ReviewJSES open access2019
Reverse shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged 65 years or younger: a systematic review of the literature.
Review in JSES open access, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers.
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
26 citing papers in PubMed, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Continuous clinical and radiological follow-up of isainlay reverse shoulder prostheses: results from the isa registry with a minimum of 1-year follow-up.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026Article
- Outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients ≤65 years old.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026Article
- Primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged ≤65 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Review
- Impact of body mass index on clinical outcomes following arthroscopically assisted lower trapezius tendon transfer for irreparable posterosuperior rotator cuff tears.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Article
- Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in younger patients.JSES international · 2025Review
- Clinical outcomes following intramedullary nailing of humerus fractures: a systematic review.JSES international · 2025Review
- Revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty by indication : a National Joint Registry study.Bone & joint open · 2025Article
- Shoulder replacement in the under 55's is anatomical or reverse the best solution?EFORT open reviews · 2025Article
- Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty outcomes in elderly patients.JSES international · 2025Article
- Humeral socket decoupling from the stem causes mechanical failure of a reverse shoulder prosthesis. A case report.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2025Article
- Preventing Infections in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2024Review
- Infected Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients Younger than 60 Years: Results of a Multicenter Study.Microorganisms · 2023Article
- Article
- Shoulder joint arthroplasty in young patients: Analysis of 8742 patients from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry.Shoulder & elbow · 2023Article
- Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty for Younger Patients: A Comparable Analysis of Patients Older and Younger Than 65 Years.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2023Article
- Preoperative Planning for Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: Does the Clinical Range of Motion Match the Planned 3D Humeral Displacement?Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- Influence of sportive activity on functional and radiographic outcomes following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a comparative study.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Patient-specific risk profile associated with early-onset primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder: is it really primary?Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Article
- Massive rotator cuff tears: algorithmic approach to surgical treatment.Annals of joint · 2023Review
- Sports Participation After Reverse Total Shoulder Replacement.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundReverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is offered to young patients with a failed previous arthroplasty or a cuff-deficient shoulder, but the overall results are still uncertain. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to report the midterm outcomes and complications of RSA in patients younger than 65 years.
methodsA search of the MEDLINE and Cochrane electronic databases identified clinical studies reporting the results, at a minimum 2-year follow-up, of patients younger than 65 years treated with an RSA. The methodologic quality was assessed with the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score by 2 independent reviewers. Complications, reoperations, range of motion, functional scores, and radiologic outcomes were analyzed.
resultsEight articles were included, with a total of 417 patients. The mean age at surgery was 56 years (range, 21-65 years). RSA was used as a primary arthroplasty in 79% of cases and revision of a failed arthroplasty in 21%. In primary cases, the indications were cuff tear arthropathy and/or massive irreparable cuff tear in 72% of cases. The overall complication rate was 17% (range, 7%-38%), with the most common complications being instability (5%) and infection (4%). The reintervention rate was 10% at 4 years, with implant revision in 7% of cases. The mean weighted American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, active forward elevation, and external rotation were 64 points, 121°, and 29°, respectively.
conclusionsRSA provides reliable clinical improvements in patients younger than 65 years with a cuff-deficient shoulder or failed arthroplasty. The complication and revision rates are comparable to those in older patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.