ReviewEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2026
Does the indication of reverse shoulder arthroplasty affect its outcomes? a meta-analysis.
Review in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWith the rise of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), its indications expanded to englobe much more than rotator cuff arthropathy such as severe glenoid deformity, massive irreparable rotator cuff tears, and proximal humerus fracture (PHF). Due to these numerous indications, knowing their impact on post-operative outcomes of RSA is important for surgeons. Therefore, this meta-analysis will compare the outcomes of RSA based on its pre-operative indications.
methodsPubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (page 1-20) were searched till October 2025. The clinical outcomes consisted of surgery related outcomes, functional outcome scores, and range of motion.
resultsEleven studies were included in this meta-analysis. It was shown that patients undergoing RSA for elective indications had a reduced length of stay (Mean difference = - 1.18; p < .001). Furthermore, these patients had a higher post-operative abduction (Standardized Mean difference = 0.17; p = 0.02), flexion (Standardized Mean difference = 0.59; p = 0.02), and external rotation (Standardized Mean difference = 0.42; p = 0.008) than the PHF group.
conclusionRSA done for PHF was shown to have a longer length of stay, and worse post-operative ROM. Our results emphasize the importance of fall prevention and tuberosity reduction intra-operatively. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
Indexed as
Identifiers
41746430What 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.