SynthesisJournal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology2025
Exploring the role of hemiarthroplasty in revision shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 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
backgroundHemiarthroplasty (HA) is a salvage option in revision shoulder arthroplasty when reimplantation (aTSA/rTSA) or secure glenoid fixation is not feasible. This systematic review evaluates indications, clinical outcomes, and complications after conversion to HA using an indication- and implant-stratified synthesis.
methodsFollowing Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA), PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase/Scopus, and Web of Science were queried to 15 March 2024. Studies reporting revision of any shoulder arthroplasty to HA with ≥ 12-month follow-up were included. Owing to heterogeneity in measures and implant types, a descriptive analysis stratified by initial implant × indication was performed; primary endpoints were postoperative functional scores, with complications and reoperations as secondary endpoints.
resultsOf 580 identified studies, 20 met inclusion criteria, totaling 268 patients. Glenoid component loosening was the most frequent indication (≈59%), followed by soft-tissue insufficiency (≈11%) and infection (≈9%). Postoperative function varied: ASES 48.2-66, constant 22-37, SANE 54-70. Complications occurred in 29%, and 15.7% underwent reoperation. Outcomes were indication-dependent: the highest scores were observed after humeral loosening (small subgroup), whereas glenoid loosening after aTSA or rTSA showed moderate, clinically meaningful improvements, particularly when bone loss could be reconstructed (e.g., grafting). Instability yielded modest gains, and infection was associated with the poorest results. Preoperative values were inconsistently reported, limiting Δ estimates.
conclusionsHA remains a salvage solution with indication-dependent effectiveness: best after humeral/glenoid loosening when reconstruction is feasible, modest in instability, and poor in infection. While HA can relieve pain and provide moderate functional improvement, it does not restore normal function. Selection should be deliberate and indication-specific, and future studies should adopt standardized reporting and prospective, indication-stratified designs.
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.