Skip to main content

Table 3 Retear rate

From: Conservative versus accelerated rehabilitation after rotator cuff repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Authors
(Year, level of evidence)
No of patients in the accelerated group (AG) and conservative group (CG)a No of retear (%)
Arndt et al. [61] (2012, II) AG (49) 11 (23.3 %)
CG (43) 7 (15.4 %)
Cuff et al. [70] (2012, I) AG (33) 5 (15 %)
CG (35) 3 (8 %)
De Roo et al. [110] (2015, I) AG (79) 0 (0 %)
CG (51) 2 (4 %)
Düzgün et al. [29] (2014, II) AG (19) 0 (0 %)
CG (21) 0 (0 %)
Keener et al. [63] (2014, I) AG (61) 6 (10 %)
CG (53) 3 (6 %)
Kim et al. [64] (2012, I) AG (56) 7 (12 %)
CG (49) 9 (18 %)
Koh et al. [77] (2014, I) AG (40) 5 (12.5 %)
CG (48) 4 (8.3 %)
Lee et al. [67] (2012, II) AG (30) 7 (23 %)
CG (34) 3 (8.8 %)
Mazzocca et al. [68] (2017, II) AG (31) 11 (34 %)
CG (27) 9 (31 %)
Sheps et al. [79] (2019, I) AG (103) 5 (4.9 %)
CG (103) 4 (3.9 %)
  1. AG Accelerated Group, CG Conservative Group
  2. aData are reported as number unless otherwise indicated