Stemmed VS stemless total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is commonly used for glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA) in patients with an intact rotator cuff. The aim of this study was to quantify advantages and disadvantages of the stemmed and stemless designs in terms of clinical outcome and complications.

A review was developed based on the PRISMA statement and registered on PROSPERO. Inclusion criteria were comparative studies analyzing stemmed vs. stemless TSA in adults with OA. The literature search was performed in PubMed, Web of Science, and Wiley Cochrane Library up to January 2024. Constant and Murley Score (CMS), Range of Motion, and operative time were documented, as well as complications divided into minor and major complications. The Downs and Black’s “Checklist for Measuring Quality” was used to assess risk of bias and quality of evidence.

Out of 1876 articles retrieved; 14 were included in the meta-analysis for a total of 1496 patients (51.4% men, 48.6% women). The CMS was 74.8 points in the stemmed group and 76.9 points in the stemless group, with no differences in both overall score and subscales. No differences were found in elevation and abduction, while external rotation was 3.9° higher in the stemless group (p < 0.05) No differences were found in operating time and overall complications. However, deep infections were higher in the stemless group (2.2% vs. 0.8%, p < 0.05). The quality was assessed as poor, fair, good, and excellent in 0, 2, 7, and 5 studies, respectively.

Stemless TSA may offer minor advantages in terms of external rotation, although the clinical relevance appears doubtful. On the other hand, a lower deep infection rate was documented for stemmed implants. Overall, stemmed and stemless TSA provided good clinical results, with similar benefits in terms of clinical outcomes and complications.