ReviewJournal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma2025
Non-operative versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of 3- or 4-part proximal humeral fractures: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Complication rates following total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis versus proximal humerus fracture: a propensity-matched cohort comparison of 9,190 patients.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 2026Article
- Proximal Humerus Fractures - A Contemporary Narrative Review of Management Strategies.Orthopedic reviews · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) are a common injury experienced by elderly patients, however there is no consensus regarding the best treatment option. Recently, the use of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in elderly patients with complex fractures is increasing. This systematic review and meta-analysis will compare the outcomes between RSA and non-operative treatment in 3- or 4-part PHFs in the elderly. Methods: This study was conducted according to the PRISMA statement protocol and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023439647). Searches on four databases (Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library) were performed, and comparative studies which compared the outcomes of using RSA with conservative management were included. Demographic data, patient related outcome measures (PROMs), and complications rates were collected. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Heterogeneity was determined using the I Results: Six studies involving 439 patients (mean age 79.0 years old; 12.1 % male) were analysed. The average Charlson co-morbidity index (CCI) was 3.74 and follow-up time was 26.0 months. Compared to the non-operative cohort, the RSA cohort had better VAS scores (1.0 versus 0.575; p = 0.047), Constant-Murley scores (66.3 versus 71; p = 0.114), active forward flexion (121.5° versus 100°; p = 0.023; I Conclusion: In the short-term, elderly patients with complex PHFs treated with RSA may have decreased pain, increased Constant-Murley scores, and increased ROM compared with patients treated non-operatively, at the expense of a higher risk of needing subsequent surgery. However, moderate between-study heterogeneity in effect sizes and the retrospective nature of included studies may limit the clinical applications of conclusions obtained in this review. Level of evidence: 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.