Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31956943›Full record

ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2020

Failed Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty and Recommendations for Revision.

Alexander R Markes, Edward Cheung, C Benjamin Ma

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

24 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Evaluation of augmented reality guidance for glenoid pin placement in total shoulder arthroplasty.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Preventing and Treating Infection in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2023
    Review
  19. Review
  20. 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

3 authors.

Alexander R MarkesUniversity of California San Francisco, School of Medicine, San Francisco, CA, USA. Alexander.Markes@ucsf.edu.
Edward CheungDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.
C Benjamin MaDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe most common complications warranting revision consideration in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) include instability and its associated causes: infection, periprosthetic fracture, and glenoid baseplate loosening. Management of complications can be challenging and the nuances of treatment are still being elucidated. The focus of this paper is to review the treatment of the failed RSA and discuss evidence-based recommendations for revision. RECENT

findingsThe most common complications requiring revision RSA are instability and infection. The causes for instability can be subdivided into three main subcategories: loss of compression, loss of containment, and impingement. Loss of compression is further broken down into 6 subcategories revolving around abnormal prosthesis positioning, undersized prostheses, or intrinsic soft-tissue tension loss leading to instability. Periprosthetic infection can also lead to instability, yet the most appropriate management for infected RSA remains controversial. Restoring stability by maximizing deltoid and soft tissue tension while avoiding impingement revolves around three basic methods: (1) lateralizing and/or upsizing the glenosphere to an inferior position on the glenoid, (2) use of a more constrained polyethylene insert, and (3) distalizing the humerus by increasing the polyethylene thickness and/or the thickness of the humeral tray. Management of periprosthetic joint infection can be performed in one-stage, two-stage, or "three-stage" procedures all showing good outcomes with two-stage procedures being the most commonly performed. However, persistent positive culture with propriobacterium acnes can occur in up to 25% of cases. In order to limit the associated morbidity from failed revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty, continued research on best management of associated complications is warranted.

Indexed as

Reverse shoulder arthroplastyReverse shoulder arthroplasty complicationsReverse shoulder arthroplasty instabilityRevision reverse shoulder arthroplastyShoulder periprosthetic joint infection

Identifiers

PMID31956943
PMCPMC7083982

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.