Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38529225›Full record

ReviewAnnals of joint2023

Preoperative planning in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: plain radiographs

Jorge Rojas, Lievano, Andrés Mauricio Jiménez, Helberth Augusto González-Rico, Mercedes Salas, Guido Fierro, Juan Carlos González

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of joint, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
4.8field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

11 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Current Uses for Medical Imaging With Orthopaedic Implant Technology.Journal of orthopaedic research : official publication of the Orthopaedic Research Society · 2026
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
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

7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Jorge RojasDivision of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá, Bogotá, Colombia.
LievanoDivision of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá, Bogotá, Colombia.ORCID 0000-0002-1714-9261
Andrés Mauricio JiménezDivision of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá, Bogotá, Colombia.
Helberth Augusto González-RicoDivision of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá, Bogotá, Colombia.
Mercedes SalasDivision of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá, Bogotá, Colombia.
Guido FierroDivision of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá, Bogotá, Colombia.
Juan Carlos GonzálezDivision of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Department of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Hospital Universitario Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá, Bogotá, Colombia.
Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá · COUniversidad de Los Andes · COUniversidad del Rosario · CO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has become a highly successful treatment option for various shoulder conditions, leading to a significant increase in its utilization since its approval in 2003. However, postoperative complications, including scapular notching, prosthetic instability, and component loosening, remain a concern. These complications can often be attributed to technical errors during component implantation, emphasizing the importance of proper preoperative planning and accurate positioning of prosthetic components. Improper baseplate and glenosphere positioning in RSA have been linked to impingement, reduced range of motion, and increased scapular notching. Additionally, the relationship between component positioning and intrinsic stability of RSA has been established, with glenoid component retroversion exceeding 10° posing a risk to implant stability. Adequate initial glenoid baseplate fixation, achieved through optimal seating and the use of appropriate screws, is crucial for long-term success and prevention of early failure. Factors such as lateralization and distalization also influence outcomes and complications in RSA, yet standardized guidelines for preoperative planning in these parameters are still lacking. Despite the impact of component position on outcomes, glenoid component implantation remains challenging, with position errors being common even among experienced surgeons. Challenges arise due to factors such as deformity, bone defects, limited exposure, and the absence of reliable bony landmarks intraoperatively. With the evolving understanding of RSA biomechanics and the significance of implant configuration and positioning, advancements in preoperative planning and surgical aids have emerged. This review article explores the current evidence on preoperative planning techniques in RSA, including plain radiographs, three-dimensional imaging, computer planning software, intraoperative navigation, and augmented reality (AR), highlighting their potential benefits and advancements in improving implant position accuracy.

Indexed as

augmented reality (AR)navigationpatient-specific instrumentation (PSI)preoperative planningReverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA)

Identifiers

PMID38529225
PMCPMC10929295
OpenAlexW4387783647

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.