Shoulder and Elbow最新文献

{"title":"Pre-operative biopsies in the revision setting - helpful or harmful?","authors":"Matthew Howard, William Thomas, Jon Evans, Jeff Kitson, Chris Smith","doi":"10.1177/17585732261474495","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17585732261474495","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is no clear consensus as to whether pre-operative biopsies (arthroscopic or open) should be routinely obtained to confirm absence of infection in presumed aseptic revision cases, and practice widely varies.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Consecutive patients over a 4-year period from a single centre undergoing a revision shoulder or elbow procedure without evidence or suspicion of infection were included. Electronic patient records were utilised to determine biopsy results, revision procedure and clinical outcome.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 81 patients undergoing a revision shoulder or elbow procedure for presumed aseptic cause, 40 had biopsies taken prior to the revision procedure, with seven positive results (defined as ≥3/5 positive samples). These were treated with oral antibiotics before undergoing revision. At revision, intra-operative biopsies showed that infection had been cleared in 4/7 cases, and new infection was identified in six cases that were previously negative. Of the 41 patients who did not have pre-revision biopsies, 13 were positive at the time of definitive procedure and subsequently successfully treated with oral antibiotics.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Pre-revision biopsy has a low sensitivity (54%) for identifying bacteria in presumed aseptic cases and is not necessarily a benign procedure, with potential risk of introducing infection. Pre-revision antibiotic treatment may not result in negative biopsies at the time of definitive revision.</p>","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732261474495"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13433567/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148674176","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Semi-inlay and onlay humeral stems in reverse shoulder arthroplasty achieve comparable outcomes through different patterns of glenoid and humeral lateralization and distalization: A retrospective study from the FP-UCBM Shoulder Study Group.","authors":"Michele Paciotti, Antonino De Rosa, Edoardo Franceschetti, Mauro La Bruna, Pietro Gregori, Mauro Ciuffreda, Giovanni Perricone, Giancarlo Giurazza, Rocco Papalia","doi":"10.1177/17585732261473902","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17585732261473902","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has evolved through different humeral stem designs to optimize biomechanics and minimize complications. Although inlay and onlay configurations differ in geometry and bone preservation, their clinical outcomes often appear similar. This study aimed to compare clinical, functional, and radiographic outcomes between onlay and semi-inlay humeral stems, hypothesizing that comparable results may be achieved through distinct glenoid and humeral lateralization and distalization patterns.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A retrospective analysis was conducted on 199 patients who underwent primary RSA between January 2021 and January 2024. Radiographic parameters lateralization shoulder angle (LSA), distalization shoulder angle (DSA), glenoid and humeral lateralization angles (GLA and HLA), and glenoid and humeral distalization angles (GDA and HDA) were measured on standardized anteroposterior radiographs. Clinical evaluation included Constant-Murley Score, Simple Shoulder Test, Visual Analog Scale, and range of motion. Statistical comparisons were performed using non-parametric or parametric tests according to data distribution (α = 0.05).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>At a mean follow-up of 28 ± 8 months, 164 patients met the inclusion criteria (41 semi-inlay; 123 onlay); the groups showed no significant difference in clinical outcomes. Radiographically, semi-inlay stems demonstrated higher glenoid lateralization (GLA 53.31 ± 4.43 vs. 50.26 ± 6.92, <i>p</i> = 0.001) and lower humeral lateralization (HLA 34.52 ± 6.49 vs. 35.62 ± 9.11, <i>p</i> > 0.05), while onlay stems showed greater glenoid distalization (GDA 76.84 ± 12.03 vs. 70.01 ± 8.05, <i>p</i> = 0.001) and lower humeral distalization (HDA 22.04 ± 8.40 vs. 29.95 ± 6.53, <i>p</i> < 0.001). No significant differences were found for global LSA or DSA (<i>p</i> > 0.05). Scapular notching incidence was comparable in the groups. Interobserver reliability for angular measurements was excellent (<i>κ</i> = 0.82).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Onlay and semi-inlay RSA designs achieved equivalent clinical outcomes through different biomechanical adaptations. Semi-inlay stems appear to compensate for their intrinsic lower humeral lateralization with increased glenoid lateralization, whereas onlay stems may balance their humeral geometry through greater glenoid distalization. These complementary strategies highlight that, rather than the selection of a specific stem design, it is the achievement of the desired lateralization and distalization obtained through different approaches that is key to successful RSA outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732261473902"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-08-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13433569/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148674178","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Kinesiotaping effects in patients with rotator cuff-related shoulder pain: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Ángel Del Blanco-Múñiz, Alberto Sánchez-Sierra, Adrián Mares-Herranz, Álvaro Zubia-Ráez, Javier Merino-Andrés","doi":"10.1177/17585732261473885","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17585732261473885","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rotator cuff-related shoulder pain (RCRSP) is multifactorial; current guidelines prioritize education and active rehabilitation, while adjuncts such as Kinesiotaping (KT) remain controversial.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To update the evidence on KT in RCRSP (historically termed subacromial impingement syndrome) and quantify its effects on pain, function, and shoulder range of motion (ROM) compared with sham, no tape or other conservative interventions.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five databases (MEDLINE, Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro), Cochrane Library, Rehabilitation, and Sports Medicine Source and SPORTDiscus) were searched from inception to 1 April 2026. The effects of KT treatment were calculated through the estimation of the effect size (ES) and its 95% confidence intervals. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing the risk of bias 2 (RoB 2).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirty-nine RCTs (n = 2481) met the criteria. KT showed a small ES on the functionality of the injured shoulder, in addition to pain during activities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>KT offers, at best, small short-term benefits in shoulder function and pain during activity and night pain, with uncertain effects on ROM. The overall certainty of evidence is low to very low. KT may be considered as an adjunct, but should not replace education-focused, exercise-based rehabilitation in RCRSP.</p>","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732261473885"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-07-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13415625/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148621593","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Effects of neurocognitive reactive activities on upper extremity closed kinetic chain functional performance testing.","authors":"Sidney M Stoddard, Kelsey Lewis, Bryan L Riemann, George J Davies","doi":"10.1177/17585732261469815","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17585732261469815","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Existing UE return-to-sport (RTS) decision-making criteria do not assess neurocognitive (NC) deficits, increasing the risk of reinjury. This study aimed to establish the test-retest reliability of two NC reactive (NCR) variations of an upper extremity (UE) functional performance test (FPT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-two healthy adults completed two trials each of the Closed Kinetic Chain (CKC) UE Stability Test and two NCR variations, the UE Reactive CKC Test-Single Light (UERCKCT-SL) and UE Reactive CKC Test-Multi-Light (UERCKCT-ML), on two separate days. The average number of touches and reaction time were recorded. Reliability was assessed using systematic bias, total error, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC), and 90% minimal detectable change.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ICC results for each test ranged from .669 to .816 for females and .676 to .872 for males. A significant difference in the average number of touches performed between the test variations was observed for both females (<i>F</i> _2,38 = 7.6, <i>p</i> = .002, <math><msubsup><mi>η</mi> <mi>p</mi> <mn>2</mn></msubsup> </math>  = .29) and males (<i>F</i> _2,42 = 13.5, <i>p</i> < .001, <math><msubsup><mi>η</mi> <mi>p</mi> <mn>2</mn></msubsup> </math>  = .39). Test reaction time differences between the UERCKCT-SL and UERCKCT-ML were not significant for females (<i>t</i> ₁₉ = 1.20, <i>d</i> = 0.21, <i>P</i> = .245, CI_diff = -56.78 to 15.43) and males (<i>t</i> ₂₁ = 0.40, <i>d</i> = 0.05, <i>p</i> = .692, CI_diff = -59.65 to 40.33).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Adding NCR multitask UE testing may improve RTS decision-making guidelines by better mimicking sporting demands. However, further research is needed to identify clinically suitable and ecologically valid NCR UE CKC FPT.</p>","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732261469815"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13407671/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148608211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Concerns regarding interpretation of outcome measure utilization in 'Physiotherapists' Use of Outcome Measures in the Assessment of Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: An International Online Survey'.","authors":"Etika Rana","doi":"10.1177/17585732261470034","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17585732261470034","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732261470034"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13407661/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148608282","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Assessment of \"Spin\" in the abstracts of systematic reviews in leading upper extremity surgery journals over the past 10 years: A cross-sectional methodological study.","authors":"Oluwatoba T Balogun, Varun Jain, Praveen Sritharan, Aava Param, Ajay Shah, Darius Luke Lameire, Ujash Sheth","doi":"10.1177/17585732261472066","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17585732261472066","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Practice guidelines in upper extremity surgery are heavily influenced by systematic reviews (SRs). SRs are prone to \"spin\"; misleading reporting that can distort interpretation, such as omitting individual study risk of bias when formulating study conclusions. This study aimed to assess the prevalence and types of spin employed in abstracts of SRs from leading upper extremity surgical journals.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional analysis of SRs published between 2015 and 2025 was conducted across the three highest impact factor upper extremity journals. Included study abstracts were assessed for nine types of spin using a published framework by Yavchitz et al. (2016). Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate the prevalence of spin and its associations with study bibliometric characteristics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Spin was found in 28/54 included articles (51.9%). 21/54 (38.9%) studies demonstrated more than one type of spin. The most common type of spin employed was type 9 (claims of benefit despite reporting bias) (27/54, 50.0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Over 50% of SRs published in leading upper extremity surgical journals demonstrated at least one form of spin in their abstracts. Claiming benefits despite a high risk of bias was most commonly employed. These findings highlight the need for robust reporting frameworks to ensure SRs are interpreted effectively.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>IV.</p>","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732261472066"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13407678/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148608116","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Comparative functional outcomes of arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Rafael Llombart-Blanco, Gonzalo Mariscal, Ahmed Hamdy Zabady, Paul Broqua, Carlos Barrios, Rafael Llombart-Ais","doi":"10.1177/17585732261469408","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17585732261469408","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Rotator cuff tears are a common cause of shoulder pain and dysfunction in adults. Mini-open and all-arthroscopic rotator cuff repair are widely used, but their comparative effectiveness remains debated. This meta-analysis compared functional, pain, and range-of-motion outcomes between techniques.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from inception to October 2025 for comparative studies in adults undergoing all-arthroscopic versus mini-open rotator cuff repair. Outcomes included ASES, Constant-Murley, DASH, range of motion, and VAS pain. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed using RevMan v5.4.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventeen studies comprising 1185 patients met inclusion criteria. There were no statistically significant differences between techniques in ASES (MD: -1.40; <i>p</i> = 0.64), Constant-Murley (MD: -0.23; <i>p</i> = 0.91), DASH (MD: 2.00; <i>p</i> = 0.48), range of motion (MD: 2.58°-2.95°, all <i>p</i> > 0.20), or VAS pain (MD: -0.57; <i>p</i> = 0.06). Arthroscopic repair showed a nonsignificant trend toward lower pain, but functional and motion outcomes were clinically equivalent at both short- and long-term follow-up.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Arthroscopic and mini-open rotator cuff repairs showed comparable functional recovery, pain relief, and range-of-motion outcomes up to two years post-surgery. Further well-designed studies with standard protocols are needed to confirm these findings.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>II, systematic review and meta-analysis.</p>","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732261469408"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-07-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13407679/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148608257","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Long-term survival outcomes following total shoulder arthroplasty: An implant-level systematic review and meta-analysis of case series and registry data with more than 13 years follow-up.","authors":"Faheem Bhatti, Saima Waseem, Hemant Singh, Robert Scott, Jenna Shepherd, Pip Divall, Niel Kang, Harvinder Pal Singh","doi":"10.1177/17585732261469128","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17585732261469128","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>It is known that survival of primary total shoulder arthroplasty at 10 years is excellent; however, evidence beyond this time-point is limited. We aimed to evaluate the long-term survival of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) implants, at ≥13 years follow-up, using case series and international joint registry data.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>CENTRAL, Embase, and MEDLINE databases were searched for studies reporting TSA survival data at ≥13 years follow-up. National joint registries were contacted for implant data. Pooled survival at 13, 15, and 20 years was calculated for case series and registry data using a random-effects model.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Data from four national joint registries and seven studies were analysed. Pooled aTSA registry data showed survival of 91.50% (89.36-93.64) at 13-years and 90.82% (88.25-93.38) at 15-years. Pooled rTSA registry data showed survival of 93.19% (91.78-94.60) at 13-years and 90.74% (85.73-95.74) at 15-years. Data from case series gave pooled aTSA survival estimates of 88.69% (76.97-100.42), 90.23% (85.87-94.58) and 82.08% (70.30-93.88) at 13, 15 and 20 years, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our analysis suggests approximately 90% of shoulder replacements last up to 15 years without revision. Variation between individual implants highlights the need for granular implant-level data to guide patient and clinician decision making.</p>","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732261469128"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13388502/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148563169","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Bony ongrowth in stemless reverse total shoulder arthroplasty components.","authors":"Victor Cardona-Perez, Seyedeh Zahra Mousavi, Diana Angelica Perez-Garcia, Alberto R Rivera, Abdulaziz Ahmed, Uma Srikumaran","doi":"10.1177/17585732261469034","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17585732261469034","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Stemless shoulder arthroplasty utilizes epiphysometaphyseal fixation, eliminating the need for humeral canal reaming. Extending stemless technology to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) introduced distinct biomechanical challenges. In the absence of diaphyseal support, concerns regarding humeral component subsidence, varus tilting, and aseptic loosening arise. In the United States, stemless rTSA remains investigational, with the Fx Easytech Reversed system currently under evaluation through an Investigational Device Exemption clinical trial.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Explanted components were submitted to an independent orthopaedic laboratory for systematic, non-destructive analysis comprising high-magnification microscopy. Bony ongrowth was assessed using a non-standardized, semi-quantitative grading scale applied across four fixation surface quadrants (Q1-Q4), estimating tissue coverage from 0 (none) to 4 (75-100%).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bony ongrowth was observed on all three titanium-hydroxyapatite (Ti/HA)-coated humeral anchor bases across implantation durations ranging from 39 days to 3 years and 8 months, with semi-quantitative scores of Q1: 2-4, Q2: 4, Q3: 3-4, Q4: 3. No case was revised for fixation failure.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Ti/HA-coated stemless humeral components demonstrated osseointegration under the compressive-dominant loading environment of rTSA. Bony ongrowth was evident as early as 39 days postoperatively. Larger retrieval series and long-term follow-up are necessary to confirm the durability of stemless humeral implants.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: </strong>Level IV, Case Report.</p>","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732261469034"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13388503/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148563153","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Response to: Concerns regarding interpretation of outcome measure utilisation in \"Physiotherapists' Use of Outcome Measures in the Assessment of Lateral Elbow Tendinopathy: An International Online Survey\".","authors":"Luke Heales, Leanne Bisset, Bill Vicenzino, Marcus Bateman, Caitlin Hill, Crystal Kean, Steven Obst","doi":"10.1177/17585732261470036","DOIUrl":"10.1177/17585732261470036","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":36705,"journal":{"name":"Shoulder and Elbow","volume":" ","pages":"17585732261470036"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2,"publicationDate":"2026-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC13388491/pdf/","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148563209","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}