Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37588633›Full record

ReviewJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2021

Primary reverse shoulder replacement with a short stem: A systematic literature review.

Anna K Tross, Thomas E Woolson, Philip C Nolte, Marc Schnetzke, Markus Loew, Peter J Millett

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 22% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Humeral Stem Design in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2024
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Does the proximal humeral bone quality influence alignment after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with short humeral stems?European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Anna K TrossSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.
Thomas E WoolsonSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.
Philip C NolteSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.
Marc SchnetzkeBG Trauma Center Ludwigshafen at the University of Heidelberg, Clinic for Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, Heidelberg, Germany.
Markus LoewGerman Joint Centre, ATOS Clinic Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
Peter J MillettSteadman Philippon Research Institute, Vail, CO, USA.
Heidelberg University · DESteadman Clinic · USSteadman Philippon Research Institute · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Total shoulder arthroplasty implant designs have continued to evolve over the years. One recent change has been the shortening of the humeral component to preserve bone stock and to facilitate revision surgery. Despite promising clinical results, radiographic bone adaptions occur frequently in short-stem total shoulder arthroplasty, and limited data exist on short-stem reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The purpose of this systematic review was to provide an overview about the functional and radiographic outcomes after an uncemented short-stem RSA, as well as identify areas of clinical importance that are underreported in the current literature. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was performed in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines using PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and EMBASE. Clinical outcome studies reporting on short-stem RSA outcomes with evidence level I-IV were included. Demographics, clinical and radiological outcomes, as well as complications and revision data were systematically analyzed and described. Results: Ten studies, published between 2014 and 2019, reporting on 555 shoulders with a mean follow-up of 32 months (range, 20-99.6 months) met the inclusion criteria. For all studies cuff tear arthropathy was the main indication for RSA (36%), followed by primary osteoarthritis (20%). Clinical outcome was reported in nine of ten studies, with range of motion improving in all studies. Six of the seven studies that used the Constant score (CS) demonstrated significant improvement (27.9 points to 69.3 points in weighted means). All studies reported on radiographic changes and bone adaptions. Among these, scapular notching was the most commonly observed (60 out of 327 cases, 18%) but without any described implication on clinical outcomes. No stem loosening was recorded at any final follow-up. A total of 63 complications (12.9%) were reported, with scapula fractures being the most commonly reported complication. Revision surgery was necessary in 24 cases (4.9%). Conclusion: Good clinical results, comparable with long-stem RSAs, are reported at short-term follow-up for short-stem RSAs. Humeral bone adaptions occur frequently but aseptic stem loosening is not a matter of concern at short-term follow-up. An area of clinical importance that is under-reported is the relation between filling ratio and stem alignment in short-stem RSA.

Indexed as

Aseptic stem looseningBone adaptionsCuff tear arthropathyReverse shoulder arthroplastyShort-stemShort-term follow-up

Identifiers

PMID37588633
PMCPMC10426698
OpenAlexW3111270880

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.