ReviewJSES international2025
Reverse shoulder arthroplasty in the revision setting.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Salvage Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty for Failed Proximal Humeral Fracture Fixation with Broken Implant.Orthopedic reviews · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent years have seen a rise in the popularity of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). Over the past decade, changes in rTSA design have led to improvements in functional outcomes and implant survival as well as fewer complications. While traditionally indicated for the management of rotator cuff tear arthropathy, rTSA has emerged as a versatile revision option following failure of a primary procedure including failed shoulder arthroplasty, rotator cuff repair, or proximal humerus open reduction and internal fixation. A large body of literature has demonstrated the success of rTSA following these procedures. The purpose of this article is to review the outcomes of rTSA in the revision setting, compare them with outcomes of primary rTSA, and provide guidance to surgeons on how to use this option for a failed primary procedure.
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.