Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32043057›Full record

ArticleJB & JS open access

Core Set of Radiographic Parameters for Shoulder Arthroplasty Monitoring: Criteria Defined by an International Delphi Consensus Process.

Holger Durchholz, Björn Salomonsson, Philipp Moroder, Simon Lambert, Richard Page, Laurent Audigé, John Sperling, Hans-Kaspar Schwyzer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JB & JS open access. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. The reliability of the forgotten joint score for shoulder arthroplasty.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

8 authors.

Holger DurchholzResearch and Development (H.D. and L.A.) and Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (L.A.), Schulthess Klinik, Zurich, Switzerland.
Björn SalomonssonKarolinska Institutet Danderyds Sjukhus AB, Stockholm, Sweden.
Philipp MoroderCharité Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany.
Simon LambertUniversity College London Hospital, London, United Kingdom.
Richard PageBarwon Centre for Orthopaedic Research and Education, School of Medicine, Deakin, University, Geelong, Victoria, Australia.
Laurent AudigéResearch and Development (H.D. and L.A.) and Shoulder and Elbow Surgery (L.A.), Schulthess Klinik, Zurich, Switzerland.
John Sperling
Hans-Kaspar Schwyzer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Some unfavorable local events following shoulder arthroplasty occur without the patient experiencing symptoms and yet may be detected on diagnostic imaging, thereby serving as indicators of complications that may require revision. Our aim was to create a standardized protocol for an image-based monitoring process for assessing patients who are asymptomatic following shoulder arthroplasty.

methodsA Delphi exercise was implemented with the participation of an international panel of experienced shoulder surgeons. On the basis of expert opinion from a core steering group, an initial list of imaging parameters for shoulder arthroplasty monitoring of asymptomatic patients was developed and reviewed by panel members. The most appropriate imaging modality was identified. Between each survey, all feedback was considered in order to revise the proposed core set with its definitions and specifications. Consensus was reached upon a two-thirds agreement.

resultsThree online surveys were administered, with 98 surgeons responding to the first and/or the second survey. The response rate for the final survey was 74%. Final parameter definitions were organized in 7 categories (implant migration, radiolucency around implant and implant loosening, signs of shoulder displacement, bone resorption and formation, wear of implant articular surfaces, fractures around the implant, and implant breakage and disassembly) and approved with 85% to 100% agreement. Seventy-eight percent of the panel members agreed on a minimum radiographic imaging schedule: standard anteroposterior and axial (alternatively, Y) views made within 6 weeks after implantation and between 3 and 6 months as well as at 12 months post-surgery.

conclusionsOur work presents a monitoring tool developed with international consensus for the assessment of asymptomatic patients after shoulder arthroplasty and including a structured core set of radiographic parameters. Clinical application and scientific evaluation of the monitoring process are needed. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This represents a major step toward the standardization of shoulder arthroplasty radiographic monitoring for routine quality controls and research investigations.

Identifiers

PMID32043057
PMCPMC6959915

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.