Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35628933›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2022

Innovations in Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Nels Leafblad, Elise Asghar, Robert Z Tashjian

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing 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

27 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Inset glenoid component stability and bone removal by implantation depth.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Does the indication of reverse shoulder arthroplasty affect its outcomes? a meta-analysis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Evaluation of augmented reality guidance for glenoid pin placement in total shoulder arthroplasty.International journal of computer assisted radiology and surgery · 2025
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors.

Nels LeafbladDepartment of Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, University of Utah, 590 Wakara Way, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA.
Elise AsgharDepartment of Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, University of Utah, 590 Wakara Way, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA.
Robert Z TashjianDepartment of Orthopaedics, School of Medicine, University of Utah, 590 Wakara Way, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Innovations currently available with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty include shorter stem designs and augmented/inset/inlay glenoid components. Regarding reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), metal augmentation, including custom augments, on both the glenoid and humeral side have expanded indications in cases of bone loss. In the setting of revision arthroplasty, humeral options include convertible stems and newer tools to improve humeral implant removal. New strategies for treatment and surgical techniques have been developed for recalcitrant shoulder instability, acromial fractures, and infections after RSA. Finally, computer planning, navigation, PSI, and augmented reality are imaging options now available that have redefined preoperative planning and indications as well intraoperative component placement. This review covers many of the innovations in the realm of shoulder arthroplasty.

Indexed as

augmentinlayonlayshoulder arthroplastystemless

Identifiers

PMID35628933
PMCPMC9144112

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.