ReviewJSES international2025
Lateralization and distalization shoulder angles may not predict clinical outcomes in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in JSES international, 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.
- Comparison of DSA and LSA angle measurements in postoperative radiographs and computed tomography of patients with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.Skeletal radiology · 2026Article
- Radiographic comparison of humeral and glenoid lateralization and distalization between onlay and inlay reverse total shoulder arthroplasty designs in Japanese shoulders.Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty · 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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prognostic value of the lateralization shoulder angle (LSA) and distalization shoulder angle (DSA) following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). Methods: This systematic review was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus were queried on February 18, 2024. The inclusion criteria encompassed studies reporting correlations between LSA, DSA, and patient-reported outcome scores in patients undergoing rTSA with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Study quality was evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score. Meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model with correlation coefficients (r) calculated via Fisher's z-transformation. Heterogeneity was assessed with the Q test and I Results: After screening, 4 studies met inclusion criteria, representing a total of 974 shoulders with a minimum follow-up of 24 months. The studies included retrospective cohort designs with Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies scores ranging from 14 to 15. Meta-analysis revealed no significant correlation between LSA or DSA and functional outcomes (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Constant score) or range of motion (ROM) (active anterior elevation [AAE] and active external rotation). The overall correlation coefficient for LSA and DSA with postoperative outcomes was 0.023 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.056 to 0.101, Conclusion: DSA and LSA may not predict the postoperative range of motion or clinical outcomes following rTSA. Future studies are warranted to develop and validate measurements of that can be used to help optimize patient outcomes.
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.