ReviewJSES international2023
Diagnostic arthroscopy for periprosthetic shoulder arthroplasty infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in JSES international, 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.
- Arthroscopy for the Painful Shoulder Arthroplasty: Indications, Outcomes, and Technical Considerations.Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine · 2026Review
- Current Concepts in Shoulder Periprosthetic Joint Infections-Are Shoulders the Same as Hips and Knees?Journal of clinical medicine · 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
6 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Periprosthetic joint infection of the shoulder (PJI) is a devastating complication with a reported incidence of 1%-15.4% and is often difficult to diagnose with current diagnostic tools including serologic tests and arthrocentesis. This systematic review evaluates the reliability and validity of arthroscopic biopsy in the current literature for the diagnosis of shoulder PJI. Methods: MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Sciences, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases were queried electronically from inception to June 2022 for publications reporting diagnostic accuracy of shoulder arthroscopic biopsy for detecting infection after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty, shoulder hemiarthroplasty, or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. This systematic review was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Results: After exclusion, our meta-analysis consisted of 7 articles with a total of 112 patients. The estimated pooled sensitivity and specificity of arthroscopic biopsy for confirmation of shoulder periprosthetic infection were 0.87 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.73-0.95) and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.67-0.88), respectively. The pooled positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio were 4.15 (95% CI: 2.57, 6.70) and 0.17 (95% CI: 0.08, 0.36), respectively. The aggregate positive predictive value was 73.58% (95% CI: 63.29%-81.82%), and aggregate negative predictive value was 89.83% (95% CI: 80.59%-94.95%). The diagnostic odds ratio of arthroscopic biopsy was 19.92 (95% CI: 4.96-79.99). Conclusion: Arthroscopic biopsy in patients suspected of shoulder PJI has good diagnostic accuracy, with high sensitivity and specificity. Given the various biopsy protocols (such as devices, numbers, locations, etc.), further prospective studies are necessary to define the future role of arthroscopic biopsy in diagnosis and treatment.
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.