of rotator cuff arthropathy, and postoperative acromiohumeral distance in both groups.

resultsPatients treated via bridging reconstruction using dermal allograft had better postoperative WORC and DASH scores (23.93 ± 24.55 and 15.77 ± 19.27, respectively) compared with patients who received maximal repair alone (53.36 ± 31.93 and 34.32 ± 23.31, respectively). We also noted increased progression to rotator cuff arthropathy in the maximal repair group with an increased retear rate when compared with the reconstruction group (87% and 21%, respectively;

conclusionRotator cuff bridging reconstruction using a dermal allograft demonstrated improved patient-reported outcomes as measured using the WORC index 2 years postoperatively. This technique also showed favorable structural healing rates and decreased progression to arthropathy compared with maximal repair.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01987973).

Indexed as

Rotator CuffRotator Cuff InjuriesAllograftsHumansProspective StudiesTendonsbridging reconstructiondermal allograftinterposition graftmassive rotator cuff tearmaximal repairpatient-reported outcome

Identifiers

PMID34494901
PMCPMC8485417

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.