ArticleJSES international2023
Preoperative planning to preserve glenoid subchondral bone in anatomical total shoulder replacement.
Article in JSES international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Glenoid loosening remains a concern in anatomical total shoulder replacement. Preoperative planning software allows optimization of the component positioning, but the target orientation remains unclear due to conflicting optimization priorities. Commonly, the component is aligned to the prescribed version and inclination that reflect the population's average anatomy. The freehand technique attempts to secure strong fixation by aiming to preserve the subchondral bone. This study compared the state of the subchondral plate after reaming and compared the results of these two techniques. Methods: Two groups of shoulder computed tomography scans were assessed, 34 normal and 34 osteoarthritic. Preoperative planning software was used to place the glenoid component in prescribed adjusted angles, with neutral (0 Results: The freehand technique improved cortical bone seating in the osteoarthritic group with a mean (standard deviation) of 53.3% (14.3), while neutral alignment resulted in 36.7% (10.8), retroversion 40.4% (13.1), and inclination 39.3% (13.5), Conclusions: The freehand method resulted in significantly improved cortical bone seating compared to the prescribed adjusted angles. These findings question the use of a one-size-fits-all-orientation and suggest that applying a technique that aims for maximum cortical fixation (freehand) may reduce the risk of aseptic loosening.
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.