ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2026
Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in neglected anterior shoulder dislocation with glenoid bone defect: a comparative cohort study.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2026. 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.
- Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty is a surgical option for patients over 60 years of age with locked shoulder dislocation.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsLiterature has reported favorable outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for treating neglected anterior shoulder dislocation (NASD). However, few studies have specifically addressed the treatment outcomes and management of NASD in the presence of glenoid bone loss. The aim of this study is to evaluate the clinical outcomes of RSA in patients with NASD associated with glenoid bone defects.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of NASD patients treated with RSA from January 2018 to December 2022. Neglected dislocation was defined as lasting more than three weeks. Glenoid bone defect size and patient demographics were recorded. A matched control group of patients who underwent RSA for classical indications was included. NASD patients were divided into those who received autologous bone grafting (BG) and those who did not (N-BG). Outcome measures included range of motion (ROM), visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, subjective shoulder value (SSV), Constant score (CS), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score.
resultsTwenty-four NASD patients (mean duration 3.0 ± 1.3 months) were included, with an average glenoid defect of 25.3 ± 8.5%. Eleven underwent bone grafting due to defect sizes ≥ 30%. Compared to cuff tear arthropathy patients, NASD patients had worse preoperative ROM and functional scores. At final follow-up, the NASD group demonstrated marked postoperative improvements in forward flexion (from 44.7° to 121.3°), external rotation (from 2.2° to 26.9°), and abduction (from 57.8° to 95.9°). Functional outcomes were comparable between the NASD group and the matched cuff tear arthropathy group, with VAS scores of 1.4 vs. 1.2 (p = 0.370) and CS, SSV, and ASES scores of 75.2 vs. 77.4 (p = 0.290), 80.3 vs 81.3 (p = 0.751), and 77.6 vs. 80.4 (p = 0.165), respectively. Similarly, no significant differences were observed between the BG and N-BG groups, with VAS scores of 1.6 vs. 1.2 (p = 0.187) and CS, SSV, and ASES scores of 74.4 vs. 75.8 (p = 0.730), 81.4 vs. 79.4 (p = 0.692), and 76.6 vs. 78.4 (p = 0.585), respectively.
conclusionRSA is effective for NASD with glenoid bone loss, yielding outcomes comparable to cuff tear arthropathy cases. Bone grafting for defects ≥ 30% provided favorable results without significant differences in functional recovery compared to non-grafted cases.
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.