ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2024
Analysis of three different reverse shoulder arthroplasty designs for cuff tear arthropathy - the combination of lateralization and distalization provides best mobility.
Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.
- Does excessive lateralization influence tuberosity healing in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures?JSES international · 2026Article
- Radiographic comparison of humeral and glenoid lateralization and distalization between onlay and inlay reverse total shoulder arthroplasty designs in Japanese shoulders.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026Article
- The impact of glenoid/humeral lateralization and distalization angles based in the pattern of reverse shoulder arthroplasty.JSES international · 2026Article
- Bilateral reverse shoulder arthroplasty in a patient with progressive supranuclear palsy: a case report.International journal of surgery case reports · 2026Article
- 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
- Lateralization and distalization shoulder angles may not predict clinical outcomes in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.JSES international · 2025Review
- Clinical and radiological comparison of three different reverse shoulder arthroplasty designs for patients with primary osteoarthritis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty by indication : a National Joint Registry study.Bone & joint open · 2025Article
- Using deep learning to predict postoperative pain in reverse shoulder arthroplasty patients.JSES international · 2025Article
- Volumetric Humeral Canal Fill Ratio Effects Primary Stability and Cortical Bone Loading in Short and Standard Stem Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Biomechanical and Computational Study.Journal of imaging · 2024Article
- Recent Advances in the Design and Application of Shoulder Arthroplasty Implant Systems and Their Impact on Clinical Outcomes: A Comprehensive Review.Orthopedic research and reviews · 2024Review
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 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe two major reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) designs are the Grammont design and the lateralized design. Even if the lateralized design is biomechanically favored, the classic Grammont prosthesis continues to be used. Functional and subjective patient scores as well as implant survival described in the literature so far are comparable to the lateralized design. A pure comparison of how the RSA design influences outcome in patients has not yet been determined. The aim of this study was a comparison focused on patients with cuff tear arthropathy (CTA).
methodsWe analyzed registry data from 696 CTA patients prospectively collected between 2012 and 2020 in two specialized orthopedic centers up to 2 years post-RSA with the same follow-up time points (6,12 24 months). Complete teres minor tears were excluded. Three groups were defined: group 1 (inlay, 155° humeral inclination, 36 + 2 mm eccentric glenosphere (n = 50)), group 2 (inlay, 135° humeral inclination, 36 + 4 mm lateralized glenosphere (n = 141)) and group 3 (onlay, 145° humeral inclination, + 3 mm lateralized base plate, 36 + 2 mm eccentric glenosphere (n = 35)) We compared group differences in clinical outcomes (e.g., active and passive range of motion (ROM), abduction strength, Constant-Murley score (CS)), radiographic evaluations of prosthetic position, scapular anatomy and complications using mixed models adjusted for age and sex.
resultsThe final analysis included 226 patients. The overall adjusted p-value of the CS for all time-points showed no significant difference (p = 0.466). Flexion of group 3 (mean, 155° (SD 13)) was higher than flexion of group 1 (mean, 142° (SD 18) and 2 (mean, 132° (SD 18) (p < 0.001). Values for abduction of group 3 (mean, 145° (SD 23)) were bigger than those of group 1 (mean, 130° (SD 22)) and group 2 (mean, 118° (SD 25)) (p < 0.001). Mean external rotation for group 3 (mean, 41° (SD 23)) and group 2 (mean, 38° (SD 17)) was larger than external rotation of group 1 (mean, 24° (SD 16)) (p < 0.001); a greater proportion of group 2 (78%) and 3 (69%) patients reached L3 level on internal rotation compared to group 1 (44%) (p = 0.003). Prosthesis position measurements were similar, but group 3 had significantly less scapular notching (14%) versus 24% (group 2) and 50% (group 1) (p = 0.001).
conclusionsOutcome scores of different RSA designs for CTA revealed comparable results. However, CTA patients with a lateralized and distalized RSA configuration were associated with achieving better flexion and abduction with less scapular notching. A better rotation was associated with either of the lateralized RSA designs in comparison with the classic Grammont prosthesis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level III.
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.