Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42063985›Full record

ArticleJournal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty2026

Quantifying glenoid bone loss in the setting of primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Alexander J MacFarlane, Jordan H Larson, Michael P Kucharik, Joshua U Hancock, Ankur S Narain, Micah J Nieboer, Kaitlyn N Christmas, Peter Simon, Mark A Frankle

Abstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Alexander J MacFarlaneFlorida Orthopaedic Institute, Shoulder Service, Tampa, FL, USA.
Jordan H LarsonFoundation for Orthopaedic Research and Education, Department of Translational Research, Tampa, FL, USA.
Michael P KucharikDepartment of Orthopaedics and Sports Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA.
Joshua U HancockFoundation for Orthopaedic Research and Education, Department of Translational Research, Tampa, FL, USA.
Ankur S NarainFlorida Orthopaedic Institute, Shoulder Service, Tampa, FL, USA.
Micah J NieboerFlorida Orthopaedic Institute, Shoulder Service, Tampa, FL, USA.
Kaitlyn N ChristmasFoundation for Orthopaedic Research and Education, Department of Translational Research, Tampa, FL, USA.
Peter SimonFoundation for Orthopaedic Research and Education, Department of Translational Research, Tampa, FL, USA.
Mark A FrankleFlorida Orthopaedic Institute, Shoulder Service, Tampa, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Presently, there is no quantifiable and objective criteria for defining severe glenoid bone loss (GBL) for primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). In this study, we sought to establish quantifiable thresholds of severe GBL using scapular statistical shape models and intraoperative assessment. In addition, we compared outcomes of severe GBL against moderate and mild cases of GBL. Methods: A retrospective review of 57 primary rTSA cases that were determined intraoperatively to be severe GBL were identified. These were uploaded to pre-operative planning software for three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction. Cases were propensity matched at a 1:1 ratio to moderate and mild bone loss cases based on age, sex, and time to final follow-up (mean 53.5 months). Glenoid version, inclination, maximum erosion depth, and glenoid vault loss (GVL) were compared between groups. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine severe bone loss thresholds. Blinded raters were asked to determine bone loss severity based on radiographs, 2D computed tomographies, or 3D reconstructions. Two-year and final follow-up American Shoulder Elbow Surgeons and visual analog scale (VAS) pain and function were compared between groups. Results: There was a higher proportion of rotator cuff disease in the mild and moderate bone loss groups when compared to severe bone loss. ROC curves resulted in minimum thresholds for severe GBL of 5.5 mm maximum erosion depth, 12.5% GVL, and 17.5° of version (area under curve = 0.944, 0.924, 0.812, respectively). Discrimination was highest when combining 2 of the 3 measurements (Youden's J = 0.82). Interobserver reliability was highest when using 3D reconstructions (ƙ = 0.726). The mild bone loss group performed worse on American Shoulder Elbow Surgeons, VAS pain, and VAS function scores at 2 years and final follow-up when compared to the severe bone loss group. Conclusion: In this study, we found that severe GBL in primary rTSA is defined as medialization of at least 5.5 mm, GVL of greater than 12.5%, and retroversion greater than 17.5°. Discrimination of severe bone loss from less severe bone loss is best done with at least 2 of the 3 measurements. In addition, these measurements have substantial agreement when blindly assessed and are strongest when using 3D reconstructions. Severe GBL outcomes are similar to less severe bone loss at a mean of 53.5 months, though this is in part driven by less rotator cuff disease in patients with less severe bone loss.

Indexed as

3D planning softwareClassificationGlenoid bone lossPre-operative planningReverse shoulder arthroplastyrTSA

Identifiers

PMID42063985
PMCPMC13126498

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.