Search

Background: Shoulder arthroplasty in the setting of severe proximal humerus bone loss can be challenging. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of a modular segmental megaprosthesis when implanted in a reverse configuration for complex primary arthroplasty, reconstruction at the time of oncologic resection, and revision shoulder arthroplasty., Materials and Methods: A Joint Registry Database was queried to identify all shoulder arthroplasties performed at a single institution using the Comprehensive Segmental Revision System reverse shoulder arthroplasty (SRS-RSA; Zimmer Biomet). A retrospective review of electronic medical records and radiographs was performed to record demographic data, indication, outcomes, complications, and revision surgery., Results: Between February 2012 and October 2022, a total of 76 consecutive SRS-RSAs were implanted. An analysis of patients with minimum 12-month follow-up yielded 53 patients with a mean follow-up of 4.1 ± 2.43 years. Surgical complication rate in this cohort was observed in 41.5% (22 of 53) of cases. Overall, the revision rate at final follow-up was 26.4% (14 of 53), with a significant difference between the primary and revision cohorts. The number of prior surgeries was a significant risk factor for revision surgery, with a hazard ratio of 1.789 (95% confidence interval 1.314-2.436, P < .001). When analyzing aseptic humeral loosening rates across study cohorts, a significant difference was found between the primary arthroplasty (0%, n = 0) and the revision arthroplasty cohorts (22.2%, n = 6) (P = .04)., Discussion: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty using a modular segmental megaprosthesis remains a reasonable salvage option for shoulder reconstruction in the setting of proximal humeral bone loss. Because of the substantial bone loss and soft tissue deficiencies typically present in these cases, surgeons should educate patients on the relatively high complication rate, particularly when used in the setting of a previous failed arthroplasty., (Copyright © 2024 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The purpose of this retrospective case series was to examine the AO Foundation and Orthopaedic Trauma Association (AO/OTA) 13-C3 distal humeral fractures treated with open reduction-internal fixation (ORIF) in patients older than 70 years., Methods: During an 8-year period, 21 patients older than 70 years with AO/OTA 13-C3 distal humeral fractures were treated with ORIF performed by 2 senior upper extremity traumatologists. There were 16 patients with >1 year of follow-up, with a mean age of 78 (70-84) years., Results: At a mean follow-up of 4 years (1-8 years), all 16 patients demonstrated radiographic signs of bone union. Three patients underwent reoperations, including irrigation and débridement for postoperative infections (n = 2) and removal of implant for symptomatic olecranon intramedullary screw (n = 1). The mean postoperative total arc of ulnohumeral motion was 97° (80°-145°), including a mean flexion of 117° (106°-126°) and flexion contracture of 20° (14°-26°). The mean pronation was 69° (55°-85°), and supination was 78° (74°-9°0). The mean Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand score was 19 (standard deviation, 6.9; confidence interval, 15.4-22.8), and the mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 91 (standard deviation, 8.2; confidence interval, 86-95)., Conclusions: ORIF remains a reliable option for treatment of AO/OTA 13-C3 distal humeral fractures in elderly patients. Excellent clinical outcomes can be achieved with preservation of motion and arm function through anatomic reduction, rigid internal fixation, and early mobilization., (Copyright © 2017 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: This investigation used age as a continuous variable to estimate implant survival and the risk of complications., Methods: Prospectively collected data were used to analyze 5494 consecutive shoulder arthroplasties performed from 1970 to 2012. Patients were a mean age of 67 years. The association between the age at the index procedure and the risk for each outcome was assessed using Cox regression and smoothing spline analysis., Results: Older age was associated with a decreased risk of revision surgery, revision for mechanical failure, and reoperation but with a higher risk for thromboembolic events. Reoperation rates also decreased in a linear fashion with older ages (P < .001). The risk of revision surgery decreased in a linear fashion between the ages of 40 and 85, with a 3% decreased risk of revision per 1-year increase in age (P < .01). This association held true in a multivariate model and when specific procedures were separated out. Compared with patients aged <50 years, patients aged from 50 to 65 years (P < .001) and those >65 years (P < .001) have decreased risks of revision surgery. The risk of a revision surgery in a patient aged >50 years was significantly decreased (~13% reduction in risk for each year; P < .001). There was a subtle association between older age and decreased rates of infection (P = .01)., Conclusions: There is a strong association between older age and decreased rates of revision surgery and reoperation after shoulder arthroplasty, with a striking association with decreased rates of mechanical failure. These are important considerations when counseling younger patients regarding their risks., (Copyright © 2017 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The purpose of this study was to determine the complications and results of cement-within cement-humeral fixation in revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty., Methods: In 38 shoulders, a cemented humeral component was revised to a cemented reverse humeral component using a cement-within-cement technique. The mean follow-up time was 3.7 (2.0-7.0) years. Clinical, radiologic, and hard outcomes were assessed using the Kaplan-Meier survival method, Fisher exact test, and Student t-test., Results: The average operative time for the cement-within-cement technique was 153 minutes. There were 7 (18%) nondisplaced intraoperative fractures involving the greater tuberosity that occurred on implant removal; all healed at last follow-up. A second revision surgery was performed in 3 (8%) patients who underwent cement-in-cement humeral component revision for glenoid loosening (n = 1), periprosthetic instability associated with glenoid loosening (n = 1), and periprosthetic humerus fracture (n = 1). The overall implant revision-free survival at 2 and 5 years was 95% and 91%, respectively. Patients experienced significant pain relief, improvements in their shoulder range of motion, and high satisfaction. There was 1 "at-risk" humeral component (grade 4 or higher humeral lucency, moderate subsidence) that did not undergo revision surgery. There were 2 other humeral components with grade 3 humeral lucency, no subsidence., Conclusions: Cement-within-cement fixation of the humeral component in revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty is associated with a reasonable operative time, good medium-term survival rates, and good pain relief and functional outcomes with low complications. This technique is an important consideration to preserve humeral bone stock and potentially humeral component and implant stability., (Copyright © 2017 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The purpose of this study was to examine the outcomes of revision reverse arthroplasty using short bone-preserving humeral components in revising a long-stemmed component., Methods: During a 7-year period, 39 patients who underwent revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty using the long to short humeral component technique were included. The mean age was 72 years. Prior implants used in the primary setting included anatomic (n = 26), hemiarthroplasty (n = 11), and reverse (n = 2)., Results: At a follow-up of 3 years (2-5), 5 shoulders (13%) required revision surgery, including 1 for a periprosthetic humerus fracture and 4 for glenoid component loosening. The survival free of revision for any reason and revision for humeral disease was 84% and 94%, respectively. One patient experienced a nondisplaced greater tuberosity fracture at 18 months postoperatively that healed without operative intervention. There were no dislocations or infections. Overall, patients experienced excellent overall improvements in their pain levels and shoulder motion (P < .001), with a postoperative 91% satisfaction rate as well as postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score of 68 and Simple Shoulder Test score of 6.7. At most recent radiographic follow-up, 1 (5%) patient had grade 3 humeral lucency., Conclusions: Preserving bone stock through conversion to a shorter reverse humeral stem in the revision setting is a reasonable option with good short- to intermediate-term results and low rates of humeral complications. Using the shorter stem components provides adequate stability and high rates of humeral component ingrowth., (Copyright © 2017 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has classically been reserved for patients older than 65 years with rotator cuff arthropathy, pseudoparalysis, and severe pain. This investigation assessed outcomes in a consecutive series of patients aged 65 and younger undergoing primary RTSA., Methods: There were 63 patients (67 shoulders; 40 women, 27 men) with a mean age of 60 years (range, 50-65 years). Indications were cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) in 51, severe glenohumeral arthritis in 15, and osteonecrosis in 1. The primary end point was revision-free implant survival. Pain scale, motion, strength, and radiographic outcomes were also studied., Results: At a mean follow-up of 3 years (range, 2-8 years), the 2-year and 5-year revision-free survival was 99% and 91%, and reoperation-free survival was 97% and 90%, respectively. Complications occurred in 9%. Smoking increased the risk for revision, reoperation, and complications (P < .03). Patients experienced improvements in pain (P < .0001), active abduction (57.5° vs. 132.4°, P < .0001), and active external rotation (20.1° vs. 39.4°, P < .001). At the most recent follow-up, 90% patients were satisfied with their result, and 85% felt they were better or much better than before surgery. There was an 18% incidence notching, 3% incidence of dislocation, and no loosening., Conclusions: At both 2 and 5 years, RTSA is a reliable operation in patients aged younger than 65 years. Patients gain significant improvements in pain level, range of motion, and strength, without a large number of early failures. Long-term follow-up is needed to understand late component mechanical problems and loosening., (Copyright © 2017 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Surgical treatment of proximal humeral fractures in the elderly pose challenges in decision making. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has been established as a reliable option for salvage of failed hemiarthroplasty, although few studies have analyzed RTSA after failed open reduction with internal fixation (ORIF). This study evaluated the outcomes of patients with failed osteosynthesis who undergo salvage RTSA compared with patients undergoing primary RTSA for proximal humeral fractures., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 18 patients who underwent primary RTSA for acute proximal humeral fractures and 26 patients who underwent arthroplasty after failed ORIF at our institution between 2003 and 2013. Minimum follow-up was 2 years, with a mean follow-up 3 years (range, 2.0-6.0 years)., Results: There are no statistically significant differences in clinical outcomes between the two cohorts in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores and in the most recent forward flexion or external rotation. The salvage RTSA cohort experienced a higher complication rate (8%), including dislocation and aseptic loosening. The primary RTSA cohort had a 5% complication rate, with 1 late prosthetic joint infection requiring reoperation., Conclusion: Although RTSA after failed ORIF has a higher rate of complications compared with acute RTSA, the revision and reoperation rate as well as clinical outcomes and shoulder function remained comparable. When a surgeon approaches these complex fractures in patients with poor underlying bone stock, this study supports acute arthroplasty or ORIF with the knowledge that salvage RTSA still has the potential to achieve good outcomes if osteosynthesis fails., (Copyright © 2016 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Obesity is a risk factor for worse outcomes in anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this investigation was to determine outcomes of primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in patients with morbid obesity., Methods: We reviewed all primary RSAs performed on morbidly obese (body mass index [BMI] ≥40 kg/m(2)) patients from 2005 to 2012 at our institution with at least 2 years of follow-up. The study included 41 patients (57% female), the mean BMI was 44 kg/m(2), and the mean age was 67.7 years., Results: The only intraoperative complication was an inferior glenoid fracture that remained stable after glenosphere implantation. At a mean follow-up of 3.2 years (range 2-7.36 years), 2 patients (5%) required revision surgery for infection (n = 1) and humeral loosening (n = 1). Survival was 98% at 2 years and 92% at 5 years. Additional postoperative complications included ulnar neuropathy (n = 1) and heterotopic ossification (n = 2). Pain relief was excellent, with 93% reporting moderate or severe pain preoperatively compared with 2% postoperatively (P < .001). Shoulder abduction improved from 49° to 142° and external rotation from 17° to 50° (P < .001). The average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 71.1. At the most recent follow-up, no patients had glenoid lucency, 1 (2%) had humeral lucency, and 2 (5%) had inferior scapular notching. Laborers had higher risk for revision surgery (P = .01), and females had worse functional outcomes and shoulder motion (P < .02)., Conclusions: RSA is a successful procedure in morbidly obese patients (BMI ≥40 kg/m(2)). At intermediate follow-up, there is good implant survival with a reasonable complication rate and excellent pain relief., (Copyright © 2016 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)