ArticleJSES international2023
Image-derived instrumentation vs. conventional instrumentation with 3D planning for glenoid component placement in reverse total shoulder replacements: a randomized controlled trial.
Article in JSES international, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Clinical added value of 3D printed patient-specific guides in orthopedic surgery (excluding knee arthroplasty): a systematic review.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2025Pooled it
- Review
- Accuracy of implant placement after preoperative planning using Blueprint software in inlay and onlay reverse total shoulder arthroplasty systems: a cadaver study.Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery · 2026Article
- Patient-specific instrumentation in primary total shoulder arthroplasty: a meta-analysis of clinical outcomes.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2025Article
- Comparison of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) versus conventional instrumentation (CI) in shoulder arthroplasties: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.Journal of orthopaedics · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Hypothesis: Glenoid baseplate positioning for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is important for stability and longevity, with techniques such as image-derived instrumentation (IDI) developed for improving implant placement accuracy. We performed a single-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing glenoid baseplate insertion accuracy with 3D preoperative planning and IDI jigs vs. 3D preoperative planning and conventional instrumentation. Methods: All patients had a preoperative 3D computed tomography to create an IDI; then underwent rTSA according to their randomized method. Repeat computed tomography scans performed at six weeks postoperatively were compared to the preoperative plan to assess for accuracy of implantation. Patient-reported outcome measures and plain radiographs were collected with 2-year follow-up. Results: Forty-seven rTSA patients were included (IDI n = 24, conventional instrumentation n = 23). The IDI group was more likely to have a guidewire placement within 2mm of the preoperative plan in the superior/inferior plane ( Conclusion: IDI is an accurate method for glenoid guidewire and component placement in rTSA, particularly in the superior/inferior plane and in glenoids with native retroversion >10°, when compared to conventional instrumentation.
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.