ArticleJSES international2025
Analysis of osseous shoulder morphology and muscle volume in concentric and eccentric osteoarthritis of the shoulder.
Article in JSES international, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The etiology of primary eccentric osteoarthritis (OA) is multifactorial involving glenoid shape alterations, acromion abnormalities, and rotator cuff pathologies. However, none of the changes described for eccentric OA are either consistent or do satisfactorily explain the condition. Up to now, potential individual risk factors contributing to the development of concentric or eccentric OA have been studied mostly independently of each other. This study examined the differences of osseous shoulder morphology and muscle volume in concentric and eccentric OA of the shoulder as a potential risk factor for the development of posterior glenoid wear. Methods: A retrospective, comparative study was conducted, analyzing computed tomography scans of 114 shoulders in 86 patients with primary OA at a single center between 2010 and 2023. These patients were divided into 2 groups-according to an underlying concentric or eccentric OA. As parameters, the osseous shoulder morphology (glenoid offset, glenoid version, posterior humeral head subluxation, anterior acromial coverage, posterior acromial coverage, posterior acromial tilt, posterior acromial height, and critical shoulder angle (CSA)) and muscle volume (subscapularis, infraspinatus/teres minor, supraspinatus), were measured and compared between the groups. Computed tomography images were classified according to the modified Walch classification. Results: The mean age of the patients was 68.9 ± 9.9 years and 62.3% of the patients were female (54 of 86). A total of 25 shoulders were included in the concentric group and 89 shoulders in the eccentric group. Patients with eccentric OA had a significantly increased glenoid retroversion according to Friedmann (12.6° ± 8.2° vs. 4.3° ± 3.4°; Conclusion: Patients with primary eccentric OA show significant differences in glenoid retroversion, posterior scapulohumeral/glenohumeral subluxation, and CSA. However, there are no significant differences regarding the acromion roof morphology and rotator cuff volume compared to patients with concentric OA.
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.