ArticleJSES reviews, reports, and techniques2026
A bibliometric analysis of the top 100 most-cited shoulder arthroscopy patents.
Article in JSES reviews, reports, and techniques, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Despite significant technological advancement in the field of shoulder arthroscopy, there remains limited evaluation of the evolution and categorization of shoulder arthroscopy patents. This bibliometric and patent analysis was performed to address this gap by systematically evaluating the most influential shoulder arthroscopy patents. The primary purpose of this study was to characterize the 100 most-cited shoulder arthroscopy patents by category of innovation and to analyze differences in citation metrics, including age-adjusted citation rates, and temporal trends across categories. Methods: The Lens patent database was searched for patents containing "arthroscop∗" and "shoulder" in titles, abstracts, or claims, restricted to medical patents using Cooperative Patent Classification code A61. Patents were manually screened for relevance, ranked by forward citations, and the top 100 categorized into 6 groups: Arthroscopic Instruments, Fixation, Implants, Orthobiologic/Pharmacologic/Regenerative Medicine (OPR), Access and Retraction, and Computer-guided Systems. Non-parametric statistics compared forward citation counts and age-adjusted citation rates across categories. Significance was set at Results: Of 579 unique patents identified, 261 remained after screening. Among the top 100, median forward citation count was 97 (interquartile range: 26-188). Arthroscopic Instruments were most frequent (42%), followed by Fixation (19%), OPR (17%), Implants (15%), Access and Retraction (5%), and Computer-guided Systems (2%). Fixation patents had the highest median forward citation count (177, interquartile range: 92-308, Conclusion: Arthroscopic Instruments and Fixation patents comprised more than half of the top 100 most-cited shoulder arthroscopy patents. Fixation patents demonstrated the highest citation impact, including the highest age-adjusted citation rate, a metric that showed no significant correlation with patent age and may therefore more reliably reflect technological influence independent of temporal bias. Age-adjusted citation rates and temporal trend analyses revealed a shifting patent landscape, with increasing innovation in Implants and OPR categories over time. This bibliometric and patent analysis characterizes the shoulder arthroscopy patent landscape and may serve as a resource for researchers, clinicians, and industry stakeholders seeking to identify areas of continued innovation.
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.