Comparison of reconstructive techniques following oncologic intraarticular resection of proximal humerus

Endoprosthetic Reconstruction for Proximal Humerus Tumors

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

Anatomic and reverse endoprosthetic reconstruction are two common surgical options used after tumor resection of the proximal humerus. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the functional outcomes and complications of modern anatomic and reverse endoprostheses.

RECENT FINDINGS

The anatomic endoprosthesis has traditionally been a successful reconstructive technique as it provided a stable platform upon which the hand and elbow could function. However, the reverse endoprosthesis has gradually replaced the anatomic endoprosthesis given that its semi-constrained design affords greater stability. Patients with reverse endoprostheses have improved motion, patient-reported outcome scores, and revision-free implant survivorship compared to those with anatomic endoprostheses. Shoulder function may be further improved with a reverse allograft prosthetic composite (APC) due to reconstruction of the rotator cuff tendons or by transferring the latissimus dorsi and teres major tendons to recreate the function of the posterosuperior rotator cuff muscles. The short-term functional improvement observed with the use of an allograft reconstruction, however, may diminish with longer follow-up due to delayed graft complications, such as resorption, nonunion, and fracture. In most patients undergoing oncologic resection of the proximal humerus, the reverse endoprosthesis or reverse APC is recommended due to improved functional outcomes and reduced postoperative complications compared to other reconstructive techniques.

Allograft Prosthetic Composite (APC) for Proximal Humeral Bone Deficiency in Revision Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Technical Note and Systematic Review

Background: Proximal humeral bone deficiency in revision shoulder arthroplasty is an emerging and challenging problem as the use of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) increases. This paper presents a technical note discussing our detailed preoperative planning steps, surgical techniques, and their rationale in carrying out the use of an allograft prosthetic composite (APC) to address proximal humeral bone deficiency in revision RSA. The outcomes of this technique are also presented. This paper also presents a systematic review to further discuss the existing literature on RSA with APCs. Methods: The preoperative surgical planning and the surgical technique employed to execute proximal humeral reconstruction using APC during revision arthroplasty are discussed in the technical note. The preliminary clinical and radiological results of five patients who underwent revision shoulder arthroplasty with proximal humeral reconstruction using APCs are presented. The PRISMA guidelines were followed to perform the systematic review. A systematic search using PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases was conducted. All studies involving RSA and APCs were pooled, and the data were extracted and analyzed. Results: A total of 14 studies were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review, with a total of 255 patients and a mean follow-up of 57 months. All studies in the systematic review and the patients included in the author's case series showed improvements in the level of pain, range of motion, function, and satisfaction. Graft incorporation in the systematic review was 84%. Conclusions: Based on the available literature and the results of our case series, the use of an APC construct is a viable option for proximal humeral bone deficiency in revision shoulder arthroplasty.

Reverse Allograft Prosthetic-Composite Versus Endoprosthesis Reconstruction for Massive Proximal Humerus Bone Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Outcomes and Complications

Background

This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to compare the clinical outcomes after proximal humerus reconstruction with a reverse allograft-prosthetic composite (APC) versus reverse endoprosthesis.

Methods

Per PRISMA guidelines, we queried PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify articles reporting clinical outcomes of reverse APC or reverse endoprosthesis reconstruction of the proximal humerus for massive bone loss secondary to tumor, fracture, or failed arthroplasty. We compared postoperative range of motion, outcome scores, and the incidence of complications and revision surgery.

Results

Of 259 unique articles, 18 articles were included (267 APC, 260 endoprosthesis). There were no significant differences between the APC and endoprosthesis cohort for postoperative forward elevation (P = .231), external rotation (P = .634), ASES score (P = .420), Constant score (P = .414), MSTS (P = .815), SST (P = .367), or VAS (P = .714). Rate of complications was 15% (31/213) in the APC cohort and 19% (27/144) in the endoprosthesis cohort. The rate of revision surgery was 12% after APC cohort and 7% after endoprosthesis. APC-specific complications included a 10% APC nonunion/malunion/resorption rate and 6% APC fracture/fragmentation rate.

Discussion

Reverse APC and endoprosthesis are reasonable options for proximal humerus reconstruction. APC carries additional risks for complications, warranting evaluation of patients' healing capacity and surgeon experience.

Level of Evidence

Level IV; Systematic Review.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43465-024-01248-7.

Malawer type I/V proximal humerus reconstruction after tumor resection: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Several reconstruction methods exist for Malawer type I/V proximal humerus reconstruction after bone tumor resection; however, no consensus has been reached regarding the preferred methods.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search on various types of proximal humerus oncologic reconstruction methods. We collected data on postoperative functional outcomes assessed based on Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scores, 5-year reconstruction survival rates, and complications. We calculated each reconstruction's weighted mean based on the sample size and standard errors. Complications were categorized based on the Henderson classification. Based on these integrated data, our primary objective is to propose an optimal strategy for proximal humerus reconstruction after bone tumor resection.

RESULTS

We examined various reconstruction techniques, including modular prosthesis (752 patients in 21 articles), osteoarticular allograft (142 patients in 6 articles), allograft prosthesis composites (APCs) (236 patients in 12 articles), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (141 patients in 10 articles), composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (33 patients in 4 articles), claviculo-pro-humero (CPH) technique (51 patients in 6 articles), and cement spacer (207 patients in 4 articles). Weighted mean MSTS scores were: modular prosthesis (73.8%), osteoarticular allograft (74.4%), APCs (79.2%), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (77.0%), composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (76.1%), CPH technique (75.1%), and cement spacer (69.1%). Weighted 5-year reconstruction survival rates were modular prosthesis (85.4%), osteoarticular allograft (67.6%), APCs (85.2%), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (84.1%), and cement spacer (88.0%). Reconstruction survival data was unavailable for composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty and CPH technique. Major complications included shoulder joint instability: modular prosthesis (26.2%), osteoarticular allograft (41.5%), APCs (33.9%), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (17%), composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (6.1%), CPH technique (2.0%), and cement spacer (8.7%). Aseptic loosening of the prosthesis occurred: modular prosthesis (3.9%) and reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (5.7%). Allograft fracture was observed in 54.9% of patients with osteoarticular allograft.

CONCLUSION

The complication profiles differed among reconstruction methods. Weighted mean MSTS scores exceeded 70% in all methods except cement spacer, and the 5-year reconstruction survival rate surpassed 80% for all methods except osteoarticular allograft. Proximal humerus reconstruction after bone tumor resection should consider potential complications and patients' individual factors.

Tendon transfers in the setting of shoulder arthroplasty

Background

Tendon transfers in conjunction with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty can significantly improve functional outcomes in patients with glenohumeral arthritis and irreparable rotator cuff deficiency. There have been multiple promising new techniques described within the last 20 years that shoulder surgeons should become familiar with.

Methods

The authors reviewed the literature on tendon transfers in the setting of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Procedures to restore various shoulder functions were described including surgical anatomy, techniques, pearls and pitfalls, and photos.

Results

Subscapularis insufficiency can be reconstructed with a pectoralis major transfer or latissimus dorsi transfer, with the latter having better clinical outcomes and a more anatomic line of pull. Posterosuperior rotator cuff deficiency can be reconstructed with a latissimus transfer (L'Episcopo transfer) or lower trapezius transfer, with the latter proving superior in biomechanical and short-term studies. Deltoid deficiency can be reconstructed with a pedicled upper pectoralis major transfer. Massive proximal humerus bone loss can be reconstructed with an allograft-prosthetic composite, and any of the aforementioned transfers can be utilized in this setting as well.

Conclusion

Tendon transfers in conjunction with reverse shoulder arthroplasty can significantly improve functional outcomes in patients with glenohumeral arthritis and irreparable rotator cuff deficiency. There have been multiple promising new techniques described within the last 20 years that shoulder surgeons should become familiar with.

Complications and functional outcomes after reconstruction of the proximal humerus with allograft-prosthetic composite: a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Allograft prosthetic composite (APC) reconstruction is performed after resection of proximal humerus tumors or failure of arthroplasty implants. There is limited literature on the postoperative outcomes of this technique. We sought to assess implant survival, failure rates, and postoperative functional outcomes after APC reconstruction of the proximal humerus.

METHODS

A systematic review of the PubMed and Embase databases was conducted. The study was registered on PROSPERO (ID: 448,663). The Strengthening of the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist was used for quality assessment. Implant failure was determined using the Henderson classification for biological reconstruction. Functional outcome was primarily assessed using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score at last follow-up.

RESULTS

Twenty-five studies with a total of 488 patients were included. Mean follow-up in reporting studies ranged from 2.5 to 10 years. Five-year revision-free survival for implants ranged from 41% to 92%. Overall implant failure rate ranged from 9% to 54%, and reoperation rate ranged from 0% to 55%. Graft host nonunion (type 2) was the most common mode of failure, with rates ranging from 0% to 75%. The mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores at last follow-up ranged from 57% to 90% across studies. A trend towards better functional outcomes was seen in patients having an APC with a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) compared with those with hemiarthroplasty.

CONCLUSIONS

APCs show promise in proximal shoulder reconstruction, with heterogeneous functional outcomes that are noninferior to other reconstruction techniques. Graft host nonunion is a common mode of failure and remains a concern in this type of prosthesis. Future studies should compare rTSA-APCs and rTSA endoprostheses while controlling for potential confounders.

Comparison of reconstructive techniques for nonprimary malignancies in the proximal humerus

BACKGROUND

Endoprostheses (EPC) are often utilized for reconstruction of the proximal humerus with either hemiarthroplasty (HA) or reverse arthroplasty (RA) constructs. RA constructs have improved outcomes in patients with primary lesions, but no studies have compared techniques in metastatic disease. The aim of this study is to compare functional outcomes and complications between HA and RA constructs in patients undergoing endoprosthetic reconstruction for proximal humerus metastases.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed our institutional arthroplasty database to identify 66 (56% male; 38 HA and 28 RA) patients with a proximal humerus reconstruction for a non-primary malignancy. The majority (88%) presented with pathologic fracture, and the most common diagnosis was renal cell carcinoma (48%).

RESULTSS

Patients with RA reconstructions had better postoperative forward elevation (74° vs. 32°, p < 0.01) and higher functional outcome scores. HA patients had more complications (odds ratio 13, p < 0.01), with instability being the most common complication.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with nonprimary malignancies of the proximal humerus had improved functional outcomes and fewer complications after undergoing reconstruction with a reverse EPC compared to a HA EPC. Preference for reverse EPC should be given in patients with good prognosis and ability to complete postoperative rehabilitation.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty megaprosthesis for surgical management of severe proximal humeral bone loss

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.

The Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Clinical Practice Guideline on the Management of Metastatic Humeral Disease

Management of Metastatic Humeral Disease is based on a systematic review of published studies surrounding the management of metastatic disease, multiple myeloma, and lymphoma limited to the humerus. This guideline contains seven action statements to assist orthopaedic surgeons, orthopaedic oncologists, physicians, and any other qualified healthcare professionals involved in the surgical management of metastatic disease of the humerus. It is also intended to serve as an information resource for decision makers, researchers, and developers of clinical practice guidelines. In addition to providing pragmatic practice recommendations, this guideline also highlights gaps in the literature and informs areas for future research and quality measure development. This guideline has been endorsed by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons.

Poor clinical outcomes and high rates of dislocation after modular reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humeral oncologic resection

PURPOSE

The shoulder is the most common site for upper extremity tumors. The aim of the study was to analyze the outcomes and the complications of modular reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) after proximal humerus resection.

METHODS

We retrospectively included 15 consecutive patients who underwent a modular MUTARS™ RSA reconstruction after proximal humerus tumour resection between 2017 and 2020. The mean age was 52 years. Their clinical outcomes were assessed using the Constant-Murley score and the MSTS shoulder. Radiological outcomes were assessed based on the presence of loosening, osteolysis, and scapular notching. Complications such as dislocation, oncological recurrence, and infection were assessed. Mean follow-up time was 32.9 months (24 to 45).

RESULTS

The mean adjusted Constant score was 50.7% (min 22, max 81), and the mean MSTS score was 15.6 (min 4, max 26). We had no loosening, osteolysis, or scapular notching on the radiographs at last follow-up. We had a high complication rate of 53%: one infection, one oncological recurrence, and six dislocations (40%), of which five were re-operated.

CONCLUSION

In our experience, the MUTARS™ Implantcast™ modular RSA has poor functional results and a high rate of dislocation in the case of large proximal humerus resections below the distal insertion of the deltoid.

Reduced recurrence rate and comparable functionality after wide resection and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with allograft-prosthetic composite versus curettage for proximal humeral giant cell tumor: a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Giant cell tumors of bone (GCTBs) are rare, aggressive tumors, and the proximal humerus is a relatively rare location for GCTBs; limited evidence exists on which surgical approaches and reconstruction techniques are optimal. In the largest case series to date, we evaluated the recurrence rate of proximal humeral GCTBs and the functional outcomes of different resection and reconstruction options in this multicenter study.

METHODS

All 51 patients included in this study received initial surgical treatment for proximal humeral GCTBs from January 2007 to December 2020, with a minimum 2-year follow-up period. Local recurrence and functional outcomes were statistically analyzed in relation to demographic, clinical, and primary surgical variables. Functional outcomes were reported by patients and were assessed by the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score and QuickDASH instrument (shortened version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand instrument).

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 81.5 months (range, 30-191 months), and the overall recurrence rate was 17.6% (9 of 51 patients). The majority of recurrences (n = 7) occurred in the first 2 years of follow-up. The intralesional curettage group (n = 23) showed a statistically significant difference in the recurrence rate compared with the en bloc resection group (n = 28) (34.8% vs. 3.6%, P = .007). Among shoulders receiving en bloc resection, 16 were reconstructed with hemiarthroplasty; 8, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) with allograft-prosthetic composite (APC) reconstruction; and 4, arthrodesis. On the basis of intention-to-treat analysis, the mean functional Musculoskeletal Tumor Society scores of the groups undergoing curettage, rTSA with APC, hemiarthroplasty, and arthrodesis were 26.0 ± 3.1, 26.0 ± 1.7, 20.3 ± 2.8, and 22.5 ± 1.3, respectively (P < .001 [with P < .001 for curettage vs. hemiarthroplasty and P = .004 for rTSA with APC vs. hemiarthroplasty]) and the mean QuickDASH scores were 14.0 ± 11.0, 11.6 ± 4.5, 33.1 ± 11.8, and 21.6 ± 4.7, respectively (P < .001 [with P < .001 for curettage vs. hemiarthroplasty and P = .003 for rTSA with APC vs. hemiarthroplasty]).

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of our data, en bloc resection followed by reverse shoulder arthroplasty showed a lower recurrence rate and no significant difference in functional outcome scores for proximal humeral GCTBs compared with intralesional curettage. Therefore, we believe that rTSA with APC may be reasonable for the initial treatment of proximal humeral GCTBs.

Proximal Humerus Reconstruction for Bone Sarcomas: A Critical Analysis

» The proximal humerus is a common location for primary bone tumors, and the goal of surgical care is to obtain a negative margin resection and subsequent reconstruction of the proximal humerus to allow for shoulder function.» The current evidence supports the use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty over hemiarthroplasty when reconstructing the proximal humerus after resection of a bone sarcoma if the axillary nerve can be preserved.» There is a lack of high-quality data comparing allograft prosthetic composite (APC) with endoprosthetic reconstruction of the proximal humerus.» Reverse APC should be performed using an allograft with donor rotator cuff to allow for soft-tissue repair of the donor and host rotator cuff, leading to improvements in shoulder motion compared with an endoprosthesis.

Oncological and functional outcomes after resection of malignant tumours of the scapula

Aims

The scapula is a rare site for a primary bone tumour. Only a small number of series have studied patient outcomes after treatment. Previous studies have shown a high rate of recurrence, with functional outcomes determined by the preservation of the glenohumeral joint and deltoid. The purpose of the current study was to report the outcome of patients who had undergone tumour resection that included the scapula.

Methods

We reviewed 61 patients (37 male, 24 female; mean age 42 years (SD 19)) who had undergone resection of the scapula. The most common resection was type 2 (n = 34) according to the Tikhoff-Linberg classification, or type S1A (n = 35) on the Enneking classification.

Results

The ten-year disease-specific survival was 76%. High tumour grade (hazard ratio (HR) 4.27; p = 0.016) and a total resection of the scapula (HR 3.84; p = 0.015) were associated with worse survival. The ten-year metastasis-free and local recurrence-free survivals were 82% and 86%, respectively. Total scapular resection (HR 6.29; p = 0.004) was associated with metastatic disease and positive margins were associated with local recurrence (HR 12.86; p = 0.001). At final follow-up, the mean shoulder forward elevation and external rotation were 79° (SD 62°) and 27° (SD 25°), respectively. The most recent functional outcomes evaluated included the mean Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score (76% (SD 17%)), the American Shoulder and Elbow Score (73% (SD 20%)), and the Simple Shoulder Test (7 (SD 3)). Preservation of the glenoid (p = 0.001) and scapular spine (p < 0.001) improved clinical outcomes; interestingly, preservation of the scapular spine without the glenoid improved outcomes (p < 0.001) compared to preservation of the glenoid alone (p = 0.05).

Conclusion

Resection of the scapula is a major undertaking with an oncological outcome related to tumour grade, and a functional outcome associated with the status of the scapular spine and glenoid. Positive resection margins are associated with local recurrence.

Functional outcome and quality of life following resection of the proximal humerus performed for musculoskeletal tumors and reconstruction done by four different methods

INTRODUCTION

The proximal humerus is a frequent site for both primary and secondary bone tumors. Several options are currently available to reconstruct the resected humerus, but there is no consensus regarding optimal reconstruction. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the functional outcome, complications and patient compliance following four different types of reconstructive techniques.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The authors performed 90 proximal humerus resections due to primary and secondary bone tumors over the past 21 years. Four different procedures were performed for reconstruction following the resection: fibula autograft transplantation, osteoarticular allograft implantation, modular tumor endoprosthesis (hemiarthroplasty) and reconstruction of the defect with a reverse shoulder prosthesis-allograft composite. A retrospective analysis of the complications and patient's physical status was performed. Functional outcome and life quality was evaluated by using the MSTS and SF-36 scores.

RESULTS

The best range of motion was observed following arthroplasty with a reverse shoulder prosthesis-homograft composite followed by a fibula autograft reconstruction. Revision surgery was required due to major complications most frequently in the osteoarticular allograft group, followed by the reverse shoulder prosthesis-allograft composite group, the autologous fibula transplantation group; the tumor endoprosthesis hemiarthroplasty group had superior results regarding revision surgery (40, 25, 24 and 14% respectively). MSTS was 84% on average for the reverse shoulder prosthesis-allograft composite group, 70% for the autologous fibula group, 67% for the anatomical hemiarthroplasty group and 64% for the osteoartricular allograft group. Using the SF-36 questionnaire for assessment no significant differences were found between the four groups regarding quality of life.

DISCUSSION

Based on the results of our study the best functional performance (range of motion and patient compliance) was achieved in the a reverse prosthesis-allograft combination group-in cases where the axillary nerve could be spared. The use of an osteoarticular allograft resulted in unsatisfying functional results and high complication rates, therefore we do not recommend it as a reconstructive method following resection of the proximal humerus due to either primary or metastatic bone tumors. Young patients who have good life expectancy but a small humerus or intramedullar cavity reconstruction by implantation of a fibula autograft is a good option. For patients with a poor prognosis (i.g. bone metastases) or in cases where the axillary nerve must be sacrificed, hemiarthroplasty using a tumor endoprosthesis was found to have acceptable results with a low complication rate. According to the MSTS and SF-36 functional scoring systems patients compliance was nearly identical following all four types of reconstruction techniques; the underlying cause may be the complexity of the shoulder girdle. However, we recommend the implantation of a reverse shoulder prosthesis-allograft whenever indication is appropriate, as it has been demonstrated to provide excellent functional outcomes, especially in young adults.

Allograft Prosthesis Composite (APC) for Proximal Humeral Bone Loss: Outcomes and Perspectives

(1) Background: Allograft prosthetic composite (APC) represents one of the techniques used for reconstruction in large proximal humeral bone deficits. The present systematic review aimed at summarizing the state of the art of the technique and analyzing its outcomes. (2) Methods: The PRISMA guidelines were followed to perform this systematic review. A systematic electronic search was performed using PubMed (MEDLINE), EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library databases. All the studies analyzing the rates of allograft prosthesis composite were pooled, and the data were extracted and analyzed. (3) Results: A total of 10 studies were eligible for inclusion in this systematic review for a total of 239 patients. The rate of patient satisfaction with surgery was reported in 7 studies with a mean of 86.4% ± 13.64. The mean constant score was 45.7 ± 3.51, the mean ASES score was 63.58 ± 8.37, and the mean SST was 4.6 ± 1.04. The mean revision rate observed was 10.32% ± 3.63 and the mean implant survival was 83.66% ± 14.98. (4) Conclusions: Based on the currently available data, allograft prosthesis composite represents a valuable option for the reconstruction of proximal humeral deficits. All studies analyzed showed the favorable impact of this surgical technique on clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Allograft-Prosthetic Composite Reconstruction for Proximal Humerus Bone Loss: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes and Complications

BACKGROUND

In smaller studies, allograft-prosthetic composite (APC) has been used for proximal humerus bone loss with some success, although with notable complication risk. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to describe outcomes and complications after proximal humerus APC and how major APC complications are defined in the literature.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane were queried for articles on APC for proximal humeral bone loss secondary to tumor, fracture, or failed arthroplasty. Primary outcomes included postoperative range of motion, outcome scores (Musculoskeletal Tumor Society [MSTS], Simple Shoulder Test [SST], American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES], Constant, visual analog scale [VAS], and subjective shoulder value [SSV]), and complication incidence. We also described individual study definitions of APC malunion/nonunion, methods of postoperative evaluation, malunion/nonunion rates, allograft fracture/fragmentation rates, and mean union time, when available. Secondarily, we compared hemiarthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

RESULTS

Sixteen articles including 375 shoulders were evaluated (average age: 49 years, follow-up: 54 months). Fifty-seven percent of procedures were performed for tumors, 1% for proximal humerus trauma sequelae, and 42% for revision arthroplasty. Average postoperative forward elevation was 82° (69-94°), abduction 60° (30-90°), and external rotation 23° (17-28°). Average MSTS score was 82% (77%-87%), SST score 5.3 (4.5-6.1), ASES score 64 (54-74), Constant score 44 (38-50), VAS score 2.2 (1.7-2.7), and SSV 51 (45-58). There was a 51% complication rate with an 18% nonallograft surgical complication rate, 26% APC nonunion/malunion/resorption rate, and 10% APC fracture/fragmentation rate. Fifteen percent of nonunited APCs underwent secondary bone grafting; 3% required a new allograft; and overall revision rate was 12%. APC nonunion/malunion was defined in 2 of 16, malunion/nonunion rates in 14 of 16, fracture/fragmentation rates in 6 of 16, and mean union time (7 months) in 4 of 16 studies.

CONCLUSION

APC reconstruction of the proximal humerus remains a treatment option, albeit with substantial complication rates. In addition, there is a need for APC literature to report institutional definitions of nonunion/malunion, postoperative evaluation, and time to union for a more standardized evaluation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV; systematic review. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Postoperative Complication and Reoperation Rates Following Resection of Soft Tissue vs. Bone Malignancies Based on Anatomic Location in the Inpatient Setting

Introduction

Surgical excisions of upper and lower extremity malignancies are increasing annually, due in part to the rising incidence of sarcomas. The purpose of this study is to compare readmissions, reoperation rate, and complications following surgical excision of soft/connective tissue vs bone malignancies of the upper and lower extremities.

Methods

The Nationwide Readmissions Database (NRD) was queried from 2016-2017 to conduct a retrospective analysis of 16,435 patients diagnosed with malignant neoplasms of the long bone (ULLB, n = 1,433) and soft tissue (ULST, n = 2,049) of the upper limb and malignant neoplasms of the long bone (LLLB, n = 5,422) and soft tissue (LLST, n = 7,531) of the lower limb. Patients who underwent surgical excision of their neoplasms were included. Binomial multivariate logistic regression was used to compare complications, nonelective readmission rates, and reoperation rates between the two groups at 30 and 90 days.

Results

Average age of the ULST group was 61.88, with 36% female. Average age of the ULLB group was 44.97, with 41.90% female. Average age of the LLST group was 60.96, with 46.90% female. Average age of the LLLB group was 43.09, with 42.60% female. The ULST group had lower odds of readmission within 30 days (p=0.263), which became significant within 90 days of surgery (p=0.045). The LLST group had significantly higher odds of infection, reoperation within 30 to 90 days of the index surgery compared to the LLLB group (p < 0.0001). The LLST group had significantly lower odds of readmission within 30 (p=0.04) and 90 days (p=0.015) of the index surgery.

Conclusion

Patients in the ULST group had significantly lower odds of 90-day readmission compared to the ULLB group. There were also significantly lower odds of 30- and 90-day readmission in the LLST group compared to the LLLB group. However, the LLST group had significantly higher odds of infection and reoperation within 30 and 90 days compared to the LLLB group.

Management of Proximal Humeral Oncologic Lesions

The proximal humerus is a common location for primary tumors, benign lesions, and metastatic disease. Advances in neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapy have allowed for limb-salvage surgery in most of the cases. There are numerous of options for surgical management of proximal humerus lesions and the decision to pursue one over another depends on factors such as age, comorbidities, pathology, location within the proximal humerus, planned resection margins/size of defect, and bone quality. Long-term outcomes for these techniques tend to be retrospective comparative studies, with recent studies highlighting the improved outcomes of reverse total shoulders.

Management of Scapular Tumors

Scapular resections are large oncologic undertakings. Due to the soft tissue coverage of the scapula, tumors are often able to be resected with a negative margin. Involvement of the brachial plexus and axillary vessels is rare, allowing for a limb-salvage surgery in most cases. Functional outcomes are based on the magnitude of resection; patients undergoing a partial scapulectomy and those with glenoid preservation demonstrate improved outcomes compared to patients undergoing a total scapulectomy or glenoid resection. Although scapular endoprosthetics are available, there is limited data to support their routine use.

Function and return to sports after proximal humeral replacement in patients with primary bone sarcoma

BACKGROUND

Improved patient and limb survival rates have led to an increased interest in the functional outcome and return to sports of patients undergoing megaprosthetic reconstruction in musculoskeletal oncology. This study evaluates the functional outcome and postoperatively performed level of sports in patients undergoing proximal humeral replacement (PHR) following resection of a primary bone sarcoma and identifies potential beneficial and limiting factors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between 2007 and 2020, a total of 606 patients underwent resection of a primary bone sarcoma and reconstruction with a single-design modular implant. For 112 (18%) patients, the location of the tumour was the proximal humerus. Exclusion criteria were death (n = 65), patients living overseas (n = 8), and subsequent amputation (n = 1), leaving 38 patients for evaluation, of whom 32 were available for the study (13 women, median age 42 years). Clinical data regarding oncological and surgical treatment as well as subsequent complications were obtained from the patients' electronic medical records. Functional outcome was determined using the Musculoskeletal Tumor Society Score (MSTS) and Toronto Extremity Salvage Score (TESS) as well as the Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV). Return to sports was assessed using the Tegner Activity Score (TS) and the modified Weighted Activity Score (WAS).

RESULTS

At the last follow-up after a median of 30 months (IQR 22-58), median MSTS was 18 (IQR 12-24), median TESS was 80% (IQR 69-87), median SSV was 35% (IQR 10-58), median TS was 5 (IQR 4-6) and median WAS was 5 (IQR 0-10). Preservation of the axillary nerve, a reverse shoulder reconstruction and a WAS of > 10 prior to surgery were associated with better functional outcome and return to sports activity scores.

CONCLUSION

Following PHR, good to excellent functional outcomes are possible, and patients regularly return to participate in sports activities-most commonly in low-impact types of sports, but some individuals are even able to participate in high-impact sports activities.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV.

Early functional and therapeutic effect of reversed tumour shoulder prosthesis reconstruction after proximal humerus tumour resection

Introduction

Reconstruction of proximal humeral tumours after resection is still controversial. And there are few articles describing oncology patients' postoperative function after reversed tumour shoulder prosthesis reconstruction. We investigated the functional results of patients who underwent reversed tumour shoulder prosthesis, including those who did not preserve the deltoid ending point.

Patients and methods

We retrospectively evaluated 16 patients with proximal humerus tumours who had undergone reversed tumour shoulder prosthesis. All patients underwent type Malawer I proximal humeral resection surgery and standard reverse tumour shoulder arthroplasty with a modular reverse shoulder prosthesis. We sutured the severed end of the deltoid to the brachialis muscle using the artificial patch for patients who had their deltoid ending point resected. Patients are rehabilitated and followed up according to our instructions.

Result

All patients were followed up for a mean of 27.4 months (13–59), and their mean age was 45.9 years (15–74). The mean length of the humeral resection was 11.6 cm (5–15). The mean shoulder mobility was 122° (82°–180°) in forward flexion; 39° (31°–45°) in posterior extension; 102° (65°–172°) in abduction; 43° (30°–60°) in external rotation; 83° (61°–90°) in internal rotation, and a mean MSTS score of 77.9% (63.3%–93.3%). The mean DASH score was 20.8 (2.5–35.8). The mean VAS score was 0.9. For patients who had their deltoid ending point resected, the mean length of the humeral resection was 14.0 cm; the mean shoulder mobility was 109° in forward flexion; 37.8° in posterior extension; 102.0° in abduction; 38.3° in external rotation; 86.3° in internal rotation, and the mean MSTS score was 78.8%; the mean DASH score was 21.6; the mean VAS score was 1.0.

Conclusion

Patients who underwent reverse tumour shoulder arthroplasty can achieve good early postoperative function, survival rate and low complication rate. In addition, patients who had their deltoid ending point removed also obtained good function after particular reconstruction.

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for oncologic reconstruction of the proximal humerus: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

In recent years, there has been growing interest in the use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) for reconstruction of the proximal humerus after oncologic resection. However, the indications and outcomes of oncologic rTSA remain unclear.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review to identify studies that reported outcomes of patients who underwent rTSA for oncologic reconstruction of the proximal humerus. Extracted data included demographic characteristics, indications, operative techniques, outcomes, and complications. Weighted means were calculated according to sample size.

RESULTS

Twelve studies were included, containing 194 patients who underwent rTSA for oncologic reconstruction of the proximal humerus. The mean patient age was 48 years, and 52% of patients were male. Primary malignancies were present in 55% of patients; metastatic disease, 30%; and benign tumors, 9%. The mean humeral resection length was 12 cm. The mean postoperative Musculoskeletal Tumor Society score was 78%; Constant score, 60; and Toronto Extremity Salvage Score, 77%. The mean complication rate was 28%, with shoulder instability accounting for 63% of complications. Revisions were performed in 16% of patients, and the mean implant survival rate was 89% at a mean follow-up across studies of 53 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the existing literature is of poor study quality, with a high level of heterogeneity and risk of bias, rTSA appears to be a suitable option in appropriately selected patients undergoing oncologic resection and reconstruction of the proximal humerus. The most common complication is instability. Higher-quality evidence is needed to help guide decision making on appropriate implant utilization for patients undergoing oncologic resection of the proximal humerus.

Reconstruction for bone tumours of the shoulder and humerus in children and adolescents

Reconstructions for paediatric bone tumours of the shoulder girdle and humerus are intended to optimize placement of the hand in space. Given the longevity of paediatric survivors of sarcoma, durability is an important planning consideration. Here, I review a subset of approaches based on anatomical site with an emphasis on function and longevity. Often, biological reconstructions that combine living bone with tendon repairs and transfers best address those goals.