ReviewCureus2021
Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Humeral Lateralisation: A Systematic Review.
Review in Cureus, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for acute Neer type III and IV proximal humeral head fractures with different humeral stem inclination versus nonsurgical treatment: a prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial.JSES international · 2026Article
- Does using a low-profile inlay in a Grammont-style shoulder prosthesis decrease the risk of scapular notching?Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Article
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Different studies on reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have proposed changes to the humeral design to lateralise the humeral centre of rotation (COR), with humeral inclination to 135 or 145 from 155 degrees or to switch to onlay humeral trays from inlay design; with both having also been used in combination. There have been many studies and systematic reviews to show the difference in outcomes and complications to the variations in glenoid design but to date, there have been no systematic studies to compare different humeral inclinations for RSA implants. Searches using keywords were used in common medical search engines in a systematic fashion. The article was reviewed for the class of evidence and bias, summarised and compared in meta-analysis. Inclusion criteria included studies on adults with RSA that compared lateralised humeral implants to medialised. The search produced 349 articles; of these, we identified nine studies that met the inclusion criteria. Our review identified a total of 562 patients who had been included in studies directly comparing lateralised humerus to a more medial design. Meta-analysis showed a significantly reduced risk of scapular notching in lateralised humerus compared to the standard medialised component. The external rotation range of motion in the lateralised group was statistically significant. The improvement in scapular notching and gain in the range of motion without any apparent downside in the form of reduced patient-reported outcome measures or complications suggest a lateralised humeral component is superior to the more medialised design in RSA. A large RCT with a longer-term follow-up is needed to confirm whether there is clinically significant benefit from the lateralisation of the humerus.
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.