Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Versus Hemiarthroplasty for Massive, Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears Without Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Massive, irreparable rotator cuff tears with glenohumeral deficiency present a significant surgical challenge. While hemiarthroplasty was historically the treatment of choice, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) has gained popularity due to its biomechanical ability to restore active elevation. However, high-quality comparative evidence remains scarce. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes and revision rates of rTSA versus hemiarthroplasty for massive rotator cuff deficiency. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify comparative studies evaluating rTSA versus hemiarthroplasty for cuff tear arthropathy or massive cuff tears without significant arthritis. Methodological quality was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool for non-randomized studies. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Functional outcomes were analysed using standardized mean differences (SMD), and revision rates were analysed using odds ratios (OR). The overall certainty of evidence was graded using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Two retrospective cohort studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified, comprising 158 shoulders (87 rTSA, 71 hemiarthroplasty). Risk of bias ranged from moderate to serious due to confounding factors. rTSA demonstrated superior functional outcomes compared to hemiarthroplasty (SMD=0.64; 95% CI: 0.32-0.97; P<.001). Patients undergoing rTSA achieved significantly greater active forward elevation (113° vs. 58°). There was no statistically significant difference in revision rates between the two procedures (OR=0.58; 95% CI: 0.21-1.57; P=.28), though the trend favoured rTSA. It was found that rTSA provides superior functional recovery compared to hemiarthroplasty for patients with massive rotator cuff deficiency, with a comparable safety profile at short- to-mid-term follow-up. Despite the "very low" certainty of evidence due to the observational nature of available studies, the consistent functional benefits support rTSA as the preferred surgical intervention for this condition.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Cureus
Published
2026-02-09
DOI
https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.103260
Primary Topic
Shoulder Injury and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Versus Hemiarthroplasty for Massive, Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears Without Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ali Juma, Abdulmalik Aljulajil, Qasim M Shamtoot, Mohamad B Dahha et al.
Cureus
Shoulder Injury and Treatment
article

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Versus Hemiarthroplasty for Massive, Irreparable Rotator Cuff Tears Without Arthritis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Ali Juma, Abdulmalik Aljulajil, Qasim M Shamtoot, Mohamad B Dahha, Rayan M Alharbi, Deena M Alamri, Tareq Albaqali, Hayf Zayed Oraidah, Saad I Abuelsaid, Mohammed W Alghamdi, Ezzat M Abu Khaled, Ayman Saad, Mohammed A Alamer, Adnan F Soqir, Safwan K Alghwail
article en

Abstract

Massive, irreparable rotator cuff tears with glenohumeral deficiency present a significant surgical challenge. While hemiarthroplasty was historically the treatment of choice, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) has gained popularity due to its biomechanical ability to restore active elevation. However, high-quality comparative evidence remains scarce. The purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the clinical outcomes and revision rates of rTSA versus hemiarthroplasty for massive rotator cuff deficiency. A systematic literature search was conducted to identify comparative studies evaluating rTSA versus hemiarthroplasty for cuff tear arthropathy or massive cuff tears without significant arthritis. Methodological quality was assessed using the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies - of Interventions) tool for non-randomized studies. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. Functional outcomes were analysed using standardized mean differences (SMD), and revision rates were analysed using odds ratios (OR). The overall certainty of evidence was graded using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) approach. Two retrospective cohort studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified, comprising 158 shoulders (87 rTSA, 71 hemiarthroplasty). Risk of bias ranged from moderate to serious due to confounding factors. rTSA demonstrated superior functional outcomes compared to hemiarthroplasty (SMD=0.64; 95% CI: 0.32-0.97; P<.001). Patients undergoing rTSA achieved significantly greater active forward elevation (113° vs. 58°). There was no statistically significant difference in revision rates between the two procedures (OR=0.58; 95% CI: 0.21-1.57; P=.28), though the trend favoured rTSA. It was found that rTSA provides superior functional recovery compared to hemiarthroplasty for patients with massive rotator cuff deficiency, with a comparable safety profile at short- to-mid-term follow-up. Despite the "very low" certainty of evidence due to the observational nature of available studies, the consistent functional benefits support rTSA as the preferred surgical intervention for this condition.

CureusVol. 18(2)
Misurata University (LY), Qassim University (SA), Jordan University of Science and Technology (JO), King Abdulaziz University (SA), Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland - Bahrain (BH), Salmaniya Medical Complex (BH), King Saud University (SA), Ibn Sina National College for Medical Studies (SA), University of Jeddah (SA), Saudi Heart Association (SA), Ministry of Health (JO), Innovation Cluster (Canada) (CA), University of Bisha (SA), University of Tabuk (SA)
Reduced inequalities
Openalex Percentile: Top 62%
Shoulder Injury and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.