ArticleShoulder & elbow2021
Decreased complication profile and improved clinical outcomes of primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty after 2010: A systematic review.
Article in Shoulder & elbow, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Does surgical indication influence implant survival in reverse shoulder arthroplasty? A comparative cohort study of fracture and glenohumeral osteoarthritis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Article
- Article
- Towards optimal reverse total shoulder arthroplasty design: reconsidering the role of lateralized implants.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2024Article
- Implant selection for successful reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2023Article
- Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Versus Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients Aged Over 70 Without a Full-Thickness Rotator Cuff Tear: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2023Review
- Dislocation after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using contemporary medialized modular systems. Can we still consider it such a frequent complication?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The purpose of this review was to update the complication profile of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) post-2010, given greater procedural familiarity, improved learning curves, enhanced implant designs, and increased attention to the nuances of patient selection. Three electronic databases were searched and screened in duplicate from 1 January 2010 to 16 December 2018 based on predetermined criteria. Twenty-two studies examining 1455 patients (26% male; mean age: 73.4 ± 3.6; mean follow-up: 23.4 ± 14.3 months) were reviewed. Post-operative motion ranged a mean 122.4° ± 11.5° flexion, 109° ± 19.4° abduction, and 33° ± 11.2°/41° ± 5° external/internal rotation. Post-operative mean Constant score was 58.9 ± 10.1, American Shoulder Elbow Surgeon score was 73.4 ± 6.1, Simple Shoulder Test score was 63.5 ± 6.5, and a Visual Analog Scale pain score was 1.6 ± 0.9. The overall complication rate was 18.2% and major complication rate was 15.4%. Compared to pre-2010, the overall complication rate of 18.2% is lower than previous rates of 19%-68%, with the rate of "major" complications dropping three-fold from 15.4% to 4.6%. The data suggest that rTSA is a safe and efficacious alternative to aTSA and HA, and the "stale" nature of previous complication profiles are points fundamental to perioperative discussions surrounding rTSA.
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.