SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2026
Surgical vs. non-surgical therapy for partial tears of the rotator cuff: a systematic review and meta-analysis of pooled studies with indirect comparison.
Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundRotator cuff disease (RCD) constitutes the most common cause of shoulder pain, with partial-thickness rotator cuff tears (PT-RCTs) representing a substantial subset that may progress over time. Although both surgical and non-surgical interventions are employed in clinical practice, a consensus regarding the optimal management of symptomatic PT-RCTs is lacking, and a comprehensive synthesis of available evidence has not yet been conducted.
methodsA systematic review was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines using MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov, and WHO ICTRP. Studies on arthroscopic surgical and/or non-surgical treatments for PT-RCTs in patients ≥ 18 years were included. Clinical outcomes (Constant Score (CS), ASES Score, VAS for pain) were extracted. Random-effects meta-analysis and descriptive statistics were used to analyze outcomes and study characteristics.
resultsOf the 9,894 trials screened, 33 trials with a total of 1,818 patients met the inclusion criteria. Comparing pooled weighted mean outcomes across studies, surgical cohorts demonstrated higher scores than non-surgical cohorts in both the CS (p = 0.0095) and the ASES (p = 0.0060). However, no specific surgical technique proved superior, with neither Reconstruction versus Debridement (CS, p = 0.19; ASES, p = 0.06) nor Tear Completion versus Transtendon Repair (CS, p = 0.13; ASES, p = 0.65) reaching statistical significance. Although surgical treatment was statistically superior to non-surgical approaches, the observed differences remained below the minimal clinically important differences (MCID), indicating limited clinical relevance.
conclusionPooled analyses showed higher Constant and ASES scores in surgical cohorts. However, the magnitude of this difference does not exceed MCID, indicating limited clinical relevance. No surgical technique demonstrated significant superiority. These findings highlight the need for individualized treatment decisions, considering the limited clinical benefit of surgery over non-surgical approaches. PROTOCOL REGISTRATION: The protocol was registered in PROSPERO with ID: CRD42023487714.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
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.