Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42609634›Full record

ReviewActa medica Lituanica2026

Cement Spacer versus Endoprosthesis as Reconstruction Modality after Limb Salvage for Shoulder Malignancies: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Akshat Gupta, Divesh Jalan, Nishith Gupta, Nupur Aggarwal, Kshitish Behera, Princi Jain

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Acta medica Lituanica, 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

6 authors.

Akshat GuptaDepartment of Orthopaedics, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rajkot, Gujarat, India E-mail.
Divesh JalanCentral Institute of Orthopaedics, Vardhman Mahavir Medical College & Safdarjung Hospital, New Delhi, India E-mail: ORCID ID.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3460-8159
Nishith GuptaOrthopaedic Oncology, Narayana Hospitals, Kolkata, West Bengal, India.
Nupur AggarwalDepartment of Burns & Plastic Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Rajkot, Gujarat, India.
Kshitish BeheraOrthopaedic Oncology, Bagchi Sri Shankara Cancer Centre and Research Institute, Bhubaneshwar, Odisha, India E-mail.
Princi JainDepartment of Medicine, Lady Hardinge Medical College, New Delhi, India E-mail.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Limb salvage is the mainstay of surgical treatment for primary sarcomas as well as metastatic lesions of the proximal humerus. This involves wide excision of the involved humeral segment followed by a reconstruction of the defect. The purpose of this review was to determine which reconstruction modality offers a better overall functional outcome. Methods: After registering a review with the Results: A total of eight studies, involving 348 subjects in total, were included in this review, out of which, only four articles were found eligible for meta-analysis. Primary malignancy of the bone was the most common diagnosis (Osteogenic sarcoma followed by Ewing sarcoma). A higher frequency of axillary nerve sacrifice was seen in patients undergoing spacer implantation. Conclusion: Cement spacers are ideally suited for patients with a poor socio-economic background, aggressive lesions and a shorter life expectancy, while joint replacement is the reconstructive modality of choice in low-grade, well differentiated, isolated malignancies with negligible chances of sacrificing the shoulder abductor mechanism.

Indexed as

arthroplastycement spacerhumerusmalignancyneoplasmshoulder

Identifiers

PMID42609634
PMCPMC13479665

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.