ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2019
Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Implant Design Considerations.
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 22 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
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Influence of radiographic viewing perspective on the reverse shoulder arthroplasty angle.Seminars in arthroplasty · 2026Article
- Smaller glenosphere size and increased baseplate retroversion improve postoperative internal rotation after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty performed with a 135° humeral implant and lateralized glenoid.JSES international · 2025Article
- Influence of preoperative diagnosis on outcomes after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review.JSES international · 2025Review
- Patients posture affects clinical outcomes and range of motion after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: A clinical study.JSES international · 2025Article
- Mechanobiological evaluation of solid and multiple porous humeral stem architectures in reverse shoulder arthroplasty based on design and materials: a finite element study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2025Article
- Optimizing stability and motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty with a 135° neck-shaft-angle: a computer model study of standard versus retentive humeral inserts.JSES international · 2024Article
- Common Factors in Shoulder and Hip Arthroplasty Implant Failures: A Historical Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Global trends and research hotspots of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a bibliometric analysis from 1991 to 2022.EFORT open reviews · 2024Review
- Clinical Outcomes of Arthroscopic Superior Capsular Reconstruction Using Fascia Lata Autograft Versus Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients 65 Years and Older With Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2024Article
- Modification of Humeral Component Results in Increased Impingement Free Range of Motion in a Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Model.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2024Article
- Mid-term results of the use of structural humeral head autograft to correct glenoid bone loss in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.JSES international · 2024Article
- Average Indian Glenoid Sizes Are Smaller than All Commercially Available Glenoid Components: A Systematic Review.Indian journal of orthopaedics · 2023Review
- Mid-term comparative study between the glenoid and humerus lateralization designs for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: which lateralization design is better?BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2023Article
- Reverse shoulder arthroplasty using an onlay humeral prosthesis, offset humeral tray, and augmented glenoid baseplate: surgical technique and review of the impact of prosthesis design on scapular fractures following reverse shoulder arthroplasty.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2023Article
- Humeral and Glenoid Version in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
- Systematic review of prevalence, risk factors, and management of instability following reverse shoulder arthroplasty.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2022Review
- Implant characteristics affect in vivo shoulder kinematics during multiplanar functional motions after reverse shoulder arthroplasty.Journal of biomechanics · 2022Article
- The Evolution of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty-From the First Steps to Novel Implant Designs and Surgical Techniques.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Review
- Does Humeral Component Version Affect Range of Motion and Clinical Outcomes in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Does correction of reverse shoulder arthroplasty angle improve clinical outcomes in cuff tear arthropathy?Acta orthopaedica et traumatologica turcica · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewOur understanding of the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has grown exponentially since Grammont first introduced his design in 1985. There are a multitude of implant-related variables to consider when performing RTSA. The purpose of this article is to provide a review of these design considerations. RECENT
findingsCurrent literature demonstrates that the traditional Grammont prosthesis has over 90% survivorship at 10 years. Despite these promising results, there have been concerns raised over the significant rate of scapular notching observed. As a result, the traditional RTSA design has been modified to minimize this complication and maximize impingement-free motion. Modern RTSA designs with a cementless, curved, short-stemmed eccentric onlay humeral component combined with a large, lateralized glenosphere placed in 10° of inferior tilt with > 3.5 mm of inferior overhang have been found to provide excellent results. However, all implant design features must be considered on a case-by-case basis to optimize outcome for each patient. Humeral and glenoid implant design variables have evolved as the biomechanics of RTSA have been further elucidated. Consideration of these variables allows the surgeon to maximize joint efficiency, improve impingement-free range of motion, decrease the risk of scapular notching, preserve bone stock, and minimize the risk of instability.
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.