ReviewShoulder & elbow2024
Outcomes of patients undergoing anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty with augmented glenoid components - a systematic review.
Review in Shoulder & elbow, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Glenoid loosening is an issue in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (a-TSA). This has been attributed to abnormal glenoid anatomy, common among these patients. Different alternatives have been proposed to tackle glenoid bone loss and restore joint alignment with augmented glenoid implants being increasingly used to deal with this problem. This systematic review aims to evaluate the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients undergoing augmented glenoid a-TSAs. Our hypothesis was that augmented glenoid components will lead to good patient outcomes with a low incidence of complications and revision procedures. Methods: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL and CINHAL were searched from inception to February 2022 for information pertaining to outcomes of patients undergoing a-TSA with augmented glenoid implants. Results: Eighteen studies reported on outcomes of 814 a-TSA (800 participants) with a mean follow-up of 3.7 years. Most studies (67%) were Type IV level of evidence. Almost 70% of participants underwent an a-TSA secondary to primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Most glenoids were type B2 (73%). Augmented glenoids material was mostly all-polyethylene (81%) with full wedge (45%) and stepped components (38%) designs being the most common. Most studies reported good clinical outcomes. 17 patients (4%) underwent a revision surgery. Conclusions: Our review found that patients undergoing a-TSA with augmented glenoid components report good outcomes at short-to-mid-term follow-up. Further research is warranted to determine if such outcomes remain similar in long term. Level of evidence: Level III, Systematic Review of Therapeutic Studies.
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.