ReviewJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2023
Outcomes of anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients over the age of 70: a systematic review.
Review in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07060469 (Comparative Analysis of Anatomic Shoulder Arthroplasty, Hemiarthroplasty, and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients Over 70), which is not on this map. Cited by 22 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.
Comparative Analysis of Anatomic Shoulder Arthroplasty, Hemiarthroplasty, and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients Over 70: A Retrospective Single Unit Single Surgeon Study
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative outcomes of anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for rotator cuff-intact glenohumeral osteoarthritis: a propensity score-matched, age-stratified exploratory analysis.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026Article
- Why do primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasties fail today? A systematic review and meta-analysis.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Review
- Anatomic shoulder arthroplasty: a single surgeon's consecutive series of four hundred and fifty eight patients.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Clinical and radiographic outcomes of the SMR TT system - a novel convertible all-polyethylene glenoid with hybrid fixation in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: minimum 5-year follow-up.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026Article
- Two-year follow-up of a novel fully 3D-printed off-the-shelf humeral total shoulder arthroplasty prosthesis.JSES international · 2026Article
- Unique convertible shoulder modular replacement trabecular titanium hybrid glenoid component in anatomic shoulder arthroplasty: 5-7 year outcome data.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026Article
- Complication rates following total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis versus proximal humerus fracture: a propensity-matched cohort comparison of 9,190 patients.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026Article
- Re-revision rate after anatomic-to-anatomic revision of total shoulder arthroplasty: a descriptive study of the Dutch national registry.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2026Article
- Pain Management Strategies in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2026Review
- A reproducible wafered lesser tuberosity osteotomy technique with transosseous box configuration for subscapularis repair in stemless total shoulder arthroplasty.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2026Article
- EVIDENCE-BASED REVIEW & RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE BRAZILIAN SOCIETY OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY: REVERSE VERSUS ANATOMIC TOTAL ARTHROPLASTY FOR THE TREATMENT OF PRIMARY GLENOHUMERAL OSTEOARTHRITIS WITH AN INTACT ROTATOR CUFF IN PATIENTS AGED 70 YEARS OR OLDER.Acta ortopedica brasileira · 2026Review
- Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis in patients who are 75 years or older. An analysis of revision rates and patient-reported outcome using data from the Danish shoulder arthroplasty registry.JSES international · 2026Article
- Evaluation of spin in the abstracts of systematic reviews and meta-analyses of stemless total shoulder arthroplasty.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2025Review
- Glenoid Radiolucent Lines and Subsidence Show Limited Impact on Clinical and Functional Long-Term Outcomes After Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Analysis of Cemented Polyethylene Glenoid Components.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Article
- Glenohumeral osteoarthritis and reverse shoulder replacement.JSES international · 2025Review
- Evaluation of spin in systematic reviews and meta-analyses involving glenoid augmentation in total shoulder arthroplasty.JSES international · 2025Article
- Shoulder replacement in the under 55's is anatomical or reverse the best solution?EFORT open reviews · 2025Article
- Early complications and risk factors following reverse versus anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis: a nationwide registry study.Clinics in shoulder and elbow · 2025Article
- Anatomic versus reverse shoulder replacement: Are we asking the right questions and what are the answers?Journal of hand and microsurgery · 2025Review
- Humeral socket decoupling from the stem causes mechanical failure of a reverse shoulder prosthesis. A case report.JSES reviews, reports, and techniques · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Both anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) reliably improve pain and function for a variety of indications. However, there remain concerns about these procedures among elderly patients due to their general health, the potential for lesser functional gain, and the possible need for revision at an even older age. The purpose of this review is to compare the clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, and complications of ATSA and RTSA among patients older than 70 years. Methods: A systematic review was performed using searches of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The inclusion criteria were studies with patients older than 70 years who were treated with a primary ATSA or RTSA and clinical results reported at a minimum of 2 years. All indications for primary RTSA except for tumor were included. Outcomes of interest included patient-reported outcomes (PROs), range of motion, patient satisfaction, radiographic changes, complication and revision rates, and implant survival. Results: A total of 24 studies met the inclusion criteria. At a mean follow-up of 3.4 years for ATSA and 3.1 years for RTSA, there were significant improvements in pain, range of motion, and PROs for both prostheses. Patients who underwent ATSA generally had better motion and functional outcomes compared to those who underwent RTSA, though these comparisons were made across different indications for arthroplasty. The satisfaction rate was 90.9% after ATSA and 90.8% after RTSA. Furthermore, 10.2% of ATSA patients and 9.9% of RTSA patients experienced a surgical complication, whereas 2.3% of ATSA and 2.2% of RTSA patients underwent a revision. Secondary rotator cuff tear was the most common complication after ATSA, occurring in 3.7% of patients, but only 1.1% of patients required revision surgery. Both ATSA and RTSA implant survivorship was reported to range from 93.1% to 98.9% at 5- and 8-year follow-up, respectively. Patient mortality was estimated to be 19.3% with a mean time to death of 6.1 years. Conclusions: Elderly patients with primary osteoarthritis and an intact rotator cuff can have predictable pain relief, restoration of functional range of motion, and significant improvement in PROs after ATSA with low complication rates. Secondary rotator cuff failure and revision arthroplasty occur infrequently at early to mid-term follow-up. Although elderly patients who underwent ATSA generally had better functional outcomes compared to those who underwent RTSA for differing indications, patient satisfaction after both procedures were similar.
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.