ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2024
Humeral Stem Design in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Radiographic bone resorption after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using a single onlay platform: risk factors and distribution patterns in a Japanese cohort.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026Article
- Standard-length stems require lower distal filling ratios than short stems to achieve neutral alignment in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.JSES international · 2026Article
- The impact of glenoid/humeral lateralization and distalization angles based in the pattern of reverse shoulder arthroplasty.JSES international · 2026Article
- Does surgical indication influence implant survival in reverse shoulder arthroplasty? A comparative cohort study of fracture and glenohumeral osteoarthritis.European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie · 2026Article
- Clinical and radiological outcomes of Inlay versus Onlay humeral stems in reverse shoulder arthroplasty with a 145° neck shaft angle: a multicentre retrospective study with a minimum follow-up of three years, an analysis from the registry of the shoulder friends institute.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Volumetric 3-dimensional computed tomography analysis of proximal humeral bone resorption after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Lower average cortical bone thickness predicts cemented fixation in short-stem reverse shoulder arthroplasty.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- Mechanobiological evaluation of solid and multiple porous humeral stem architectures in reverse shoulder arthroplasty based on design and materials: a finite element study.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purpose of the reviewThere have been tremendous modifications to the humeral component since Paul Grammont first introduced the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in 1985. The purpose of this article is to review historical design features and their drawbacks and to summarize the clinical outcomes of modern designs. RECENT
findingsDecreasing the neck-shaft angle and increasing humeral lateralization have helped address problems of scapular notching and limited internal and external rotation that were common with traditional designs. Advancements in proximal porous coatings have also facilitated the development of short-stem and stemless implants, which decreases the need for cement fixation and allows preservation of bone stock. Moreover, a reduction in stem length with smaller metaphyseal and diaphyseal filling ratios may limit stress shielding. Current humeral implants have an aseptic loosening rate less than 1%. Despite promising results, many of these new humeral design features do not have long-term data and continued surveillance of their performance is necessary. The humeral stem design significantly influences clinical and radiographic outcomes. Surgeons should be mindful of these design variables to increase impingement-free range of motion, minimize scapular notching, reduce stress shielding, and improve implant survivorship.
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.