ReviewCurrent reviews in musculoskeletal medicine2026
Arthroscopy for the Painful Shoulder Arthroplasty: Indications, Outcomes, and Technical Considerations.
Review in Current reviews in musculoskeletal medicine, 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
purpose of reviewPersistent pain, stiffness, or suspected infection following shoulder arthroplasty remains a challenging clinical problem. Arthroscopy has emerged as a minimally invasive diagnostic and therapeutic tool in selected patients with painful anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty, reverse shoulder arthroplasty, or hemiarthroplasty. This review summarizes the current evidence regarding indications, outcomes, complications, and technical considerations for arthroscopy in the setting of pain following prior shoulder arthroplasty. RECENT
findingsShoulder arthroscopy after arthroplasty has been described for glenoid component loosening, polyethylene wear, rotator cuff pathology, biceps tendon disease, postoperative stiffness, impingement, and suspected periprosthetic joint infection. Reported outcomes suggest that arthroscopy may improve pain and function in selected patients, particularly after glenoid component removal, biceps procedures, capsular release, and lysis of adhesions. Arthroscopic tissue biopsy also demonstrates greater diagnostic utility than aspiration or serum inflammatory markers for suspected periprosthetic shoulder infection. Technical strategies, including initial subacromial evaluation and controlled glenohumeral entry through the rotator interval, may reduce iatrogenic implant damage during arthroscopic evaluation. Arthroscopy can be both diagnostic and therapeutic in well-selected patients with painful or stiff shoulder arthroplasty. Although it is not a substitute for revision surgery in cases of clear implant failure, instability, or massive cuff insufficiency, it may help clarify the diagnosis, treat focal pathology, and delay or avoid open revision in selected patients.
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.