Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 27, 2025

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty
Published on: July 5, 2011
Clinical outcomes of cemented vs. uncemented reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures: a
David S Kao1, Omar A Protzuk2, Robert S O'Connell2
1Virginia Commonwealth University Health, 1250 E. Marshall St., Richmond, VA, 23219, USA. David.kao@vcuhealth.org.
Background:
Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty is an established treatment method for comminuted proximal humerus fractures. Both cemented and uncemented techniques exist, with uncemented reverse total shoulder offering many theoretical advantages, including improved biologic fixation, absence of cement related complications, and ease of revision if necessary. There are few studies comparing the outcomes of the two techniques.
Methods:
The study was performed in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. A search for studies assessing clinical outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures was performed of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library. Main outcomes included Constant Score (CS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and complication rate. Inclusion criteria were as follows: indication for arthroplasty was fracture; minimum one year follow up; article in English. Exclusion criteria were as follows: review articles; biomechanical or cadaver studies. Quality analysis was performed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (RoB 2) and the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies-of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool.
Results:
A total of 682 studies were identified through the initial search, with 36 studies meeting all inclusion criteria. There were 24 studies investigating cemented technique, 10 studies examining uncemented technique, and two studies involving both techniques. There was no difference in mean follow up between patients receiving a cemented vs. uncemented rTSA (32.3 months vs. 30.6 months, p = 0.06). Patients who received a cemented rTSA had a significantly higher Constant-Murley score than those who received an uncemented rTSA (59.4 vs 55.9, p < .001). There was no difference between the two groups when comparing ASES Scores (77.5 vs 78.6, p = 0.54) and overall complication rates (11.1% vs 11.8%, p = 0.23).
Conclusion:
Both cemented and uncemented rTSA are both valid options for treating acute proximal humerus fractures. Cemented rTSA may portend slightly improved clinical outcomes with similar overall complication rates compared to uncemented rTSA for proximal humerus fractures.
More Related Videos
09:51The Transition to an Anterior-Based Muscle Sparing Approach Improves Early Postoperative Function but is Associated with a Learning Curve
Published on: September 7, 2022
04:41Treatment with Locking Intramedullary Nailing for Intertrochanteric Fracture of the Femur Utilizing a New Awl with a Distal Positioner
Published on: June 6, 2025