SynthesisClinics in orthopedic surgery2025
Comparison of Revision Rates and Clinical Outcomes between Anatomic and Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty for Rotator Cuff-Intact Osteoarthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Clinics in orthopedic surgery, 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.
- Comparative outcomes of anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for rotator cuff-intact glenohumeral osteoarthritis: a propensity score-matched, age-stratified exploratory analysis.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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Backgroud: This study aimed to compare the outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) in patients with rotator cuff-intact osteoarthritis, assessing revision and complication rates, patient-reported outcomes, and postoperative range of motion. Methods: This systematic review and meta-analysis included comparative studies with levels I-III evidence that assessed rTSA and aTSA in patients with rotator cuff-intact osteoarthritis. Inclusion criteria required studies to report postoperative revision rates, complication rates, patient-reported outcomes, or range of motion with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Studies focusing on noncomparative designs, biomechanical analyses, or case series were excluded. A comprehensive search of PubMed, Ovid Medline, and Scopus databases was conducted from their inception through December 2024. Odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CI were used for dichotomous outcomes, and mean differences (MDs) with 95% CI were used for continuous outcomes. Results: A total of 14 studies, encompassing 4,819 cases, were included in the analysis. rTSA demonstrated a significantly lower revision rate compared to aTSA (OR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.29 to 0.65; Conclusions: In patients with rotator cuff-intact osteoarthritis, rTSA is associated with a lower revision rate compared to aTSA, while achieving comparable clinical outcomes and range of motion, with the exception of external rotation.
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.