ReviewShoulder & elbow2023
Outcomes after salvage reverse shoulder arthroplasty for failed primary fixation or hemiarthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures: A systematic review.
Review in Shoulder & elbow, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Salvage Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty for Failed Proximal Humeral Fracture Fixation with Broken Implant.Orthopedic reviews · 2026Article
- Reverse shoulder arthroplasty in the revision setting.JSES international · 2025Review
- Computed tomography improves the diagnostic accuracy but not the interobserver reliability of the Boileau classification of proximal humerus fracture sequelae.Shoulder & elbow · 2023Article
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Salvage reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for failed proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) fixation and hemiarthroplasty (HA) may maximize outcomes in the absence of tuberosity healing or a chronically torn rotator cuff. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the improvement in clinical outcomes for patients after revision RSA was performed for failed PHFs fixation or HA. Methods: An electronic database search of SCOPUS, PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov was performed. A meta-analysis was carried out to determine weighted mean outcome differences between two primary intervention cohorts (failed fixation: open reduction and internal fixation, intramedullary nail, or K-wire vs. failed HA). Results: Fifteen studies were included (primary fixation: 208 patients; HA: 162 patients). Patients improved meaningfully in all clinical outcomes after revision surgery (constant: 18.5-48.3; abduction: 44-95; forward flexion: 47-107; external rotation: 5-10), with a 16.2% complication and 9.4% revision rate. The failed fixation group performed significantly better than the failed HA group in postoperative constant (fixation: 53.3 vs. HA: 45.1, Conclusions: RSA is a successful revision intervention for primary PHF operative failures with the greatest benefit for failures of primary fixation versus HA.
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.