English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Rotator cuff tears (RCT) are common pathologies which affect middle-aged and elderly population with a prevalence ranging between 4% to 54% (1). Symptomatic RCTs can be managed with conservative and surgical treatment modalities (2). There is still controversy on the indications of surgical treatment of RCTs. Still, parameters such as duration and severity of symptoms, shape, and size of the tear, muscle atrophy, and fatty infiltration may influence the selection of the mode of treatment (2, 3). Despite the shortage of evidence-based agreement for indications, surgery has been performed as the mainstay of treatment and the technique has insidiously shifted from the open approach to the mini-open and subsequently to arthroscopic techniques (4, 5). Recently, arthroscopic techniques were popularized attributed to its advantages such as smaller skin incisions, access to the glenohumeral joint and less soft tissue dissection (6). Some studies suggest that arthroscopy can be administered for not only small and medium-sized RCTs, but also larger tears (>3 cm) can be treated successfully (7).

Comparative Evaluation of Manual and Automated Irrigation Systems in the Arthroscopic Repair of Rotator Cuff Tears