Table 3.
Literature review.
| Author and Year (No of Implant Types) |
No. of Patients |
Patients with PRNR | Mean Follow-Up |
Clinical Results | Implant-Related Reintervention | Complications |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Chanlalit et al., 2012 [1] (5 RHA types) |
26 | 17 (63%) | 33 months | NA | NA | NA |
| Levy et al., 2016 [3] (1 RHA type) |
15 | 6 (40%) | 30 months | M-ASES 70; MEPS 85; VAS 2; SANE 75 | 0 | 6 loosening |
| Giannicola et al., 2021 [5] (2 RHA types) |
52 | 50 (96%) | 33 months | NA | NA | NA |
| Lee et al., 2023 [4] (2 RHA types) |
35 | 14 (40%) | 34 months | MEPS 77.8; q-DASH 23.8, VAS 0.8 | NA | NA |
| Giannicola et al., 2023 [2] (2 RHA types) |
97 | 82 (84%) | 72 months | MEPS 94.3, p-ASES 93.6, DASH 6.7 | 3 disassembly due to new trauma | 6 symptomatic stiffness, 9 ulnar neuropathy, and 31 asymptomatic PL instability |
NA: not assessed; VAS: visual analogical scale; MEPS: Mayo Elbow Performance Score; Q-DASH: quick Disability Arm and Shoulder; p-ASES: patient—American Shoulder and Elbow Surgery score; SANE: single assessment numeric evaluation.