Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35788508›Full record

ArticleCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2022

Assessing Bone Loss in the Unstable Shoulder: a Scoping Review.

Kyle Gouveia, Syed Fayyaz H Rizvi, Danielle Dagher, Timothy Leroux, Asheesh Bedi, Moin Khan

Open access · greenAbstract readScoping Review
In one paragraph

Article in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kyle GouveiaDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Syed Fayyaz H RizviMichael G. DeGroote School of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Danielle DagherFaculty of Science, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Timothy LerouxDivision of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Asheesh BediNorthshore Orthopedic and Spine Institute, Chicago, IL, USA.
Moin KhanDivision of Orthopaedic Surgery, Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada. khanmm2@mcmaster.ca.
McMaster University · CAUniversity of Toronto · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewThe aim of this scoping review is to identify and summarize findings published in the literature over the past 5 years related to methods for assessment of bone loss in anterior shoulder instability. RECENT

findingsOf the 113 clinical studies included in this review, 76 reported a cutoff for glenoid bone loss when determining the patients indicated for one of the many stabilization procedures investigated. Bone loss on the glenoid side was evaluated most commonly with three-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT), and either linear or surface area-based methods were employed with the use of a best-fit circle. When combined with plain CT, the two methods comprise up to 70% of the reported measurement techniques for glenoid bone loss (79 of 113 studies). On the humeral side, Hill-Sachs lesions were assessed more heterogeneously, though plain CT or 3D CT remained the methods of choice in the majority of studies (43 of 68, 63.2%). Lastly, the glenoid track was assessed by 27 of 113 studies (23.9%), again most commonly with 3D CT (13 studies) and plain CT (seven studies). The assessment of glenoid and humeral bone loss is essential to treatment decisions for patient with recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Glenoid bone loss is most commonly assessed using cross-sectional imaging, most often 3D CT, and some variation of a best-fit circle applied to the inferior portion of the glenoid. Hill-Sachs lesion assessment was also commonly done using three-dimensional imaging; however, there was more variability in assessment methods across studies and there is an obvious need to unify the approach to humeral bone loss assessment for the purposes of improving treatment decisions and to better assess on-track and off-track lesions.

Indexed as

Bipolar bone lossGlenoid bone lossGlenoid trackHill-Sachs lesionShoulder instability

Identifiers

PMID35788508
PMCPMC9463415
OpenAlexW4283829947

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.