SynthesisEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2025
Evaluating the incidence and associated factors of subscapularis failure following anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review.
Synthesis in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2025. 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSubscapularis dysfunction remains a devastating postoperative complication that negatively affects surgical outcomes following anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). This systematic review aims to determine the incidence of subscapularis failure following aTSA and evaluate the effectiveness of various surgical techniques and repair strategies.
methodsWe conducted a comprehensive literature search following PRISMA guidelines across PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase databases up to August 21, 2023. Included studies explicitly described aTSA and related complications, excluding those that did not differentiate aTSA outcomes from other procedures or were reviews, case reports, or cadaveric studies. We extracted data on demographics, surgical approaches, subscapularis management techniques, repair strategies, and the subscapularis failure rates.
resultsThis review included 56 studies published between 2010 and 2023, covering 6173 patients. The overall subscapularis failure rate was 3.7%, with variability based on surgical approach and follow-up duration. Lesser tuberosity osteotomy (LTO) demonstrated the lowest failure rate at 1.7%. Subscapularis tenotomy had a failure rate of 3.3%. Studies with follow-up periods longer than five years reported a combined 6.2% failure rate for all approaches. Subscapularis repair techniques had comparable rates of failure as tendon-tendon repair showed 2.7% failure and transosseous repair showed 3.0% failure. We further stratified transosseous repair by subscapularis approach and found similar failure rates for LTO and tenotomy techniques had similar rates of failure, at 1.7% and 3.2%, respectively.
conclusionsThis systematic review highlights the variability in subscapularis failure rates following aTSA and underscores the influence of surgical technique and follow-up duration on these outcomes. Based on this review, LTO appears to offer slightly lower failure rates compared to tenotomy or peel techniques. Following tenotomy, transosseous repair showed higher failure rates compared to tendon-tendon suture repair. There is a need for further standardization in defining and reporting subscapularis failure, along with extended follow-up studies and more level I randomized trials to compare between technique types. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III:
Indexed as
Identifiers
40536679What 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.