ArticleJSES international2024
Quantifying bone loss and lateralization with standardized baseplate versus augmented baseplates.
Article in JSES international, 2024. 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.
- 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
- Article
- Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Baseplate Stability Is Affected by Bone Density and the Type and Amount of Augmentation.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty continues to be utilized for the treatment of cuff tear arthropathy, glenohumeral degenerative joint disease, and irreparable rotator cuff tears. With advancement in component designs, glenoid retroversion and inclination are now correctable with augmented baseplates. However, quantifying bone loss and lateralization compared to standard baseplates has not been studied. The purpose of the current study is to determine the volume of bone reamed and net lateralization with a standardized baseplate vs. augmented baseplate when glenoid inclination was corrected to neutral. Methods: A series of 21 computed tomography scans of patients presenting for shoulder arthroplasty were chosen based on a range of increasing native positive inclination. Computed tomography scans were uploaded into segmentation software and processed. Four fellowship trained shoulder surgeons were then blinded from each other and virtually placed a neutral baseplate and an augmented baseplate for each specimen. Baseplate position was standardized. Additionally, baseplate backside seating of a minimum of 80% was also standardized and glenosphere (nonlateralized) size was selected to eliminate variation in baseplate contact and position. Glenoid inclination was corrected to a minimal of neutral in each specimen as well as glenoid retroversion corrected to <10 Results: The mean glenoid retroversion was 8.1 Conclusion: The current study demonstrates approximately 50% less bone removal and 2.4 mm of true lateralization with a 10-degree augmented baseplate when compared to standard baseplates.
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.