Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40241855›Full record

ReviewJournal of orthopaedics2025

Comparison of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) versus conventional instrumentation (CI) in shoulder arthroplasties: A Meta-Analysis and Systematic Review.

Francis Jia Yi Fong, Jason Derry Onggo, Michael Gui Jie Yam

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. [Virtual reality and digital shoulder surgery].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026
    Review
  2. Article
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

3 authors.

Francis Jia Yi FongYong Loo Lin School of Medicine, National University of Singapore, 10 Medical Drive, 7 Singapore, 117597, Singapore.
Jason Derry OnggoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, National Health Group, 11 Jln Tan Tock Seng, 308433, Singapore.
Michael Gui Jie YamDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Tan Tock Seng Hospital, National Health Group, 11 Jln Tan Tock Seng, 308433, Singapore.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: This study evaluates the effectiveness of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) versus conventional instrumentation (CI) in shoulder arthroplasties. Accurate glenoid component placement is crucial for successful shoulder replacements, and PSI offers the potential to improve this accuracy. Methods: Electronic database search of PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane was performed on April 10, 2024, in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines for scoping reviews. The searches were conducted using the keywords relating to "shoulder arthroplasty" and "three-dimensional printing". No restrictions were placed on the date of publication. Results: 10 clinical studies involving 4092 patients, comparing PSI and CI were included. The results show that PSI generally improves radiological outcomes, with lower anterior-posterior offset errors, longer screw lengths, and near statistically significant reductions in version, inclination, and superior-inferior offset errors. However, there was no significant difference between PSI and CI in terms of operative duration, complication rates, or short-term patient-reported outcomes such as the Constant Murley Score. Conclusion: While PSI did not significantly reduce short-term complications or alter patient-reported outcomes, it demonstrated a promising potential to enhance glenoid component positioning. Accurate placement of the glenoid component is crucial for long-term success, and PSI may reduce postoperative complications such as glenoid loosening. However, the lack of long-term follow-up in most studies limits the ability to fully assess these benefits.The study also highlights the variability in PSI design and calls for standardized protocols to improve data consistency and accuracy.Longer follow-up studies are recommended to better assess the impact of PSI on long-term outcomes. In conclusion, PSI may improve radiological outcomes without increasing surgical complexity, representing a promising alternative to CI in shoulder arthroplasty. Level of evidence: II.

Indexed as

3D printingConventional instrumentationOrthopedicsPatient-specific instrumentationPatient-specific outcomesRadiological parametersShoulder arthroplasties

Identifiers

PMID40241855
PMCPMC11997264

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.