SynthesisJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2022
Anterosuperior approach versus deltopectoral approach for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Subscapularis sparing approach vs. tenotomy of the subscapularis tendon in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2025Trial
- Anterior deltoid atrophy after reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a preliminary prospective study on surgical approach and neurophysiological correlates.International orthopaedics · 2026Observational
- A Subscapularis-Sparing Modification of the Deltopectoral Approach for Facilitated Glenoid Exposure in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Technical Note.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
- Investigation of the association between shoulder flexion range of motion and deltoid and trapezius muscle activity after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.Journal of physical therapy science · 2025Article
- Managing Subscapularis in Shoulder arthroplasty.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2024Article
- Lateralising reverse shoulder arthroplasty using bony increased offset (BIO-RSA) or increasing glenoid component diameter: comparison of clinical, radiographic and patient reported outcomes in a matched cohort.Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology · 2024Article
- Recent Advances in the Design and Application of Shoulder Arthroplasty Implant Systems and Their Impact on Clinical Outcomes: A Comprehensive Review.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSurgical approach is an important factor that may affect the outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). The most common approaches for RTSA are anterosuperior (AS) and deltopectoral (DP). However, controversy exists on which surgical approach is better. This meta-analysis aimed to compare both approaches in terms of radiological and clinical outcomes and complications.
methodsWe searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies that compared the postoperative outcomes of the AS and DP approaches for RTSA. After screening and quality assessment of the articles, we obtained two randomized controlled trials and four retrospective comparative studies. We analyzed the radiologic outcomes, functional outcomes, and complications between the two approaches. The standardized mean difference and odds ratio were used to analyze the differences in outcomes between the two surgical approaches. Statistical significance was set at P < 0.05.
resultsThe incidence rate of glenoid implant loosening was significantly (P = 0.04) lower in the AS group than that in the DP group. In terms of forward flexion after surgery, the DP approach produced significantly (P = 0.03) better outcomes compared with the AS approach. There were no significant differences in radiological outcomes or other complication rates between the two approaches.
conclusionAs a result of this meta-analysis, one of the two approaches did not bring a better result than the other. One has strength for better forward flexion and the other for a lower glenoid loosening rate. With this in mind, it is recommended to use the approach that the surgeon is most familiar with.
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.