Shoulder arthroplasty following solid organ transplant: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

IntroductionThe purpose of this study is to report a systematic review and meta-analysis of solid organ transplant (SOT) patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty to compare functional and radiographic outcomes, demographics, and complications with non-transplant patients. MethodsStudies were included if they examined patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty in the setting of prior solid organ transplantation and included post operative range of motion, patient-reported outcomes, complications, or revisions. Studies were excluded if they were national database analyses or lacked clinical data. Pubmed, MEDLine, Scopus, and Web of Science were queried using relevant search terms in July 2022. Data was pooled, weighted, and a paired t-test and chi-square analysis was performed. ResultsThere were 71 SOT and 159 non-SOT shoulders included in the study. The most common indication for surgery was avascular necrosis (n = 26) in the solid organ transplant group and osteoarthritis (n = 60) in the non-SOT group. Forward elevation, external rotation, ASES, and VAS pain scores improved significantly in both cohorts following surgery. There was no significant difference in age at surgery (p-value = 0.20), postoperative forward elevation (p-value = 0.08), postoperative external rotation (0.84), and postoperative ASES scores (p-value = 0.11) between the two cohorts. VAS pain scores were significantly lower in the SOT cohort (p-value<0.01). The risk of death was significantly higher in the SOT group (p-value<0.01). but the rate of overall complications (p = 0.47), surgical complication (p-value = 0.79), or revision surgery (p-value = 1.00) was not significantly different between the two cohorts. ConclusionShoulder arthroplasty is a safe, effective option in patients following solid organ transplant. There is not an increased risk of adverse outcomes, and SOT patients had comparable range of motion and patient-reported outcomes when compared to their non-SOT peers. Level of evidenceIII.