ArticleJSES international2025
Clinical accuracy of humeral and glenoid component placement in total shoulder arthroplasty using ASTRA patient-specific guides.
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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Malalignment of the humeral and glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty is associated with complications such as instability, implant loosening, and restricted motion. While the accuracy of patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) for glenoid component orientation is well documented, the precision of PSI for humeral osteotomy has not yet been published for a noncadaveric environment. This study aims to calculate the deviation between the planned and achieved orientations of humeral and glenoid components using PSI in a clinical, in vivo setting. Methods: Forty-six patients were enrolled. One patient was excluded due to an intraoperative change to humeral component selection. The gender, etiology for arthroplasty (osteoarthritis or cuff tear arthropathy), severity of glenoid wear based on the Walch classification, and procedure (anatomic or reverse) were recorded. Computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained preoperatively for 3-dimensional reconstruction, from which the target humeral and glenoid component orientations for each patient were selected by the surgeon in the ASTRA surgical planning platform (Enovis, Austin, TX, USA). Humeral and glenoid PSIs were designed and 3-dimensionally printed to execute the planned alignments. A postoperative CT scan was acquired and used to calculate the deviation between the planned and achieved humeral version, humeral neck-shaft angle, humeral osteotomy height, glenoid version, and glenoid inclination. Humeral version was able to be calculated for 22 patients (48.9%) with a CT scan which extended distally beyond the humeral epicondyles. Results: A total of 8 outliers (17.8%) were identified across all orientation parameters: 5 outliers (11.1%) for humeral orientation and 3 (6.7%) for glenoid orientation. The average deviation was 2.9°, 2.2°, 1.3 mm, 1.7° and 1.4° for humeral version, humeral neck-shaft angle, humeral osteotomy height, glenoid version, and glenoid inclination, respectively. The mean deviation in glenoid version was greater in males than females ( Conclusion: PSI generated from CT-based planning can achieve precise execution of preoperative plans in 89% of humeral and 93% of glenoid components in both anatomic and reverse procedures across a variety of patient morphologies. The humeral guide, when used in a more challenging in vivo environment, demonstrates accuracy comparable to those observed in existing ex vivo studies.
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.