The Role of Intraoperative Navigation in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty and its Impact on Clinical Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

What's New in Shoulder and Elbow Surgery.

What's New in Shoulder and Elbow Surgery.

Inadequate subscapularis repair has been advocated as one of the contributing factors for dislocation in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty; nonetheless the need to restore the subscapularis tendon integrity is under debate. The aim of this systematic review was to answer the question: does subscapularis reattachment following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty improve joint stability, range of motion and functional scores? The literature was systematically screened in accordance with PRISMA guidelines looking for papers evaluating clinical outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in relation to the management of subscapularis tendon. Studies comparing clinical outcomes, complications and dislocation rate with or without subscapularis repair were included. Studies in which reverse total shoulder arthroplasty was performed for trauma or tumors were excluded. The methodology of included articles was scored with MINORS scale and the Risk of Bias was assessed adopting the ROBINS-I (Risk Of Bias In Non-randomized Studies of Interventions) developed by the Cochrane Group. A meta-analysis was also performed combining the studies to increase the sample size and hence the power to obtain meaningful data. The database search identified 1062 records, and 6 full-text articles were finally included. A total number of 1085 reverse total shoulder arthroplasty were assessed on. Except for one study, lateralized prosthetic designs have been used. Dislocation occurred in 0.8% (5/599 patients) of the patient with repaired subscapularis and in 1.6% (8/486 patients) of the tenotomized patients, and subscapularis repair was not associated with a higher risk of dislocation (pooled Peto OR: 0.496, 95% CI: 0.163 to 1.510, p = 0.217). Qualitative assessment revealed no differences in the range of motion and clinical scores. Subscapularis repair after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty produces no clinically meaningful benefits, particularly using lateralized prosthetic designs. Subscapularis re-attachment does not improve implant stability, nor increases range of motion or clinical scores. Given these results, keeping in mind the antagonistic effect of the repaired subscapularis on external rotation, no evidence lead to suggest subscapularis reattachment following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with lateralized prosthetic designs.

Comparison of clinical outcomes of revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for failed primary anatomic vs. reverse shoulder arthroplasty

Revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty has similar outcomes to primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty at 5 Year average follow-up

Complications and implant survivorship following primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients younger than 65 years: a systematic review

Outcomes after shoulder replacement: comparison between reverse and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

This study quantifies the rate of improvement after anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty; a better understanding of the rate of improvement associated with each prosthesis type may better establish patient expectations for recovery. Prospectively collected data on 1,183 patients who underwent either anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (n = 505) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (n = 678) were collected. The Simple Shoulder Test (SST), University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) Shoulder, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Constant, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) scores, along with range of motion, were recorded preoperatively and at routine postoperative time points. All included patients had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. The rate of improvement of these outcome measures was quantified for patients who underwent anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and those who underwent reverse total shoulder arthroplasty to compare recovery over time. In this study, 3,587 visits by 1,183 patients were analyzed and several differences between prosthesis types were noted. Patients who underwent reverse total shoulder arthroplasty experienced larger improvements in the Constant score and active forward flexion, and patients who underwent anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty demonstrated better improvement in external rotation compared with patients who underwent reverse total shoulder arthroplasty at nearly all time points. By 72 months, improvement in flexion and abduction decreased for each prosthesis type, but in particular for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Full improvement was achieved by 24 months, although the majority of improvement was achieved in the first 6 months, with all 5 scoring metrics following a similar rate of improvement. The ASES, SPADI, and UCLA Shoulder scores closely mirrored each other in the magnitude of improvement, and the SST score demonstrated the largest improvement and the Constant score demonstrated the smallest improvement for both anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Both anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty reliably result in improved patient outcomes. However, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty more reliably improves range of motion, particularly external rotation. Most improvement occurs by 6 months, with some additional improvement up to 2 years for both anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Although the indications for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty are substantially different, in addition to the biomechanical differences, the improvement in outcome scores over time can be expected to be very similar. This study is helpful to patients and health-care providers to establish expectations regarding the rate of recovery after total shoulder arthroplasty. Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Recent studies have demonstrated the safety of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in an outpatient setting. No clinical studies, to date, have specifically analyzed complication and readmission rates after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) with same-day discharge. The purpose of this study was to compare the 90-day complication and readmission rates of patients undergoing TSA and RTSA with same-day discharge. Ninety-eight consecutive patients who underwent 104 shoulder arthroplasties with same-day discharge (52 TSA and 52 RTSA) between 2016 and 2019 were analyzed. Suitability for same-day discharge was determined preoperatively using the standardized criteria. Demographic variables, operative time, 90-day readmission, and complication rates were recorded and compared between groups. Differences between the patients undergoing TSA versus RTSA were evaluated with Student t-test, Mann-Whitney test, or Chi square tests as statistically appropriate and reported as P values. Average age in the TSA cohort was significantly lower (60.1 ± 7.4 versus 67.5 ± 7.5, respectively; P < 0.001). Total operating room time was significantly shorter in the RTSA cohort (153 ± 30.1 minutes versus 171 ± 20.9). Three minor postoperative complications (5.8%) were observed in the TSA cohort (three seromas) within the 90-day postoperative period. There were four postoperative complications (7.7%) in the RTSA cohort (two postoperative seromas, one periprosthetic fracture, and one dislocation). None of the TSA patients required readmission and 1 RTSA (periprosthetic fracture) patient required readmission within 90 days. RTSA with same-day discharge is a safe option for appropriately selected patients despite significantly increased age. 90-day readmission and complication rates between outpatient TSA and RTSA are similar. Yes. NA. III (case-control).

Reverse versus anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: A large matched cohort analysis

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is indicated for patients with glenohumeral arthritis. In this procedure, the humeral head and glenoid surface are replaced with prosthetic components. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is indicated for patients with glenohumeral arthritis and a poorly functioning rotator cuff. In this procedure, a glenosphere articulates with a humerosocket. While those surgeries are commonly performed, a thorough review of the literature is required to determine the areas of agreement and variations in postoperative rehabilitation. To describe the literature on rehabilitation protocols following anatomic TSA and RTSA. For this systematic review, a computerized search was conducted in medical databases from inception to May 21, 2018 for relevant descriptive studies on TSA and RTSA rehabilitation protocols. The methodological index for nonrandomized studies tool and the modified Downs and Black tool for randomized controlled trials were used for assessment of the individual studies. Sixteen studies met the inclusion criteria, of which 1 provided level I evidence, 1 provided level III evidence, 2 provided level IV evidence, and 12 provided level V evidence. Ten of the studies described rehabilitation guidelines for TSA and 6 described those for RTSA. Following TSA, the use of a sling was recommended for a duration that varied from 3 to 8 weeks, and 4 of the 10 published protocols included resisted exercise during the initial stage of healing (the first 6 weeks after surgery). Seven of 10 published protocols recommended limiting shoulder external rotation to 30° and that passive range of motion be fully restored by 12 weeks post surgery. Suggested use of a sling post RTSA varied from "for comfort only" to 6 weeks, motion parameters varied from no passive range of motion to precautionary range limits, and all protocols agreed on performing deltoid isometric exercises early post surgery. There was a high level of heterogeneity for the rehabilitation guidelines and associated precautions for both TSA and RTSA. The majority of published protocols were descriptive in nature. Published rehabilitation strategies following TSA and RTSA are based on biomechanical principles, healing time frames, and exercise loading principles, with little consistency among protocols. There is a need to determine optimal rehabilitation approaches post TSA and RTSA based on clinical outcomes. Therapy, level 5. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2019;49(5):337-346. doi:10.2519/jospt.2019.8616.

BACKGROUNDThe optimal surgical approach for patients with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) and an intact rotator cuff remains debated. While anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has traditionally been favoured, reverse TSA (RTSA) is increasingly utilized.AIMTo systematically compare the outcomes of RTSA and TSA in this specific patient population.METHODSA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Retrospective comparative studies evaluating RTSA and TSA in patients with GHOA and intact rotator cuff were included. Key outcomes assessed included complication and reoperation rates, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), and range of motion. Risk of bias was assessed using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions tool.RESULTSTwelve studies encompassing 1608 patients (580 RTSA, 1028 TSA) met inclusion criteria. RTSA was associated with a lower reoperation rate compared to TSA [odds ratio = 0.37; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.14-0.94; P value = 0.04], while no significant difference in overall complication rates was observed (odds ratio = 0.47; 95%CI: 0.19-1.16; P value = 0.10). RTSA patients showed superior outcomes in University of California Los Angeles, Simple Shoulder Test, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index scores; however, the differences did not exceed the minimal clinically important difference. TSA patients had significantly better external rotation (mean difference= -9.0°; 95%CI: -13.21 to -5.02; P value < 0.0001). No significant differences were found in other range of motion measures or satisfaction scores. The overall methodological quality of included studies was moderate to serious.CONCLUSIONIn patients with GHOA and an intact rotator cuff, RTSA may offer comparable or improved outcomes to TSA with lower reoperation rates and similar complication profiles. Functional outcomes favour RTSA in certain patient-reported outcome measures, while TSA retains an advantage in external rotation. Surgical decision-making should remain individualized based on patient characteristics and functional demands.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty with preservation of the rotator cuff for primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis has similar outcomes to anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse shoulder arthroplasty for cuff arthropathy.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty has higher perioperative implant complications and transfusion rates than total shoulder arthroplasty

Complication rate and implant survival for reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus total shoulder arthroplasty: results during the initial 2 years