ArticleCureus2026
Detection of Anterior and Posterior Glenoid Bone Defects After Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty With Tomosynthesis in a Pig Model.
Article in Cureus, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background Scapular notching is a well-recognized complication of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) and is typically identified at the inferior scapular neck on conventional radiographic evaluation. However, anterior and posterior glenoid bone defects around the baseplate may be difficult to detect using standard imaging modalities, including radiographic evaluation or computed tomography (CT). Tomosynthesis provides sectional imaging with reduced metal artifact and may improve the detection of region-specific glenoid bone defects after RSA. Methods The scapula of a slaughter pig was used in this study. Delta XTEND® implants (DePuy, Warsaw, IN, USA) were used to create four models: anterior, posterior, and inferior glenoid bone defect models, and an intact control model. Images obtained by radiographic evaluation, CT, and tomosynthesis were independently reviewed by 12 orthopedic surgeons to assess the presence or absence of glenoid bone defects. Detection sensitivity and specificity were calculated for each imaging modality. Results For anterior and posterior glenoid bone defect models, the sensitivities and specificities of radiographic evaluation were 25%/100% and 8.3%/94.4%, respectively. CT demonstrated sensitivities and specificities of 25%/86.1% and 33.3%/86.1%, respectively. In contrast, tomosynthesis demonstrated a sensitivity of 83.3% and a specificity of 94.4% for both anterior and posterior glenoid bone defects. The sensitivity of tomosynthesis was markedly higher than that of radiographic evaluation and CT. Conclusions In this controlled ex vivo model, tomosynthesis enabled improved detection of anterior and posterior glenoid bone defects compared with conventional radiography and CT. Although these findings are limited to an experimental setting, tomosynthesis may serve as a useful adjunctive imaging modality for characterizing region-specific glenoid bone defects after RSA.
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.