Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31338687›Full record

ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2019

Innovative Approaches in the Management of Shoulder Instability: Current Concept Review.

Rakesh John, Ivan Wong

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.7field-weighted citation impact, top 10% of its field
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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rakesh JohnDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, 5955 Veterans' Memorial Lane, Halifax, NS, B3H 2E1, Canada.
Ivan WongDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Dalhousie University, 5955 Veterans' Memorial Lane, Halifax, NS, B3H 2E1, Canada. iw@drivanwong.com.
Dalhousie University · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThis article summarises the latest innovations and concepts in the management of shoulder instability associated with glenoid bone loss. RECENT

findingsThe management of shoulder instability has undergone significant evolution in the last century with rapid strides being made in the last few decades due to the transition from open to arthroscopic techniques allowing management of pathological entities which were previously untreatable. However, there is no consensus on treatment methods, especially in the presence of glenoid bone loss. The complication profile associated with non-anatomic glenoid bony reconstruction procedures has triggered research for alternate techniques using free bone grafts. Open Latarjet procedure continues to be the gold standard in the face of glenoid bone loss; however, arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction with bone block grafts is gaining in popularity and is associated with excellent short-term clinico-radiologic outcomes. Arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction using bone grafts has been proposed as an alternative to the complex all-arthroscopic Latarjet procedure with excellent short-term results, minimal complications and a relatively easier learning curve. Capsular reconstruction has emerged as option for the management of instability with poor quality or absent capsular tissue. Future long-term outcome studies and randomised comparative trials will determine if these innovations stand the test of time.

Indexed as

Arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstructionArthroscopic LatarjetArthroscopyCapsular reconstructionInnovationsShoulder instability

Identifiers

PMID31338687
PMCPMC6684686
OpenAlexW2964317464

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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 OpenQuestion graph.