Primary Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Research Articles

Rehabilitation after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a survey of members of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons

Surgeons disagree about whether patients should undertake home physical therapy (HPT) or formal physical therapy (FPT) after undergoing reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Recent studies suggest that HPT is as effective as FPT, but surgeons who perform RTSA may believe that FPT continues to have a role. Our primary purpose was to describe the opinions and self-reported practices of surgeons who perform RTSA regarding prescribing physical therapy (PT) after surgery. We also sought to identify factors associated with prescription of FPT. A survey was distributed electronically from May to September 2023 to the 1076 members of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons who were practicing in the United States at that time. Of these surgeons, 237 (22%) responded to the survey. Anonymous responses were collected via Qualtrics, including demographic data and information about the RTSA implant systems used. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze surgeon characteristics, implant types, and rehabilitation practices. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify surgeon, procedure, and implant characteristics associated with the likelihood of FPT prescription. Because some respondents reported using multiple RTSA implant types and some did not answer implant-specific questions, a total of 225 RTSA implant types were included. Forty-six percent of respondents reported that they recommended FPT for every patient; 64% said they typically prescribe FPT. A smaller proportion of respondents who had completed a hand and upper-extremity fellowship said that they prescribed FPT compared with those who had not completed such a fellowship. However, PT prescription was not associated with any other studied characteristics, such as number of years in practice or whether the surgeon tended to repair the subscapularis. On average, respondents estimated that 92% of their patients received either FPT or HPT. Respondents also reported varying timeframes for starting PT activities after surgery. For example, 50% of respondents reported recommending passive shoulder range of motion below the shoulder level within the first postoperative week, whereas 73% recommended waiting 2-6 weeks for active shoulder range of motion below shoulder level. Most surveyed surgeons prescribe FPT and/or HPT after primary RTSA, with a slight preference for FPT. Surgical factors did not influence rehabilitation preferences. Further randomized studies to investigate the impact of PT on clinical outcomes of RTSA are needed.

Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Revised to Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes Compared to Primary Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) has become the procedure of choice for a failed aTSA. Little data exists regarding outcomes; the few studies published to date have small numbers, short follow-up, and most do not have a control group or use first generation implants. The purpose of this study is to compare the clinical and radiographic outcomes of failed aTSA revised to rTSA to primary rTSA. A prospective multicenter shoulder registry was used to conduct a retrospective review of patients that received a primary rTSA for osteoarthritis and rotator cuff disease and compare them to those that had an aTSA revised to a rTSA using the same implant between 2007 and 2021 with a minimum follow-up of two years. Cohorts were matched 3:1 (primary:revision) by age, gender, body mass index and length of follow-up. Those that underwent revision for humeral fracture, infection, or an unknown reason were excluded. Preoperative and postoperative range of motion (ROM) and patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) were compared. Outcomes included rates of scapular notching, complications, revision, and patient satisfaction. There were 88 aTSA revised to rTSA compared to 264 matched primary rTSA. In both cohorts, the mean age was 68 years, 59% were female, and the mean follow-up was 56 months. The most common reason for revision was rotator cuff tearing (53%), followed by aseptic glenoid loosening (34%), instability (9%), aseptic humeral loosening (6%) and glenoid component dissociation (3%). At latest follow-up, patients in both groups had statistically significant improvements in all outcome scores, exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and the substantial clinical benefit (SCB). The revision cohort had significantly less postoperative abduction (P<0.001) and forward elevation (P=0.001) compared to the primary rTSA cohort. All PROMs in the revision cohort were significantly worse than those in the primary rTSA cohort. Patient satisfaction rate in the revision cohort was significantly lower than the primary cohort (P<0.001). Complication (P=0.005) and revision rates (P=0.013) were significantly higher in the revision cohort, while scapular notching was similar. Patients undergoing revision of a failed aTSA to rTSA have worse clinical outcomes compared to those undergoing primary rTSA, including all PROMs, abduction, elevation, pain relief and patient satisfaction, with higher complication and revision rates. While patients in the revision group had significant improvements that exceeded the MCID and SCB, they do not achieve the same outcomes as patients who undergo primary rTSA.

Complications after Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in the Korean Population: A Single Center Study of 299 Cases

BackgroundKnowledge regarding differences in the order of frequency of complications after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) between Asian and Western populations is limited. We therefore asked for (1) What is the order of frequency of complications after primary RTSA in the Korean population? (2) What are the rates of complication, reoperation, and revision, and clinical outcomes after index surgery? MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed the 299 consecutive cases who underwent primary RTSA with more than 1 year of follow-up over a period of 12 years. The mean age of the patients was 73.4 years (range, 58-88 years) and the mean follow-up period was 3.8 years (range, 1-11.5 years). Evaluation of the clinical outcomes, complications, and reinterventions was performed at the final follow-up. ResultsThe mean VAS pain score, UCLA score, ASES score, and SSV improved from 6.7, 10.2, 30.7, and 27.7% before RTSA to 1.4, 26.4, 80.5, 77.2% after RTSA, respectively (P < .001). Overall, 45 complications (15.1%) were observed in 44 patients. The order of frequency of complications was as follows: 16 cases of scapular stress fracture (5.4%), 9 intraoperative or postoperative periprosthetic fracture (3.0%), 6 brachial plexus injury (2.0%), 4 instability (1.3%), 2 glenoid loosening (0.7%), 2 glenoid disassembly (0.7%), 2 periprosthetic joint infection (0.7%), 1 glenoid fixation failure (0.3%), 1 humeral stem fixation failure (0.3%), 1 hematoma (0.3%), and 1 complex regional pain syndrome (0.3%). Reintervention was performed in 15 cases (5.0%) including reoperation (8 cases; 2.7%) and revision surgery (7 cases; 2.3%). ConclusionAt a mean follow-up period of 3.8 years, primary RTSA showed satisfactory clinical outcomes with a complication rate of 15.1%, a reoperation rate of 2.7%, and a revision rate of 2.3%. Scapular stress fracture appears to be the most common complication after RTSA in the Korean population.

Do Constrained Liners (in a 145° onlay implant) Provide Any Benefit? A Matched Retrospective Study

The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) using constrained liners (in a 145° onlay implant, Exactech, Equinoxe) with primary rTSA using standard liners with a minimum 1-year follow-up. A total of 836 primary rTSA patients were analyzed in this study. Patients treated with constrained liners (n=209) were cross-matched 1:3 for age, gender, glenosphere diameter, and follow-up duration, and compared with 627 patients who underwent primary rTSA with standard liners. Study endpoint was at one year. Outcomes were analyzed preoperatively and at the latest follow-up. Patient characteristics, postoperative range of motion (ROM), patient reported outcomes (PROs), complications and revisions were recorded. There was no statistically significant changes in improvement in pain (-4.9 vs -5.1; p=0.356), ROM (abduction, 45.7° vs 47.9°; p=0.522) (forward elevation, 44.0 vs 50.8°; p=0.057) (internal rotation score 1.0 vs 1.1; p=0.709) (external rotation, 17.9° vs 16.7°; p=0.543), or PROs (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score, 44.5 vs 43.7; p=0.107) (Shoulder Arthroplasty Smart score, 27.5 vs 30.0; p=0.052) between the constrained and standard liner cohorts at minimum 1 year follow-up. However, the constrained liner rTSA cohort had a significantly higher rate of adverse events (6.2% vs. 2.7%; p=0.012), including a higher rate of scapular notching (15.6% vs. 8.8%; p=0.015). The utilization of constrained liners in primary rTSA demonstrated no significant difference in the change in pain, abduction, forward elevation, ER and IR scores, ASES scores, and SAS scores at minimum 1-year follow-up. There was no significant difference in forward elevation or abduction compared to standard liners. However, we observed that the overall rate of adverse events, including scapular notching were significantly higher in the constrained liner cohort. Long-term clinical and radiographic follow-up is necessary to fully elucidate the durability of these results. At this time, it is unclear if constrained liners have any benefit in rTSA.

Anatomic or Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty? How Fellowship Training Affects Selection of Arthroplasty Type

While both anatomic (ATSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) have been popularized as a means of treating individuals with degenerative shoulder conditions, the indications for each can vary widely amongst providers. While surgeons with differing fellowship training commonly perform these procedures, it is not understood how fellowship training influences choice of implant. A national database was queried to identify surgeons performing anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. For all surgeons who performed more than 10 cases between 2010-2022, fellowship data was individually collected via online search. For each fellowship group, rates of anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) procedural codes. Those undergoing revision arthroplasty and those with a history of fracture, infection, or malignancy were excluded. Primary outcome measures included the proportion of primary and revision ATSA and RTSA by fellowship in addition to the rate of RTSA performed for a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. A total of 131,974 patients met the inclusion criteria and were retained for this study. RTSA increased from 50.1% of all primary shoulder arthroplasty cases in 2011 to 72.0% in 2022. After adjusting for age and comorbidities, Sports Medicine fellowship-trained (Sports) surgeons opted for primary RTSA over ATSA at a significantly higher rate than Shoulder and Elbow fellowship-trained (Shoulder) surgeons and surgeons who completed another type of fellowship or no fellowship (Other). Sports surgeons also chose RTSA more frequently for the diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis compared to Shoulder surgeons. Surgeons in the Other cohort were more likely to perform primary ATSA rather than RTSA in comparison to surgeons in the Shoulder and Sports cohorts. Sports surgeons were responsible for the greatest increase in percentage of all shoulder arthroplasty procedures from 2010-2022 (28.4% to 40.4%) while the Other group decreased by a comparable amount (45.9% to 32.4%) over the same period. Surgeons who have completed a Sports Medicine fellowship choose RTSA over ATSA at a higher rate than Shoulder and Elbow surgeons, both for all indications and also for a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Those who have no fellowship training or fellowship training outside of Sports Medicine and Shoulder and Elbow surgery have the highest percentage of ATSA in their arthroplasty practice. Revision anatomic and revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty represents a larger percentage of overall case volume for Shoulder and Elbow surgeons.

Outcomes following humeral head autograft glenoid reconstruction in primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

Patients with severe glenoid bone loss are at increased risk for poor implant fixation, scapular notching, dislocation, joint kinematic disturbances, and prosthetic failure following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). Glenoid bone grafting has proven useful when performing rTSA in patients with inadequate glenoid bone stock, although the current literature is limited. The purpose of this study is to evaluate clinical outcomes in patients with significant glenoid deformity undergoing primary rTSA with one-stage glenoid reconstruction using a humeral head autograft. A database of prospectively enrolled patients was reviewed to identify patients who underwent primary rTSA with humeral head autograft (n=40) between 2008 and 2020 by 6 high-volume shoulder arthroplasty surgeons with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Variables studied included demographics, medical comorbidities, range of motion, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, pain score, patient satisfaction, glenoid deformity, revisions, and complications. Preoperative glenoid deformity was characterized using glenoid version and beta-angles, measured on computed tomography. Improvement at final follow-up was compared to a matched control group of 120 standard primary rTSA patients. Following the post hoc Bonferroni correction, an adjusted alpha value of 0.004 was used to define statistical significance. Forty patients were included with a mean follow-up of 5.3 (range, 2.0-13.2) years. Patients exhibited a mean preoperative glenoid retroversion and beta-angle of 29° and 80°, respectively. At final follow-up, patients who received a graft exhibited lower mean scores for active external rotation (25° vs. 39°; P=.001) in comparison to those who did not receive a graft. No differences were observed in active abduction (P=.029), active forward elevation (P=.009), active internal rotation (P=.147), passive external rotation (P=.082), Global Shoulder Function score (P=.157), Constant score (P=.036), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (P=.009), or pain score (P=.186) between groups. Seven patients (17.5%) exhibited complications of which the most common being aseptic glenoid loosening (15%). This study demonstrates that patients undergoing primary rTSA with autogenous humeral head autograft for severe glenoid deficiency experience postoperative improvements in range of motion and functional outcome scores that exceeded the minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit but inferior to matched controls. This suggests that glenoid reconstruction using a resected humeral head autograft is an effective strategy when conducting primary rTSA in patients with significant glenoid deformity.

Does morbid obesity negatively impact perioperative outcomes following elective reverse shoulder arthroplasty?: a propensity-matched comparative study

BackgroundThe incidence of primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) and the prevalence of obesity have increased in the United States. Despite this, the literature assessing the effect of morbid obesity (body mass index (BMI)≥40 kg/m2) on perioperative surgical outcomes remains inconsistent. MethodsA retrospective review of consecutive elective primary rTSA cases from January 2016 through September 2023 at a single tertiary referral center was performed. All cases involved a short-stem humeral component and screw-in glenoid baseplate from the same implant manufacturer. Surgical and patient demographic data were collected. Morbidly obese patients were propensity matched at least 1:1 with non-morbidly obese patients based on age, gender, mFI-5 score, ACCI score, and 12-month preoperative ED visit. Regression analysis was utilized to assess the relationship between morbid obesity and operative time, LOS, ITVBL, surgical postoperative complications, in-hospital medical complications, disposition, and 90-day ED return and readmission. ResultsThere were a total of 175 short-stem rTSA cases performed with a median age of 71 years (IQR 66,76) and of which 19 (10.9%) had a BMI≥40 kg/m2. These 19 patients were propensity score matched to 41 non-morbidly obese patients (9 at 1:3, 4 at 1:2, and 6 at 1:1). There were no significant differences between the groups with regards to ITBVL, operative time, need for transfusion, hospital LOS, discharge disposition, prevalence for 90-day return to ED, or unplanned 90-day readmission. ConclusionsMorbid obesity should not be considered an absolute contraindication for elective rTSA, particularly in patients who have undergone appropriate preoperative medical clearance.

Revising Failed Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Comprehensive Techniques for Precise Explantation of Well-Fixed Implants.

With the increased utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), there has been a corresponding increase in the incidence of and demand for revision RTSA3. In cases in which the patient has undergone multiple previous surgeries and presents with well-fixed shoulder implants, even the most experienced shoulder surgeon can be overwhelmed and frustrated. Having a simple and reproducible treatment algorithm to plan and execute a successful revision surgery will ease the anxiety of a revision operation and avoid future additional revisions. The extraction techniques described here strive to preserve the humeral and glenoid anatomy, hopefully facilitating the reimplantation steps to follow. The main principles of implant removal include several consistent, simple steps. In order to revise a well-fixed humeral implant, (1) identify the old implants; (2) create a preoperative plan that systematically evaluates the glenoid and humeral deficiencies; (3) prepare consistent surgical tools, such as an oscillating saw, osteotomes, and/or a tamp; (4) follow the deltoid; (5) dissect the soft tissue with a sponge; (6) dissect the bone with use of an osteotome; and (7) remove the humeral stem in rotation. In cases in which there is also a well-fixed glenoid implant, the surgical procedure will require additional steps, including (8) exposure of the anteroinferior glenoid, (9) disengagement of the glenosphere, and (10) removal of the glenoid baseplate in rotation. Alternatives to revision RTSA include nonoperative treatment, implant retention with conversion of modular components, extensile revision surgical techniques, and/or mechanical implant removal. With the advent of modular humeral and glenoid components, surgeons may choose to change the implant components instead of removing the entire humeral and glenoid implants; however, repeat complications may occur if the previous implant or implant position was not completely revised. When confronted with a tough humeral explantation, an extensile surgical approach involves creating a cortical window or humeral osteotomy to expose the humeral implant. This approach can compromise the humeral shaft integrity, leading to alternative and less ideal reconstruction implant choices, the use of cerclage wires, and/or the use of a strut graft, all of which may complicate postoperative mobilization. If glenoid implant removal is necessary, the glenosphere is removed first, followed by the underlying baseplate component(s). If the glenosphere is stuck or if screws are cold-welded, the use of a conventional mechanical extraction technique with a burr or diamond saw may be required; however, this may lead to additional metal debris and intraoperative sparks. Revision RTSA can lead to high complication rates, ranging from 12% to 70%2, which will often require additional revision surgeries4. The first steps to all revision RTSA procedures include careful surgical exposure and component explantation. A simplified approach to expose the humerus and glenoid, coupled with a systematic and atraumatic approach to remove the implants without inadvertent injuries, will prevent surgical complications and the need for re-revision. The proposed comprehensive technique hopefully will allow precise removal of the humeral and glenoid implants while also preserving the remnant humerus or glenoid for future reconstruction. Few studies have evaluated postoperative patient outcomes in revision RTSA. Chalmers et al. performed a meta-analysis and found that patients were able to achieve a mean elevation of 106°, a mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score of 63, and a mean Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score of 522. Boileau showed very similar outcomes, with a mean elevation of 107° and a mean adjusted Constant score of 621. These outcomes are slightly inferior to those of primary RTSA, but patients remain satisfied with their improvement from their preoperative function. Preoperative preparation will reduce intraoperative reparation. Know the existing implant and the unique features of its design, understand the patient anatomy including bone defects, and anticipate all of the potential tools that may be needed.Know your anatomy. The anteromedial deltoid edge will help you identify the scarred-in humeral shaft.Da Vinci said that simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. Some of the most common surgical tools and instruments can be more effective than custom-designed ones.The implant should be removed in rotation.There are some company-specific explantation instruments that can be very helpful. Give the appropriate ones a try, but be prepared to consider alternative solutions. RTSA = reverse total shoulder arthroplastyCT = computed tomographyFE = forward elevation.

Bone Density Changes at the Origin of the Deltoid Muscle following Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Background: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) significantly impacts deltoid length, tension, and structure. Studies have extensively investigated various modifications in deltoid characteristics, such as perfusion, elasticity, caliber, histological changes, and strength post-RSA. However, to date, there is a notable absence of research evaluating changes in bone mineral density (BMD) at the deltoid muscle origin after the RSA procedure. Methods: A retrospective analysis of a consecutive series of RSAs performed between May 2011 and May 2022 was conducted. Inclusion criteria comprised primary RSAs with both preoperative and last follow-up shoulder CT scans and a minimum follow-up of 12 months. Trabecular attenuation measured in Hounsfield units (HU) was calculated using a rapid region-of-interest (ROI) method. BMD analysis involved segmenting three ROIs in both pre- and postoperative CT scans of each patient: the acromion, clavicle, and spine of the scapula. Results: A total of 44 RSAs in 43 patients, comprising 29 women and 14 men, were included in this study. The mean follow-up duration was 49 ± 22.64 months. Significant differences were observed between preoperative and postoperative HU values in all analyzed regions. Specifically, BMD increased in the acromion and spine, while it decreased in the clavicle (p-values 0.0019, <0.0001, and 0.0088, respectively). Conclusions: The modifications in shoulder biomechanics and, consequently, deltoid tension post-implantation result in discernible variations in bone quality within the analyzed regions. This study underscores the importance of thorough preoperative patient planning. By utilizing CT images routinely obtained before reverse shoulder replacement surgery, patients at high risk for fractures of the acromion, clavicle, and scapular spine can be identified.

Effect of glenosphere diameter and lateralization in primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial

BackgroundWithin reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), prior studies have suggested that smaller glenosphere diameters may result in higher rates of scapular notching and polyethylene wear, while lateralized glenospheres may allow for better range of motion (ROM); however, supportive data remains limited. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to report the outcomes of a prospective randomized clinical trial comparing 4 different glenosphere configurations based on diameter and lateral offset. MethodsBetween 2016 and 2020, 113 primary RSAs with a diagnosis of either rotator cuff tear arthropathy (n = 48, 42%), irreparable rotator cuff tears (n = 22, 19%), or primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis with subluxation or glenoid bone loss (n = 43, 38%) were enrolled into a blinded prospective randomized clinical trial. The mean age of the patients included in the study was 73 ± 7 (range, 50-89) years, and 58 (51.3%) were males. All procedures were performed by two surgeons utilizing the ReUnion RSA system (Stryker, Mahwah, NJ, USA). Patients were randomized into four possible groups based on the diameter and lateral offset of the glenosphere implanted: 36 mm diameter with 2 mm (n = 34, 30.1%) or 6 mm (n = 28, 24.8%) of lateralization and 40 mm diameter with 2 mm (n = 29, 25.7%) or 6 mm (n = 22, 19.5%) of lateralization. Outcomes collected included pain, active ROM, strength, satisfaction, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), complications, reoperations, and revisions. PROMs included the Oxford Shoulder Score, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and the quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire. All patients were followed for a minimum of 2 years. ResultsWith the numbers available, glenosphere diameter and lateralization resulted in no differences in pain, ROM, strength, satisfaction, and PROMs at 1 year, 2 years, or final follow-up (All P > .05). However, all 3 complications (10.7% vs. 0% vs. 0% vs. 0%; P = .025) and 2 revision surgeries (7.1% vs. 0% vs. 0% vs. 0%; P = .103) occurred in males, with the 36 + 6 cohort. ConclusionsUsing this particular RSA design, implantation of glenospheres with 36 mm or 40 mm of diameter and 2 mm or 6 mm of sphere lateralization did not translate into significant differences when primary RSA was performed in shoulders with rotator cuff tear arthropathy, irreparable cuff tears, or primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis. However, all observed complications occurred in males with the smallest diameter and lateralized glenosphere.

Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis for Proximal Humeral Fractures: Primary Treatment vs. Salvage Procedure.

Background: The optimal treatment for complex proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) lacks consensus, with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) often being a final resort rather than a primary approach. This study aimed to compare outcomes and satisfaction rates of primary RTSA for PHFs versus salvage RTSA for previously unsuccessful treatments. We hypothesized that primary RTSA would yield superior clinical outcomes, functional scores, and patient satisfaction. Methods: A retrospective analysis of RSA procedures between 2011 and 2021 was conducted, focusing on primary RTSA for PHFs or salvage RTSA for failed osteosynthesis. Patients meeting inclusion criteria underwent clinical and radiological follow-up for at least two years. Demographic characteristics, outcomes scores, and range of motion (ROM) were assessed. Results: Of 63 patients, 42 underwent primary RTSA and 21 underwent salvage RTSA. The median follow-up was 50 months. Statistically significant differences favored primary RTSA in forward flexion, abduction, internal rotation, and Constant shoulder score. Patient satisfaction levels did not significantly differ between groups. Complications occurred in 7.15% of primary RTSA cases and 14.28% of salvage RTSA cases. Conclusions: Primary RTSA may yield slightly better outcomes and lower complication rates compared to salvage RTSA. Further prospective studies are necessary to validate these findings.

A two-year comparison of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty mini-humeral tray and augmented mini-glenoid baseplate implants vs. standard implants.

Patients who undergo reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) are getting younger with greater function expectations. This retrospective, longitudinal study of prospectively collected data compared perceived shoulder function and strength, active shoulder mobility, radiographic evidence of scapular notching, and implant survival over the initial 2-years post-RTSA among patient groups who received either standard central fixation point liner and glenoid baseplate implants, or lower size profile mini-humeral tray with offset trunnion options and mini-augmented glenoid baseplate implants. Patients who underwent primary RTSA using standard central fixation point liner and glenoid baseplate implants (Group 1, n = 180) were compared with patients who underwent primary RTSA using lower size profile mini-humeral tray with offset trunnion options and mini-augmented glenoid baseplate implants (Group 2, n = 53) for active shoulder mobility, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, perceived ability to lift 10 lbs (4.5 kg) overhead, radiographic evidence of scapular notching, and implant survival. Data was collected pre-surgery, 6-weeks, 6-months, 1-year, and 2-years post-RTSA (p ≤ 0.05). More Group 2 patients had more complex B or C Walch glenoid morphology, while Group 1 had more A1 or A2 types (p ≤ 0.001). Group 2 had greater active shoulder flexion at 6-months, 1-year, and 2-years (p ≤ 0.018) and external rotation (in adduction) at 6-months and 2-years (p ≤ 0.004) compared to Group 1, with higher ASES scores at 6-months and 2-years (p ≤ 0.026) (with small-to-medium effect sizes), and with more patients meeting or exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at 2-years (p = 0.045) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) levels at 6-months, 1-year and 2-years (p ≤ 0.045). Scapular notching was identified in six of 53 (11.3%) Group 2 patients and in 32 of 180 (17.7%) Group 1 patients. Group 1 patients had more grade 2 or greater scapular notching grades compared to Group 2 (p = 0.04). Implant survival was comparable with Group 1 = eight of 180 (4.4%) and Group 2 = 1 of 53 (1.9%) of patients requiring removal for 95.6% and 98.1% implant survival, respectively. Limited scapular notching and excellent implant survival was observed in both groups. Despite including individuals with more complex glenoid deficiency, patients receiving the lower size profile implants generally displayed better active shoulder mobility and perceived shoulder function compared to those who received standard implants. These patients also more frequently met or exceeded the MCID by 2-years post-RTSA and PASS levels by 6-months, 1-year, and 2-years post-RTSA, with lower scapular notching grades. Retrospective comparative study.

Characteristics associated with rerevision of primary inlay and onlay reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Analysis from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry

BackgroundTwo designs of primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), inlay reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (in-rTSA) and onlay reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (on-rTSA) that had undergone an aseptic revision were compared to determine differences in the rate of rerevision. MethodsIn this comparative observational national registry study between January 1, 2012, and December 31, 2021, all rTSA utilizing either a modular inlay or onlay metaphyseal humeral component that had been revised for aseptic reasons formed 2 cohort groups. The cumulative percentage rerevision (2nd CPR) was determined using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HRs) from Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age and sex. A minor category revision involved exchange of parts not fixed to bone whilst major revisions did. The primary and revision diagnoses, surgeon primary volume experience, and revision category were compared. Shoulder Modular Replacement (SMR)/SMR L1 or L2 combination (Lima Corporate, San Daniele del Friuli, Italy) was excluded at subanalysis. ResultsThe 2nd CPR at 3 years was 20.4% (95% confidence interval 17.1, 24.1) for in-rTSA (n = 571) and 16.1%(11.6, 22.2) for on-rTSA (n = 249). The risk of rerevision was not different between the 2 cohort groups. Primary diagnosis fracture was associated with an increased risk of rerevision for on-rTSA (entire period on-rTSA HR = 3.16(1.50, 6.68), P = .002), and in-rTSA at subanalysis (entire period on-rTSA HR = 2.91(1.33, 6.33), P = .007). 59.9% of in-rTSA and 24.1% of on-rTSA aseptic revisions were minor. The revision diagnosis, the surgical experience of rTSA and if the revision was major or minor did not change the rate of rerevision. The most common reason for both in-rTSA (50%) and (43.2%) on-rTSA rerevision was instability/dislocation. DiscussionRerevision rates of in-rTSA and on-rTSA after aseptic revision are high. The primary rather the revision diagnosis changed rerevision rates in contemporary rTSA surgery. Minor revisions did not reduce rerevision rates for in-rTSA or on-rTSA compared to humeral/glenoid revision. Increased surgical experience of primary rTSA did not change the rate of rerevision of in-rTSA or on-rTSA.

Do the humeral radiographic changes at 5-year follow-up affect the clinical outcomes of press-fit humeral stems in primary reverse shoulder arthroplasties?

The purposes of this study were to analyze and compare the functional outcomes and radiological changes around the press-fit humeral components in two contemporary medialized reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) systems at a minimum of 5-year follow-up. Between December 2003 and December 2015, 249 consecutive RTSAs were performed at our hospital. Of these, 68 primary uncemented RTSA met our inclusion criteria. The Constant-Murley score (CMS), the modified Constant score, a visual analog scale (VAS) and active shoulder range of motion (ROM) were measured pre- and postoperatively. Radiological assessment was performed by plain radiographs at a minimum of 5years postoperatively. At a mean follow-up of 80.2months, there was no significant difference (p = .59) between the postoperative functional scores and range of motion of the two groups (Delta Xtend and Lima SMR). Radiological data of stress-shielding were observed in 38 patients (55.9%) being slightly more frequent in the Lima SMR group (21 patients) than in the Delta Xtend group (17 patients) (p = .62). Our study shows that the good functional results are similar between the two uncemented RTSA systems used and that they do not depend on the presence of radiological changes (stress-shielding) in the humeral stem at a minimum 5-year follow-up.

Predictors of poor and excellent outcomes following reverse shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff

BackgroundAs the indications for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) continue to evolve, it has been more commonly utilized for the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff (GHOA). Given the increased use of RSA for GHOA, it is important to identify factors influential of clinical outcomes. In this study, we sought to identify variables predictive of clinical outcomes following RSA for GHOA. MethodsPatients undergoing primary RSA for GHOA between 2015-2020 were retrospectively identified through a prospectively maintained, single surgeon registry. Eligible patients had complete patient-reported outcome measures and range of motion measurements with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Univariate analysis was utilized to compare characteristics and outcome measures of patients with poor and excellent outcomes, which was defined as postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores in the bottom and top quartiles, respectively. Multivariate linear regression was performed to determine factors independently predictive of postoperative ASES score. ResultsA total of 230 patients were included with a mean follow-up of 33.4 months (SD 13.2). The mean age of the study population was 71.9 (SD 6.1). Two hundred twenty-four patients (97.4%) surpassed the minimal clinically important difference and 209 patients (90.1%) achieved substantial clinical benefit for ASES score. Preoperative factors differing between the poor and excellent outcome groups were sex (male: poor 37.9%, excellent 58.6%; P = .041), opioid use (poor 24.1%, excellent 5.2%; P = .009), ASES score (poor 32.9, excellent 41.0; P = .011), and forward elevation (poor 92°, excellent 101°; P = .030). Linear regression demonstrated that Walch B3 glenoids (β 7.08; P = .010) and higher preoperative ASES scores (β 0.14; P = .025) were predictors of higher postoperative ASES score, while postoperative complications (β -18.66; P < .001) and preoperative opioid use (β -11.88; P < .001) were predictive of lower postoperative ASES scores. ConclusionOver 90% of patients who underwent RSA for GHOA with an intact rotator cuff experienced substantial clinical benefit. An unsurprising handful of factors were associated with postoperative clinical outcomes; higher preoperative ASES scores were slightly associated with higher postoperative ASES, whereas preoperative opioid use and postoperative complications were associated with lower postoperative ASES. Additionally, Walch glenoid type B3 was associated with higher postoperative ASES, indicating that patients with posterior glenoid defects are not predisposed to poor clinical outcomes following RSA. These results serve as a resource to improve preoperative patient counseling and manage postoperative expectations.

Impact of accumulating risk factors on the incidence of dislocation after primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using a medial glenoid–lateral humerus onlay prosthesis

IntroductionThe aim of this study is to facilitate preoperative identification of patients at-risk for dislocation after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) using the Equinoxe rTSA prosthesis (medialized glenoid, lateralized onlay humerus with a 145° neck angle) and quantify the impact of accumulating risk factors on the occurrence of dislocation. MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 10,023 primary rTSA patients from an international multi-center database of a single platform shoulder prosthesis and quantified the dislocation rate associated with multiple combinations of previously identified risk factors. To adapt our statistical results for prospective identification of patients most at-risk for dislocation, we stratified our dataset by multiple risk factor combinations and calculated the odds ratio for each cohort to quantify the impact of accumulating risk factors on dislocation. Results136 (52F/83M/1UNK) of 10,023 primary rTSA patients were reported to have a dislocation for a rate of 1.4%. Patients with zero risk factors were rare, where only 12.7% of patients (1,268 of 10,023) had no risk factors, and only 0.5% of these (6 of 1,268) had a report of dislocation. The dislocation rate increased in patient cohorts with an increasing number of risk factors. Specifically, the dislocation rate increased from 0.9% for a patient cohort with 1 risk factor to 1.0% for 2 risk factors, 1.6% for 3 risk factors, 2.7% for 4 risk factors, 5.3% for 5 risk factors, and 7.3% for 6 risk factors. Stratifying dislocation rate by multiple risk factor combinations identified numerous cohorts with either an elevated risk or a diminished risk for dislocation. DiscussionThis 10,023 rTSA multi-center study demonstrated that 1.4% of rTSA patients experienced dislocation with one specific medialized glenoid/lateralized humerus onlay rTSA prosthesis. Stratifying patients by multiple combinations of risk factors demonstrated the impact of accumulating risk factors on incidence of dislocation. rTSA patients with the greatest risk of dislocation were: male gender, age ≤67 years at the time of surgery, patients with BMI ≥31, patients who received cemented humeral stems, patients who received glenospheres having a diameter >40mm, and/or patients who received expanded/laterally offset glenospheres. Patients with these risk factors who are considering rTSA using a medial glenoid/lateral humerus, should be made aware of their elevated dislocation risk profile.

Clinical Outcomes Do Not Deteriorate Over Time Following Primary Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Minimum 10-Year Follow-up of 135 Shoulders.

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) offers satisfactory mid-term outcomes for a variety of pathologies, but long-term follow-up data are limited. This study demonstrates the long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes as well as the predictive factors for an inferior outcome following RTSA. Using the prospective database of a single, tertiary referral center, we included all primary RTSAs that were performed during the study period and had a minimum 10-year follow-up. Clinical outcomes included the absolute Constant-Murley score (CS), relative CS, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), range of motion, pain, complication rate, and reintervention rate. Radiographic measurements included the critical shoulder angle (CSA), lateralization shoulder angle (LSA), distalization shoulder angle (DSA), reverse shoulder angle (RSA), acromiohumeral distance (ACHD), center of rotation, glenoid component height, notching, radiolucent lines, heterotopic ossification, and tuberosity resorption. A total of 135 shoulders (133 patients) were available for analysis at a mean follow-up of 10.9 ± 1.6 years. The mean age was 69 ± 8 years, and 76 shoulders (76 patients; 56%) were female. For most of the clinical outcomes, initial improvements were observed in the short term and were sustained in the long term without notable deterioration, with >10-year follow-up values of 64 ± 16 for the absolute CS, 79% ± 18% for the relative CS, 79% ± 21% for the SSV, and 14 ± 3 for the CS for pain. However, after initial improvement, deterioration was seen for flexion and external rotation, with values of 117° ± 26° and 25° ± 18°, respectively, at the final follow-up. Scapular notching, heterotopic ossification, and radiolucent lines of <2 mm progressed during the study period. Younger age (p = 0.040), grade-II notching (p = 0.048), tuberosity resorption (p = 0.015), and radiolucent lines of <2 mm around the glenoid (p = 0.015) were predictive of an inferior outcome. The complication rate was 28%, with a reintervention rate of 11%. RTSA provided improved long-term results that did not significantly deteriorate over time for most of the clinical parameters. Negative clinical outcome predictors were younger age, grade-II notching, tuberosity resorption, and radiolucent lines of <2 mm around the glenoid. Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Predicting pain and function with the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio in patients following primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundGlenohumeral joint osteoarthritis is prevalent in the middle-aged and elderly population, affecting approximately 16%-20% of individuals. Total shoulder arthroplasty has become a common treatment for osteoarthritis, with a notable rise in the use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) over the past decade. Despite improvements in surgical technique and prostheses, 22% of patients continue to experience chronic pain following shoulder arthroplasty. Currently, medical practitioners lack a reliable method for identifying which patients will suffer from persistent pain and functional limitations after surgery. In this context, the neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), known for measuring immune-inflammatory reactions and neuroendocrine stress, has gained significant attention. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to explore the predictive potential of the NLR in identifying patients who will experience elevated pain and functional limitations after primary rTSA. MethodsThis study was a retrospective cohort design. Patient data were collected retrospectively between 2019 and 2021 and grouped based on preoperative NLR (≥2.5 and <2.5). Primary outcome measures assessed were the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, visual analog scale (VAS), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score. Secondary outcomes included active shoulder elevation and external rotation range of motion. Outcome measures were captured before surgery and at 6 and 12 months after surgery. ResultsAt 6 months following surgery, patients with an NLR ≥2.5 scored significantly worse on the VAS (P = .0171), ASES (P = .0015), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (P = .0226). Differences in Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index scores were not significant (P = .2705). Forward elevation and external rotation range of motion were similar between groups at 6 months (P = .7777 and P = .2630, respectively). There was no statistically significant difference between groups at 12 months across all variables. Multivariate analysis showed that an NLR <2.5 had a significant positive effect on the ASES score (P = .0011) at 6 months after adjusting for age, gender, body mass index, depression, low back pain, and diabetes. ConclusionsManagement of patients with chronic pain continues to be challenging with limited high-value interventions. Early identification of patients likely to have a protracted recovery following rTSA would allow for a multidisciplinary approach earlier in the recovery phase. Based on our results, patients who had a preoperative NLR value greater than 2.5 reported higher levels of pain, more functional limitations, and perceived poorer function at 6 months following rTSA. However, these effects were relatively small and not observed at the 12-month mark.

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fracture: a complex episode of care associated with increased surgical and medical complications

IntroductionReverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) remains a viable treatment option in elderly patients with proximal humerus fractures (PHF). However, the risk profile of this procedure in this patient population has not been well established by prior studies. The aim of this study is to examine whether there are differences in sociodemographic variables, underlying medical comorbidities, and 90-day outcomes between patients undergoing rTSA for osteoarthritis (OA) vs. PHF. We hypothesized that patients with PHF would be older and have higher comorbidity burden compared to glenohumeral OA controls. Furthermore, we hypothesized that rTSA would yield inferior outcomes and higher costs of care in patients with PHF compared to glenohumeral OA. MethodsPatients who underwent primary rTSA from 2016 to 2020 were identified in the Premier Healthcare Database. PHF patients were identified using the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision diagnosis codes and compared to OA controls. All patients < 18 years old and those who underwent rTSA for other indications were excluded. Patients were matched in a 2:1 fashion based on age (± 3 years), sex, race, and presence of pertinent comorbidities. Patient demographics, hospital factors, comorbidities and 90-day surgical (wound complications, dislocation, periprosthetic fracture, periprosthetic joint infection, stiffness, loosening, mechanical complications, and revision) and medical (deep vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, respiratory failure, renal failure, stroke, myocardial infarction, and sepsis) complications and readmission were compared between the two cohorts. Descriptive statistics and regression analysis were employed with significance set at P < .05. Odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval were calculated. ResultsBefore matching 51,150 OA controls and 11,394 PHF cases were identified. After matching, 8661 PHF cases were matched to 17,332 controls. Regarding surgical complications, PHF patients were at significantly increased risk of periprosthetic fracture (OR 2.35), dislocation (OR 2.87), superficial wound infection (OR 5.51), periprosthetic joint infection (OR 1.91) and 90-day revision (OR 4.76). PHF patients were at increased risk of all medical complications examined including hemorrhage (OR 2.20), anemia (OR 2.78) deep vein thrombosis (OR 3.10), pulmonary embolism (OR 2.83), pneumonia (OR 2.93), respiratory failure (OR 3.37), pneumonia (OR 2.93), stroke (OR 2.61), myocardial infarction (OR 2.79), acute renal failure (OR 4.06), urinary tract infection (OR 5.50) and sepsis (OR 3.71) as well as 90-day readmission (OR 2.13). Discussion/ConclusionPatients undergoing rTSA for PHF are at significantly increased risk of complications compared to OA controls. Furthermore, these patients are at increased risk of 90-day readmission. These findings should prompt diligent preoperative risk stratification by surgeons and healthcare providers to prevent patient morbidity.

Predictors of Readmission and Reoperation Following Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients Under 45 Years of Age.

The use of shoulder arthroplasty has increased among all age groups, albeit most prominently in older patients. While previous studies have investigated predictors of short-term readmission and reoperation in the general population, there is a paucity of literature available on these in patients under 45 years of age. This study aimed to identify the predictors of 30-day readmission and reoperation following shoulder arthroplasty in patients under 45 years of age. A retrospective query in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2011 to 2019 was used to identify patients who underwent primary reverse and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify predictors of 30-day readmission and reoperation. A total of 530 patients were included. Multivariate regression revealed that Black race and Hispanic ethnicity were independent predictors of readmission. Functional dependence, hypertension requiring medication, and prolonged length of stay predicted reoperation. Finally, low hematocrit and prolonged length of stay predicted morbidity. Identifying and accounting for these risk factors for poor outcomes may help improve perioperative risk stratification. As a result, these findings have the potential to reduce healthcare costs associated with readmission and reoperation following shoulder arthroplasty in young patients. Our results also highlight the underlying disparities in healthcare outcomes among racial and ethnic groups that must be considered.