ReviewIndian journal of orthopaedics2023
Average Indian Glenoid Sizes Are Smaller than All Commercially Available Glenoid Components: A Systematic Review.
Review in Indian journal of orthopaedics, 2023. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Demographic and anatomic predictors of glenoid morphology: a systematic review.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Review
- An Anatomic Study of the Human Glenoid Fossa: Implications for Preoperative Evaluation of Bone Loss in Patients With Traumatic Shoulder Instability.Orthopaedic journal of sports medicine · 2026Article
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite the variability in glenoid sizes geographically, most of the currently available commercial glenoid component designs are based on the glenoid parameters of the Caucasian population which may not be suitable for the Indian population due to a mismatch between the prosthesis and native anatomy. The aim of the present study is to systematically review the literature to determine the average glenoid anthropometric parameters in the Indian population. Methods: A comprehensive literature search was conducted using preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guidelines in the PubMed, EMBASE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library databases from the date of inception to May 2021. Any observational study conducted on the Indian population measuring the glenoid diameters, glenoid index, version, inclination, or any other glenoid measurements were included in the review. Results: A total of 38 studies were included in this review. The glenoid parameters were assessed on intact cadaveric scapulae in 33 studies, on 3DCT in three studies, and 2DCT in one study. The pooled average of glenoid dimensions are as the following- the superoinferior diameter or height was 34.65 mm, anteroposterior1 diameter or maximum width was 23.72 mm, anteroposterior2 diameter or maximum width of the upper part of the glenoid was 17.05 mm, the glenoid index was 67.88, and the glenoid version was 1.75-degree retroversion. Males were having a mean height of 3.65 mm and maximum width of 2.74 mm larger than the females. A subgroup analysis revealed no significant difference between different parts of India in glenoid parameters. Conclusion: The glenoid dimensions in the Indian population are smaller compared to the average European and American populations. The average glenoid maximum width of the Indian population is 1.3 mm smaller than the minimum glenoid baseplate size available in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Glenoid components specific to the Indian market need to be designed to reduce glenoid failure attributable to the above findings. Level of evidence: III.
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.