Periprosthetic humeral fractures associated with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: incidence and management

Periprosthetic proximal humerus fractures require an individualized treatment approach-results of a multicenter retrospective study

BACKGROUND

In the last years, there has been increasing use of shoulder arthroplasty. As a result, an increasing incidence of periprosthetic humerus fractures (PPHF) is expected. Therefore, this retrospective, multicenter analysis aimed to collect demographic data from patients with PPHF, their treatment strategies, and associated complications.

METHODS

Demographics of patients with PPHF were collected retrospectively from the database of six trauma hospitals between January 2000 and December 2020. All fractures were categorized according to the Wright and Cofield, and Worland classifications. In addition, the type of treatment for PPHF, as well as subsequent complications, were evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 72 patients with a PPHF were identified. The mean age of the 55 female and 17 male patients was 77 years. PPHF occurred a mean of 50 months after primary arthroplasty implantation, almost exclusively as a result of a fall from standing height (n = 67). In-situ implant was a RTSA in 40 patients and a hemiarthroplasty in 32 patients. More than half of the fractures (n = 38) were type B fractures, according to Wright and Cofield. According to Worland, the majority of patients also had a type B fracture (type B1 (n = 22), type B2 (n = 28), type B3 (n = 10)). Associated comorbidities were found in 21 patients. A total of 31 patients were treated non-operatively, 27 with Open Reduction Internal Fixation (ORIF), and 14 with a revision arthroplasty. Nine primary radial nerve palsies were found (pre-operatively), and seven secondarily (post-operatively). Nine patients suffered from non-union (ORIF 4, non operative 4, stem replacement 1).

CONCLUSION

The treatment strategy for PPHF is primarily tailored to the individual patient. Decisive factors such as patient's age, fracture type, and primary palsies have to be considered for optimal treatment. In type B1 fractures, there is a recommendation for ORIF because of high non-union rates under non-operative treatment. In contrast, in type B2 fractures, a non-operative approach should be preferred, provided there are no radial nerve lesions.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, epidemiologic study.

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

INTRODUCTION

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.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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 5 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up of 80.2 months, 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).

CONCLUSIONS

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.

Complications and Reinterventions of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in a Korean Population: 14-Year Experience in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

Background

There are few reports on the revision or reintervention of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) in South Korea. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the true incidence of complications and reintervention of RTSA and clinical and radiological outcomes based on our 14-year experience in RTSA in a Korean population.

Methods

Between March 2008 and June 2022, 412 consecutive cases of RTSA were performed in 388 patients with an average age of 74.4 years at our institute. Excluding 23 patients lost to follow-up, 365 patients (373 shoulders including 8 bilateral cases) who underwent primary RTSA with more than 6 months of follow-up were enrolled in this study. We evaluated those who had complications or reintervention including revision RTSA for failed RTSA. Patient charts were reviewed, and clinical outcomes including clinical scores, complications, and reintervention and radiologic outcomes were evaluated at the last follow-up.

Results

Among the 373 shoulders that underwent primary RTSA, complications were found in 50 patients (13.94%, 10 men and 40 women with a mean age of 75.9 ± 6.7 years [range, 51-87 years]). The causes of complications were as follows: 13 acromion, coracoid, or scapular spine fractures, 10 loosening (glenoid: 5, humeral stem: 5), 5 infections, 4 periprosthetic fractures, 2 instability, 2 neurologic complications, and 14 miscellaneous complications. Twenty patients (5.63%, 4 men and 16 women with a mean age of 74.2 ± 8.2 years [range, 51-87 years]) underwent reintervention. The interval to the first reintervention was 27.8 ± 23.1 months (range, 0.1-78 months). The causes of reintervention (20 cases) were 8 loosening (glenoid: 4, humeral stem: 4), 5 infections, 5 fractures, and 2 instability. Among them, 15 component revisions (4.02%) were performed. At the last follow-up, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, University of California at Los Angeles, and Simple Shoulder Test scores were improved from 25.4, 12.4, and 1.6 preoperatively to 40.4, 16.2, and 3.2, respectively. Forward flexion (48° to 87°), abduction (52° to 79°), external rotation (18° to 22°), and internal rotation (buttock to L2) were improved.

Conclusions

After primary RTSA in a Korean population, the complication, reintervention, and revision rates were 13.94%, 5.63%, and 4.02%, respectively. Careful evaluation of the complications and adequate treatments should be performed.

The Delta III and Delta Xtend reverse shoulder arthroplasty-risk of revision and failure mechanisms: a report on 3650 cases from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 1994-2021

BACKGROUND

The Delta reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is commonly used worldwide and is the most frequently used RSA in Norway. The aim of this registry-based study was to report 10- and 20-year implant survival, risk of revision, and reasons for revision in 2 consecutive time periods for Delta III (1994-2010) and Delta Xtend (2007-2021) prostheses.

METHODS

We included 3650 primary RSAs reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register: 315 Delta III (42% cemented stems) and 3335 Delta Xtend (88% cemented stems). We used Kaplan-Meier analyses to investigate implant survival. The reasons for revision were compared for the 2 designs and fixation technique. Factors that could influence the risk of revision, such as implant design, fixation technique, and patient factors, were investigated using Cox regression analyses with adjustments for age, sex, and diagnosis.

RESULTS

Patients operated with Delta III were more likely to be diagnosed with inflammatory disease or fracture sequela, whereas acute fracture, osteoarthritis, and cuff arthropathy were the most frequent indications for Delta Xtend. Ten-year survival was 93.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87.0-99.0) (cemented stem) and 81.6% (95% CI: 75.3-87.9) (uncemented stem) for Delta III and 94.7% (95% CI: 93.3-96.1) (cemented stem) and 95.7% (95% CI: 88.3-100) (uncemented stem) for Delta Xtend. Twenty-year survival for Delta III (uncemented stem) was 68.2% (95% CI: 58.8-77.6). Compared with DeltaXtend (cemented stem) at 10-year follow-up, we found a higher risk of revision for Delta III (uncemented stem) (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.9, 95% CI: 1.7-5.0), whereas no significant difference was found for Delta III (cemented stem) and Delta Xtend (uncemented stem). The most common reason for revision of Delta III (uncemented stem) was glenoid loosening followed by deep infection and instability. Instability was the most frequent revision cause for Delta Xtend (both cemented and uncemented stem). Men had an overall higher revision risk than women (HR: 2.8 [95% CI: 2.0-3.9]), and patients with fracture sequela had increased risk for revision (HR: 2.8, 95% CI: 1.7-4.7) compared with patients with osteoarthritis.

DISCUSSION

We found that Delta III (uncemented stem) had a higher risk of revision compared with Delta Xtend (cemented stem). The risk of revision for glenoid component loosening was lower for Delta Xtend, but revisions due to instability/dislocation are still a concern. This register study cannot determine whether the differences found were caused by differences in implant design or other factors that changed during the study period. Risk of revision may have been affected by the indication for primary operation.

Why is female gender associated with poorer clinical outcomes after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION

There is a lack of gender-specific research after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Although previous studies have documented worse outcomes in women, a more thorough understanding of why outcomes may differ is needed. We therefore asked: (1) Are there gender-specific differences in preoperative and postoperative clinical scores, complications, surgery-related parameters, and demographics? (2) Is female gender an independent risk factor for poorer clinical outcomes after RTSA? (3) If so, why is female gender associated with poorer outcomes after RTSA?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 2005 and 2019, 987 primary RTSAs were performed in our institution. After exclusion criteria were applied, data of 422 female and 271 male patients were analyzed. Clinical outcomes (absolute/relative Constant Score [a/rCS] and Subjective Shoulder Value [SSV]), complications (intra- and/or postoperative fracture, loosening), surgery-related parameters (indication, implant-related characteristics), and demographics (age, gender, body mass index, and number of previous surgeries) were evaluated. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were analyzed (critical shoulder angle, deltoid-tuberosity index, reverse shoulder angle, lateralization shoulder angle, and distalization shoulder angle).

RESULTS

Preoperative clinical scores (aCS, rCS, SSV, and pain level) and postoperative clinical outcomes (aCS and rCS) were significantly worse in women. However, the improvement between preoperative and postoperative outcomes was significantly higher in female patients for rCS (P = .037), internal rotation (P < .001), and regarding pain (P < .001). Female patients had a significantly higher number of intraoperative and postoperative fractures (24.9% vs. 11.4%, P < .001). The proportion of female patients with a deltoid-tuberosity index <1.4 was significantly higher than males (P = .01). Female gender was an independent negative predictor for postoperative rCS (P = .047, coefficient -0.084) and pain (P = .017, coefficient -0.574). In addition to female sex per se being a predictive factor of worse outcomes, females were significantly more likely to meet 2 of the 3 most significant predictive factors: (1) significantly worse preoperative clinical scores and (2) higher rate of intra- and/or postoperative fractures.

CONCLUSIONS

Female sex is a very weak, but isolated, negative predictive factor that negatively affects the objective clinical outcome (rCS) after RTSA. However, differences did not reach the minimal clinically important difference, and it is not a predictor for the subjective outcome (SSV). The main reason for the worse outcome in female patients seems to be a combination of higher preoperative disability and higher incidence of fractures. To improve the outcome of women, all measures that contribute to the reduction of perioperative fracture risk should be used.

Inter-Observer and Intra-Observer Reliability Assessment of the Established Classification Systems for Periprosthetic Shoulder Fractures

This study evaluated the reliability and comprehensiveness of the Unified classification system (UCPF), Wright & Cofield, Worland and Kirchhoff classifications and related treatment recommendations for periprosthetic shoulder fractures (PPSFx). Two shoulder arthroplasty specialists (experts) and two orthopaedic residents (non-experts) assessed 20 humeral-sided and five scapula-sided cases of PPSFx. We used the unweighted Cohen's Kappa (κ) for measuring the intra-observer reliability and Krippendorff's alpha (α) for measuring the inter-observer reliability. The inter-rater reliabilities for the Wright & Cofield and Worland classifications were substantial for all groups. The expert and non-expert groups for UCPF also showed substantial inter-rater agreement. The all-rater group for the UCPF and the expert and non-expert group for the Kirchhoff classification revealed moderate inter-rater reliability. For the Kirchhoff classification, only fair inter-rater reliability was found for the non-expert group. Almost perfect intra-rater reliability was measured for all groups of the Wright & Cofield classification and the all-rater and expert groups of the UCPF. All groups of the Kirchhoff and Worland classifications and the group of non-experts for the UCPF had substantial intra-rater reliabilities. Regarding treatment recommendations, substantial inter-rater and moderate intra-rater reliabilities were found. Simple classification systems for PPSFx (Wright & Cofield, Worland) show the highest inter- and intra-observer reliability but lack comprehensiveness as they fail to describe scapula-sided fractures. The complex Kirchhoff classification shows limited reliability. The UCPF seems to offer an acceptable combination of comprehensiveness and reliability.

Evaluation and treatment of postoperative periprosthetic humeral fragility fractures

Postoperative periprosthetic humeral shaft fractures represent a growing and difficult complication to treat given the aging patient population and associated bone loss. Determining the best treatment option is multifactorial, including patient characteristics, fracture pattern, remaining bone stock, and implant stability. Possible treatment options include nonoperative management with bracing or surgical intervention. Nonoperative treatment has been shown to have higher nonunion rates, thus should only be selected for a specific patient population with minimally displaced fractures or those that are unfit for surgery. Surgical management is recommended with prosthetic loosening, fracture nonunion, or failure of nonoperative treatment. Surgical options include open reduction and internal fixation, revision arthroplasty, or hybrid fixation. Careful evaluation, decision making, and planning is required in the treatment of these fractures.

Reliability of Current Classification Systems for Periprosthetic Fractures of the Humerus

OBJECTIVE

Numerous classification systems exist to evaluate periprosthetic humerus fractures, although most are based on limited patient numbers. The Wright and Cofield system is the most widely used classification system. We sought to evaluate the interobserver and intraobserver reliabilities of this system compared with the Unified Classification System (UCS) using the largest patient sample to date.

METHODS

This retrospective study identified patients between December 2011 and January 2021 with a periprosthetic fracture of the humerus around the stem of a shoulder arthroplasty component. Three upper extremity fellowship-trained surgeons evaluated all radiographs for stem stability, evidence of preinjury stem loosening, Wright and Cofield classification, UCS classification, and recommended treatment for each case at 2 timepoints separated by 2 months. The kappa statistic for interobserver and intraobserver reliability was calculated.

RESULTS

Seventy-six patients were included. There was moderate interobserver (kappa 0.53) and substantial intraobserver (kappa 0.69) agreement when classifying stem stability after fracture. There was moderate interobserver (kappa 0.48) and intraobserver (kappa 0.60) agreement when evaluating for stem loosening before fracture. There was fair interobserver (kappa 0.29) and moderate intraobserver (kappa 0.51) agreement regarding the UCS class. There was moderate interobserver (kappa 0.41) and intraobserver (kappa 0.57) agreement regarding the proposed treatment. There was slight interobserver (kappa 0.04) and moderate intraobserver (kappa 0.44) agreement regarding the Wright and Cofield classification.

CONCLUSION

The Wright and Cofield system is less reliable than the UCS classification. A more reliable and clinically relevant classification system is needed to standardize discussion of periprosthetic proximal humerus fractures.

[Humeral bone defects in revision shoulder arthroplasty]

BACKGROUND

Revision shoulder arthroplasty is mainly performed with reverse TSA and should consider proper adjustment of the length and the amount of bone loss in humeral reconstruction. Whilst epi-/metaphyseal bone loss can mostly be compensated easily by stemmed standard implants, advanced bone loss exceeding 2° requires the support of longer revision stems.

EXTENSIVE HUMERAL BONE LOSS

Cementless fixation in the intact diaphyseal humerus is recommended in bone loss exceeding 2°, preferably with modular revision systems, because cemented reverse revision stems have higher loosening rates in the mid to long-term follow-up. In cases of advanced bone loss 3°-4° (more than 6-7 cm), structural humeral allografts should be considered to prevent instability and early loosening. Unfortunately, the access to fresh frozen allografts is very limited due to regulation of the German government in contrast to the situation in the US or Switzerland. Reverse tumor arthroplasty is an option with a higher complication rate and inferior function even when polyester mesh is used for ingrowth of soft tissues.

DISTINCT DIAPHYSEAL DEFECTS

In bone loss 4°-5° the minimal anchorage length is mostly critical due to the curvature of the medullary canal. The fixation of a revision stem is only possible when at least 2-3 widths of the diaphyseal diameter are available. Custom-made implants with flanges or distal locking screws, or bipolar tumor arthroplasty may be required. Additionally, strut allografts can be useful to achieve stable fixation. Two-stage biological reconstruction in impaction-bone-graft or the Masquelet technique are rarely used as a salvage procedure.

Spatial Anatomy of the Radial Nerve in the Extended Deltopectoral Approach

The goal of this study was to define safe zones to prevent radial nerve injury in an extended deltopectoral approach. Relative distances of the upper margin (UMRN) and lower margin (LMRN) of the radial nerve to the proximal and distal borders of the pectoralis major and deltoid insertions were measured in 20 cadaveric arms. Four proximal humeral zones were identified (zone I, proximal border of the pectoralis major tendon to the proximal border of the deltoid tendon; zone II, proximal border of the deltoid tendon to the distal border of the pectoralis major tendon; zone III, distal border of the pectoralis major tendon to the distal border of the deltoid tendon; and zone IV, distal to the distal border of the deltoid tendon). On fluoroscopic measurement, mean distances between the UMRN and the proximal border of the pectoralis major tendon and the proximal border of the deltoid tendon were 71.6±2.1 mm and 26.2±2.5 mm, respectively. The incidence of the radial nerve in the spiral groove within each defined zone was as follows: zone I, 0%; zone II, 50%; zones III and IV, 100%. There was a significant association between anatomic zone and radial nerve entry into the spiral groove, χ²(3, N=88)=64.53, P<.001. The proximal border of the pectoralis major tendon to the proximal border of the deltoid tendon (zone I) is a safe location to avoid injury to the radial nerve. We recommend placing cerclage wires proximal to zone I from lateral to medial to avoid entrapment of the radial nerve. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(1):e31-e37.].

Inadvertent, intraoperative, non- to minimally displaced periprosthetic humeral shaft fractures in RTSA do not affect the clinical and radiographic short-term outcome

INTRODUCTION

Little information is available on the clinical and radiographic outcome of intraoperative, non- to minimally displaced humeral fractures that occur during implantation of a stemmed, reverse shoulder prosthesis but are only recognized on routine postoperative radiographs. The goal of this study is to report the clinical and radiographic outcome for this rarely reported fracture type.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

39 conservatively treated non- to minimally displaced intraoperative periprosthetic humeral fractures after stemmed RTSA were detected from our radiographic database between 1.1.2006 and 31.1.2018. Exclusion criteria were lack of patient consent, preoperative humeral fracture, and revision arthroplasties. Clinical (absolute and relative Constant score, the Subjective Shoulder Value) and radiographic (conventional radiographs) assessment was performed preoperatively, at 6 weeks (only radiographically) and at latest follow-up with a minimum follow-up of 2 years.

RESULTS

35 patient's with a mean age of 72 years (range 32-88, SD ± 11 years) and a mean follow-up of 53 months (range 24-124, SD ± 31) were included in the study. At latest follow-up, all clinical outcome parameters except external rotation improved significantly. A complication rate of 17% (n:6) was recorded. At 6 weeks after the index surgery, none of the radiographs showed a fracture displacement or a sintering of the stem. At latest follow-up, all fractures were healed and no stem loosening was observed in any of the shoulders.

CONCLUSIONS

Non- to minimally displaced intraoperative periprosthetic humeral fractures in RTSA have an incidence of about 5% in this series of mainly uncemented press-fit stems. They generally heal without any further treatment and are not associated with stem loosening or compromise the clinical outcome after primary RTSA. Except slight restriction in the postoperative rehabilitation protocol, no further attention or action is needed.

Periprosthetic Postoperative Humeral Fractures After Shoulder Arthroplasty

The increased utilization of shoulder arthroplasty, including revision procedures, combined with rises in life expectancy, is expected to translate into a substantial increase in periprosthetic humeral fractures. The evaluation and management of these fractures needs to be updated to consider fractures that complicate anatomic and reverse arthroplasties and contemporary short-stem and stemless implants. Although conservative treatment is successful in a large proportion of these fractures, several surgical reconstructive techniques are required for the management of all fracture types. Surgical options include internal fixation, graft augmentation, standard revision procedures, and occasionally complex reconstructions including modular segmental prosthesis and allograft prosthetic composites. Most studies on the outcomes of periprosthetic humeral fractures have analyzed small samples and have typically reported on anatomic total shoulders with a standard-length humeral implant. Additional research is required to optimize the management of periprosthetic postoperative humeral fractures in the era of reverse arthroplasty, short stems, and stemless arthroplasty.

POSSIBILITIES OF ENDOPROSTHETICS IN PATIENTS WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF SHOULDER JOINT INJURIES

The use of shoulder joint replacement has increased significantly since the early 2000s. The method, initially used as the gold standard for the treatment of osteoarthritis, has long gone beyond the generally accepted indications, expanding its use for the treatment of shoulder joint injuries and their consequences. The new generation of implants has led to improved outcomes such as functionality, range of motion in the shoulder joint and patient satisfaction. The decision to perform anatomical endoprosthetics (hemiarthroplasty, total shoulder joint replacement) depends on the degree of osteopenia, the viability of the humerus head, the integrity of the tubercles or the functional state of the rotator cuff of the shoulder. This type of arthroplasty remains for patients with a functional rotator cuff. Reversible endoprosthetics is today the preferred treatment option for non-fusion or improper fusion of the proximal humerus with a collapse of the humerus head or a non-functioning rotator cuff. Despite the limitations and complications reported in the literature, revision arthroplasty has a good potential for functional improvement in patients with the consequences of injuries of the proximal humerus. This is a group of patients, which is a difficult task for a surgeon. As further research is carried out, implant designs and their clinical application will continue to evolve.

Is the Posterior Approach With Posterior locking compression plate and Anterior Allograft Useful and Safe in the Treatment of Periprosthetic Humeral Fractures Following Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty?

Introduction

As the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) surgery has dramatically increased in the last few decades, many complications have followed through. The periprosthetic fracture, at the moment, is still a subject of debate in the orthopedic world. In this monocentric study, along with a literature review of periprosthetic humeral fractures, we would present our institutional experience with the treatment of periprosthetic humeral fractures with a posterior humeral approach, posterior cortex plate fixation, anterior strut allograft, screws, and cerclage wires.

Materials and Methods

Our study consisted in a prospective monocentric study based on 18 patients, with a mean age of 75.3 years (range 64–88), all following a reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (RTSA). Postoperative follow-ups were taken at 1, 6, and 12 months with objective measurement of shoulder motion and strength, while clinical outcome measures were assessed using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES score) and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. Together with that, we performed a literature review focused on the management of periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty.

Results

All fractures consolidated without complication at a mean 4.2 months (range 3–6). At final follow-up, the average active shoulder flexion was 88° (range 62–129°), active abduction 73° (range 52–91°) and active external rotation 22° (range 3–56°). The average ASES score was 73 (range 59–97), while average VAS score was 1.1 (range 0–3).

Discussion

Surgical treatment of periprosthetic humeral fractures following a shoulder arthroplasty remains a hard challenge for every surgeon, and their treatment must consider fracture’s location, displacement, and local bone quality.

Conclusions

The posterior approach with a posterior plate placement and anterior strut allograft, which is appliable only in case of a B or C type fracture according to Worland classification, could be a good treatment option for periprosthetic humeral fractures.

Management of periprosthetic fractures of the humerus : a systematic review

AIMS

The aim of this study was to investigate the outcome of periprosthetic fractures of the humerus and to assess the uniformity of the classifications used for these fractures (including those around elbow and/or shoulder arthroplasties) by performing a systematic review of the literature.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence Healthcare Databases Advance Search. For inclusion, studies had to report clinical outcomes following the management of periprosthetic fractures of the humerus. The protocol was registered on the PROSPERO database.

RESULTS

Overall, 40 studies were included, involving a total of 210 patients. The fractures were reported using very heterogeneous classification systems, as were the functional outcome scores. A total of 60 patients had nonoperative treatment with a 50% rate of nonunion. Fixation was undertaken in 99 patients; successful union was obtained in 93 (93%). Revision of either the humeral stem or the whole arthroplasty was reported in 79 patients with a high rate of union (n = 66; 84%), and a mean rate of complications of 29% (0% to 41%).

CONCLUSION

This study highlighted a lack of uniformity in classifying these fractures and reporting the outcome of their treatment. The results may help to inform decision-making with patients, particularly about the rate of complications of nonoperative treatment. There is a need to improve the reporting of the pattern of these fractures using a uniform classification system, and the harmonization of the collection of data relating to the outcome of treatment. Based on this review, we propose a minimum dataset to be used in future studies. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(4):416-423.

Complications and Intraoperative Fractures in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review

Introduction

The reverse shoulder arthroplasty is nowadays a treatment option for a variety of shoulder problems. As its incidence rose, also the number of complications increased, including intraoperative fractures.

Significance

We performed a systematic review and critical analysis of the current literature following the PRISMA guidelines. Our purpose was to: 1) determine incidence, causes, and characteristics of intraoperative fractures; 2) evaluate their current treatment options, possible related complications, reoperation rates, and the patients’ outcome; and 3) determine the overall incidence of each complication related to reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The articles were selected from PubMed medical database in April 2020 using a comprehensive search strategy. Rayyan software was used to support the selection process of the records. A descriptive and critical analysis of the results was performed.

Results

The study group included a total of 13,513 reverse shoulder arthroplasty procedures. The total number of complications was 1647 (rate 12.1%). The most common complication was dislocation (340 cases, rate 2.5%). Forty-six studies reported a total of 188 intraoperative fractures among the complications (rate 1.4%). The intraoperative fracture rate was 2.9% and 13.6% in primary and revision settings, respectively. There were 136 humeral fractures, 60% of them occurred in revision RSAs, during the removal of the previous implant, and involved the shaft in the majority of cases (39%). Glenoid fractures were 51 and occurred mostly during the reaming of the glenoid. We observed 7 further related complications (rate of 4%) and 3 reoperations (rate of 1.5%). The outcome was satisfactory in the majority of cases.

Conclusions

A comprehensive review on intraoperative fractures in reverse shoulder arthroplasties is presented. Results suggest favorable outcomes for all treatment methods, with a modest further complication rate. This investigation may aid in the treatment decision-making for these complications.

Intermediate to long term results of stemless metaphyseal reverse shoulder arthroplasty: A five to nine year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Shoulder arthroplasty incidence is increasing as is the volume of revision surgeries. Revision surgery is easier if humeral bone stock is preserved with minimal bone defects and osteolysis. This has led to an increased focus on the development of various short stemmed and stemless implants which provides stable fixation whilst preserving humeral bone stock.

PURPOSE

To review the medium to long term clinical and radiological outcomes, complications and survival rates of a stemless reverse shoulder prosthesis.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Patients with a minimum follow-up of 60 months following a reverse stemless shoulder arthroplasty were deemed eligible. Clinical and radiological data on twenty-one patients operated between 2009 and 2014 were recorded prospectively. Survivorship and patient recorded symptoms with the end point of revision surgery were recorded.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up of 78 months (60-114 months). Mean range of active elevation was 136° (80-170°). Mean range of active abduction and active external rotation was 122° (70-170°) and 47° (10-75°) respectively. Mean Oxford score improved from 12 pre-operatively to 44 at final follow up (p < 0.0001). Mean Constant Murley Score improved from 18 to 72 (p < 0.0001). Mean ADLEIR score of 13 pre-operatively increased to 32 post-operatively (p < 0.0001). Notching was seen in 23.5% of cases and no radiolucent areas were observed around the glenoid component. There were two cases of post traumatic peri-prosthetic fractures that were managed conservatively and one case of deep-seated infection that required a washout. The survivorship at the most recent follow-up was 100%.

CONCLUSION

The advantages of bone preservation with the stemless metaphyseal prosthesis combined with encouraging medium to long term clinical and radiological results are very promising, particularly with the improved post-operative patient satisfaction scores. This is the first study that reports the results with a minimum of 5 year follow-up and has the longest mean follow-up period.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The reverse stemless shoulder prosthesis is an effective and reliable option for elective shoulder arthroplasty.

A Long-Term Follow-Up of Post-Operative Periprosthetic Humeral Fracture in Shoulder Arthroplasty

Background

During the last decades, the growing number of shoulder replacement has increased the associated complications. Periprosthetic fractures have a low incidence but can be a severe clinical condition, especially in elderly population. There are still no guidelines to define the best treatment protocol for post-operative periprosthetic humeral fractures. Factors associated to these fractures and consequently the decision-making for the best treatment seem to be patient-related but also correlated with the type of implant. The aim of this study is to analyze the patient’s risk factors, fracture pattern, implant type and treatment, evaluating the outcome with a long-term follow-up.

Methods

A retrospective study was performed on more than 2700 shoulder prostheses implanted over 10 years in two specialized centers, identifying 19 patients who underwent surgery for post-operative periprosthetic fracture. Gender, age, comorbidities, type of prosthetic implant, type of fracture, and cortical index of each patient were evaluated. All patients underwent surgery and were evaluated with a mean follow-up of 5 years with radiographic controls and functional assessment with the Constant–Murley score.

Results

Complete healing was achieved in 18 of 19 patients. All patients presented a lower Constant–Murley score than the pre-fracture score, there were no significant differences between prosthetic implants, and the cortical index was lower than the threshold level in more than 60% of cases.

Conclusion

The results of this study showed that a correct preoperative planning is essential to evaluate the type of implant and possible signs of stem mobilization. With a stable stem, it is preferable to maintain it and proceed to a synthesis. The decision process is more complex in periprosthetic fractures with a reduced cortical index, when some radiolucency lines are present in stems with high primary stability, because it is not always indicative of an unstable stem.

Level of Evidence

Therapeutic III

Dislocation after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using contemporary medialized modular systems. Can we still consider it such a frequent complication?

INTRODUCTION

Improvement in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) prosthesis and technique has reduced the initially high complication and revision rates associated with this implant. However, instability continues to be a leading cause of reoperation after RTSA, being related in previous studies with medialized designs. The aim of this study was to determine the dislocation rate with the employment of two medialized modular systems of RTSA in our institution.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of two different modular systems of RTSA (SMR Modular Shoulder System and Delta XTEND Reverse Shoulder) was performed between 2009 and 2017 with a minimum 3-year follow-up. Baseline demographic, clinical (Constant, ASES and ROM), and radiographic data were collected. Characteristics of postoperative instability cases were also evaluated.

RESULTS

237 primary RTSA (41% SMR/59% Delta) and 34 revision RTSA (44% SMR/56% Delta) with a mean follow-up of 75.6 ± 5.2 months (79.2 SMR/86.3 Delta, p = .586) were included in the present study. Indications for primary RTSA were osteoarthritis, rotator cuff tear arthropathy and massive irreparable rotator cuff tear (64%), acute fracture (32%), and fracture sequelae (4%). Subscapularis tendon was always repaired in degenerative pathology and tuberosities reattached in traumatic cases. The mean age of the global series was 76.5 ± 5.3 years (75.8 SMR/78.6 Delta, p = .104) with a mean Constant/ASES score at final follow-up of 68.5 ± 4.3/72.9 ± 20.3 (71/68 SMR and 69/74 Delta, p = .653 and .642). Only 2 patients (one acute fracture and one fracture sequelae) suffered an early postoperative anterior dislocation (before 3 months) which represents a rate of .84% in primary cases and .73% including revision surgery. Closed reduction manoeuvres were not successful, and both patients required revision surgery. At the end follow-up, both were stable and had no further dislocations.

CONCLUSION

The dislocation rate after RTSA with the employment of two contemporary modular systems with a medialized centre of rotation is extremely low, especially when compared with the previously published series with the original Grammont design. Acute fracture and fracture sequelae were the main diagnoses associated with this instability. The reasons for the low dislocation rate are multifactorial, but the improvement in the baseplate position according to the more recent standards of "ideal position" and technical aspects such as subscapularis repair or tuberosity reattachment in fractures probably play an important role in this aspect.

Primary stability of fixation methods for periprosthetic fractures of the humerus: a biomechanical investigation

BACKGROUND

The incidence of periprosthetic fractures of the proximal humerus is gradually increasing, following an increase in reverse shoulder arthroplasties in recent years. Locking plate fixation and revision arthroplasty are both valuable treatment methods. However, the primary stability of fixation methods for periprosthetic fractures has not been investigated in detail. The aim of this study was to analyze and compare the primary stability of the common treatment measures.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Cemented reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (Delta Xtend; DePuy Synthes, Warsaw, IN, USA) was performed in 5 shoulders, and a distal, mid-diaphysis humeral fracture (Wright and Cofield type B) was induced. The implant was left in place, and 3 distinct fixation scenarios were tested: osteosynthesis using 4.5-mm locking plate fixation (subgroup A), 4.5-mm locking plate fixation with an additional 3.5-mm locking plate (subgroup B), and 4.5-mm locking plate fixation with an additional K-wire cerclage (subgroup C). The specimens were tested in a biomechanical setup simulating activities of daily living including rotation. Strain gauges (4-wire strain at 120 Ω; Vishay Measurements Group, Chartres, France) mounted on the 4.5-mm locking plates were used to evaluate the strain of the fixation and to give an estimate of primary stability.

RESULTS

Regarding the simulation of activities of daily living, no statistically significant differences were found in the measured strains on the locking plate between subgroups A, B, and C. A maximum measured strain of 216.85 μm/m in subgroup A resulted in bending of the locking plate (length, 134 mm) of 0.03 mm. In subgroup B (277.01 μm/m), the plate strained 0.04 mm compared with a strain measurement of 0.01 mm in subgroup C (75.93 μm/m).

CONCLUSION

Additional K-wire cerclages or additional 3.5-mm locked plating did not increase primary stability. With a stable prosthetic implant in place, 4.5-mm locked plating is sufficient to address periprosthetic humeral shaft fractures in the present in vitro setup.

Outcome and complications following revision shoulder arthroplasty : a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

It is important to understand the rate of complications associated with the increasing burden of revision shoulder arthroplasty. Currently, this has not been well quantified. This review aims to address that deficiency with a focus on complication and reoperation rates, shoulder outcome scores, and comparison of anatomical and reverse prostheses when used in revision surgery.

METHODS

A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) systematic review was performed to identify clinical data for patients undergoing revision shoulder arthroplasty. Data were extracted from the literature and pooled for analysis. Complication and reoperation rates were analyzed using a meta-analysis of proportion, and continuous variables underwent comparative subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 112 studies (5,379 shoulders) were eligible for inclusion, although complete clinical data was not ubiquitous. Indications for revision included component loosening 20% (601/3,041), instability 19% (577/3,041), rotator cuff failure 17% (528/3,041), and infection 16% (490/3,041). Intraoperative complication and postoperative complication and reoperation rates were 8% (230/2,915), 22% (825/3,843), and 13% (584/3,843) respectively. Intraoperative and postoperative complications included iatrogenic humeral fractures (91/230, 40%) and instability (215/825, 26%). Revision to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), rather than revision to anatomical TSA from any index prosthesis, resulted in lower complication rates and superior Constant scores, although there was no difference in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores.

CONCLUSION

Satisfactory improvement in patient-reported outcome measures are reported following revision shoulder arthroplasty; however, revision surgery is associated with high complication rates and better outcomes may be evident following revision to reverse TSA. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(8):618-630.

Is suture cerclage fixation a valid treatment for intraoperative nondisplaced calcar fractures in reverse total shoulder arthroplasties?

Background

Implantation rates of reverse total shoulder arthroplasties continue to grow worldwide. Despite satisfying results, a distinct number of complications persist. Intraoperative fractures of the humeral shaft might occur in a certain number of cases. The literature is sparse regarding incidence and treatment options. This study analyzed the treatment using suture cerclage or stainless-steel-cable cerclage.

Methods

Our prospectively followed-up cohort of 860 patients who received primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in a tertiary referral hospital between September 2005 and August 2018 was screened for intraoperative medial humeral calcar fractures. The patients were retrospectively analyzed as per the treatment algorithm using (1) suture cerclage with FiberWire, (2) cable cerclage with stainless steel cable, or (3) no intervention. The outcome was radiologically and clinically (Subjective Shoulder Value and Constant score) evaluated.

Results

A total of 39 (4.5%) intraoperative calcar fractures of the humeral shaft were identified with 29 cases available for analysis at a mean follow-up time of 52 ± 27 months. Sixteen of them were treated with suture cerclage, 7 with metal cable cerclage, and 6 without intervention. All fractures were nondisplaced or could be reduced anatomically and healed without any stem subsidence or loosening within the first 4.5 months. The intervention groups reached similar values for the Subjective Shoulder Value (68%±27% vs. 79%±19%, suture vs. cable) and relative Constant score (65 % ± 25 % vs. 75 % ± 23).

Conclusion

Intraoperative medial calcar fractures can be sufficiently treated with metal or suture cerclage fixation. High-strength polyblend-polyethylene sutures seem to be a valid therapeutic option for selected medial calcar fractures of the humerus. In selected cases, however, benign neglect can result in excellent results as well.

A Tensionable Suture-based Cerclage Is an Alternative to Stainless Steel Cerclage Fixation for Stabilization of a Humeral Osteotomy During Shoulder Arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Fixation of periprosthetic humeral fractures is most commonly obtained with steel-based wires or cables; however, disadvantages with these constructs are numerous. Suture-based cerclages offer the advantage of easy handling, less radiographic interference, and risk of metallosis, as well as decreased risk of cutting into the soft humeral bone. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare a suture-based cerclage to a stainless steel wire cerclage (SSWC) for stabilization of the humerus during shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

In part I of the study, SSWC fixation was compared with single-looped tape cerclage and a double-looped tape cerclage (DLTC) fixation. In part II, a subsidence test was performed on 12 cadaveric humeri. After an osteotomy, the humeri were secured with either a SSWC or DLTC. Subsequently, a metal wedge was introduced into the humerus to simulate the stem of a shoulder arthroplasty.

RESULTS

In part I, load to 2-mm displacement was significantly higher for the DLTC construct compared with the SSWC construct (2,401 ± 483 N versus 750 ± 33 N; P < 0.0001). Load to failure was 935 ± 143 N with the SSWC, 1,737 ± 113 N with the single-looped tape cerclage, and 4,360 ± 463 N with the DLTC constructs, and all differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05). In part II, load at 20-mm subsidence was higher for the DLTC (320 ± 274 N) compared with the SSWC (247 ± 137 N), but no significant difference was observed (P > 0.05). However, gap displacement at 20 mm subsidence was significantly lower with the DLTC construct (0.33 ± 0.31 mm versus 0.77 ± 0.23 mm; P = 0.009). Load to failure was higher with the DLTC construct compared with the SSWC construct (4,447 ± 2,325 N versus 1,880 ± 1,089 N; P = 0.032), but the final gap displacement did not differ significantly (DLTC 5.23 ± 6.63 mm versus SSWC 6.03 ± 8.82 mm; P > 0.05).

DISCUSSION

A DLTC has higher load to failure and trends toward lower gap displacement compared with a SSWC. The DLTC construct may therefore be a viable alternative for fixation of periprosthetic fractures or osteotomies of the humeral shaft during shoulder arthroplasty.

Neurologic complications in primary anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: A review

Neurologic injury during shoulder replacement is one of the less common complications of the procedure, however the clinical implications can be significant. The purpose of this paper is to review the current literature on neurologic complications in various types of shoulder replacement and provide recommendations regarding avoidance, evaluation, and management of these complications.

Physical Therapy-Induced Fracture After Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Case Report

CASE

We present a case of a physical therapy-induced fracture of the proximal humerus, presumably caused by forceful shoulder flexion and external rotation, after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) in a 70-year-old woman with underlying osteopenia, systemic lupus erythematosus, long-term glucocorticoid use, and common variable immunodeficiency.

CONCLUSION

This case of a physical therapy-induced greater tuberosity fracture after RTSA presents an example of an early postoperative complication with no impact on eventual successful surgical outcomes. Special consideration should be given to tailor the postoperative rehabilitation after RTSA in patients with increased risk of fractures.

Biomechanical Assessment of Three Osteosynthesis Constructs by Periprosthetic Humerus Fractures

Background

Biomechanical stability assessment of 3 different constructs for proximal fixation of a locking compression plate (LCP) in treating a Worland type C periprosthetic fracture after total shoulder arthroplasty.

Methods

27 Worland type C fractures after shoulder arthroplasty in synthetic humeri were treated with 14-hole LCP that is proximally fixed using the following: (1) 1 × 1.5 mm cerclage wires and 2x unicortical-locking screws, (2) 3 × 1.5 mm cerclage wires, or (3) 2x bicortical-locking attachment plates. Torsional stiffness was assessed by applying an internal rotation moment of 5 Nm and then after unloading the specimen, an external rotation moment of 5 Nm at the same rate was applied. Axial stiffness was assessed by applying a 50 N preload, and then applying a cyclic load of 250 N, then increasing the load by 50 N each time, until a maximum axial load of 2500 N was reached or specimen failure occurred.

Results

With regard to internal as well as external rotational stiffness, group 1 showed a mean stiffness of 0.37 Nm/deg and 0.57 Nm/deg, respectively, group 2 had a mean stiffness of 0.51 Nm/deg and 0.39 Nm/deg, respectively, while group 3 had a mean stiffness of 1.34 Nm/deg and 1.31 Nm/deg, respectively. Concerning axial stiffness, group 1 showed an average stiffness of 451.0 N/mm, group 2 had a mean stiffness of 737.5 N/mm, whereas group 3 had a mean stiffness of 715.8 N/mm.

Conclusion

Group 3 displayed a significantly higher torsional stiffness while a comparable axial stiffness to group 2.

Nonoperative Treatment of Periprosthetic Humeral Shaft Fractures After Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Few studies report on periprosthetic humeral shaft fractures after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). The authors evaluated outcomes of 5 patients with this complication who were initially treated nonoperatively. Of 152 patients who underwent RTSA at the authors' institution from 2012 to 2017, 4 experienced periprosthetic humeral shaft fractures. One patient was referred to the authors for fracture treatment. All 5 patients were initially treated nonoperatively. The mean duration of follow-up was 11.5 months (range, 1.5-26 months). The authors analyzed time to fracture union, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, visual analog scale (VAS) score for pain, and active shoulder range of motion. Fracture union occurred in 4 patients treated nonoperatively at a mean of 4.4 months. Mean SANE score was 55 of 100 (range, 20-85). Mean VAS score was 3.4 of 10 (range, 0-8). Mean forward elevation was 83° (range, 45°-110°); mean abduction was 65° (range, 45°-80°); and mean external rotation with the arm at the side was 15° (range, 0°-30°). Many factors must be considered when customizing treatment for patients with periprosthetic fracture after RTSA. This case series indicates that nonoperative treatment of postoperative periprosthetic humeral shaft fractures can be successful. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(6):e553-e560.].

The use of tobacco is a modifiable risk factor for poor outcomes and readmissions after shoulder arthroplasty

Aims

The impact of tobacco use on readmission and medical and surgical complications has been documented in hip and knee arthroplasty. However, there remains little information about the effect of smoking on the outcome after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). We hypothesized that active smokers are at an increased risk of poor medical and surgial outcomes after TSA.

Methods

Data for patients who underwent arthroplasty of the shoulder in the USA between January 2011 and December 2015 were obtained from the National Readmission Database, and 90-day readmissions and complications were documented using validated coding methods. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to quantify the risk of smoking on the outcome after TSA, while controlling for patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital-level confounding factors.

Results

A total of 196,325 non-smokers (93.1%) and 14,461 smokers (6.9%) underwent TSA during the five-year study period. Smokers had significantly increased rates of 30- and 90-day readmission (p = 0.025 and 0.001, respectively), revision within 90 days (p < 0.001), infection (p < 0.001), wound complications (p < 0.001), and instability of the prosthesis (p < 0.001). They were also at significantly greater risk of suffering from pneumonia (p < 0.001), sepsis (p = 0.001), and myocardial infarction (p < 0.001), postoperatively.

Conclusion

Smokers have an increased risk of readmission and medical and surgical complications after TSA. These risks are similar to those found for smokers after hip and knee arthroplasty. Many surgeons choose to avoid these elective procedures in patients who smoke. The increased risks should be considered when counselling patients who smoke before undertaking TSA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1549–1554.

The use of tobacco is a modifiable risk factor for poor outcomes and readmissions after shoulder arthroplasty

AIMS

The impact of tobacco use on readmission and medical and surgical complications has been documented in hip and knee arthroplasty. However, there remains little information about the effect of smoking on the outcome after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). We hypothesized that active smokers are at an increased risk of poor medical and surgial outcomes after TSA.

METHODS

Data for patients who underwent arthroplasty of the shoulder in the USA between January 2011 and December 2015 were obtained from the National Readmission Database, and 90-day readmissions and complications were documented using validated coding methods. Multivariate regression analysis was performed to quantify the risk of smoking on the outcome after TSA, while controlling for patient demographics, comorbidities, and hospital-level confounding factors.

RESULTS

A total of 196,325 non-smokers (93.1%) and 14,461 smokers (6.9%) underwent TSA during the five-year study period. Smokers had significantly increased rates of 30- and 90-day readmission (p = 0.025 and 0.001, respectively), revision within 90 days (p < 0.001), infection (p < 0.001), wound complications (p < 0.001), and instability of the prosthesis (p < 0.001). They were also at significantly greater risk of suffering from pneumonia (p < 0.001), sepsis (p = 0.001), and myocardial infarction (p < 0.001), postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Smokers have an increased risk of readmission and medical and surgical complications after TSA. These risks are similar to those found for smokers after hip and knee arthroplasty. Many surgeons choose to avoid these elective procedures in patients who smoke. The increased risks should be considered when counselling patients who smoke before undertaking TSA.

[Periprosthetic fractures: basics, classification and treatment principles]

Periprosthetic fractures (PPFx) are becoming an increasingly important topic in orthopedics and trauma surgery due to the rising number of endoprosthetic joint replacements. The recently published unified classification system (UCS) has replaced numerous historical classification systems and can be applied to all PPFx regardless of the bone or joint involved. The treatment of PPFx requires individual therapeutic concepts taking patient-dependent and patient-independent factors into consideration. The conservative treatment of PPFx is only justified in exceptional situations. In contrast, the choice between operative treatment and deciding between osteosynthesis or revision arthroplasty is particularly based on the assessment of the implant stability. In order to achieve fracture consolidation and also a good functional outcome, knowledge of the basic biomechanical principles of operative (osteosynthesis or endoprosthesis) treatment of periprosthetic fractures is necessary.

Periprosthetic Fractures in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Current Concepts and Advances in Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Expanded indications for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have raised awareness of associated complications, including periprosthetic fractures. The purpose of this article was to provide a comprehensive update on how, when, and why RSA-related periprosthetic fractures occur, as well as to describe the current treatment strategies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Periprosthetic acromial and scapular spine fractures occur in up to 4.3% of cases and periprosthetic humeral fractures occur in approximately 3.5% of RSA procedures. Fractures of the coracoid process and clavicle have also been reported. Current literature has identified several risk factors for intraoperative or postoperative fracture, including underlying osteoporosis, revision arthroplasty, use of a superiorly placed screw during metaglene fixation, and disruption of the scapular ring by transection of the coracoacromial ligament. Periprosthetic fracture associated with RSA is a clinically significant event that warrants prolonged postoperative vigilance, timely diagnosis, and shared patient decision-making regarding treatment. Further research is needed to identify optimal treatment strategies and characterize long-term clinical outcomes following RSA-related periprosthetic fracture.

Surgically relevant anatomy of the axillary and radial nerves in relation to the latissimus dorsi tendon in variable shoulder positions: A cadaveric study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to define the relationship of the axillary and radial nerves, particularly how these are affected with changing arm position.

METHODS

Twenty cadaveric shoulders were dissected, identifying the axillary and radial nerves. Distances between the latissimus dorsi tendon and these nerves were recorded in different shoulder positions. Positions included adduction/neutral rotation, abduction/neutral rotation for the axillary nerve, adduction/internal rotation, adduction/neutral rotation, adduction/external rotation, and abduction/external rotation for the radial nerve.

RESULTS

Width of the latissimus tendon at its humeral insertion was 29.3 ± 5.7 mm. Mean distance from the latissimus insertion to the axillary nerve in adduction/neutral rotation was 24.2 ± 7.1 mm, the distance increased to 41.1 ± 9.8 mm in abduction/neutral rotation. Mean distance from the latissimus insertion to the radial nerve was 15.3 ± 5.5 mm with adduction/internal rotation, 25.8 ± 6.9 mm in adduction/neutral rotation, and 39.5 ± 6.8 mm in adduction/external rotation. Mean distance increased with abduction/external rotated 51.1 ± 7.4 mm.

CONCLUSIONS

Knowing the axillary and radial nerve locations relative to the latissimus dorsi tendon decreases the risk of iatrogenic nerve injury. Understanding the dynamic nature of these nerves related to different shoulder positions is critical to avoid complications.

Surgical treatment of periprosthetic humerus fractures and algorithm

INTRODUCTION

Periprosthetic humerus fractures are infrequent and sometimes difficult to treat. There is limited literature and no consensus on the handling of these fractures. The objective of this study was to compare our results with those published in the literature, in order to improve our care and propose a management algorithm.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

Observational study of 10cases of periprosthetic humerus fractures with a mean follow-up of the patients of 23months. An analysis of sociodemographic, radiological and surgical variables was performed. They were reviewed clinically and by telephone using the UCLA Shoulder Score and Quick-DASH scales. A systematic search was made in Pubmed for periprosthetic humerus fractures, for a literature review with which to compare our series.

RESULTS

We analysed 10patients with an average age of 69.4years (37-91). Of the patients, 90% underwent surgery through open reduction and internal fixation. Nine of the ten patients consolidated in a mean time of 6.2months (range 5-12), the remaining suffered a new fracture 5months after the intervention, who were reoperated and a new osteosynthesis performed with bone allograft. In the UCLA scale there was a decrease of 10.66points, and an increase of 27.3points in the Quick-DASH, at the end of the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

In our series of cases we found similarities in the literature, in relation to demographic aspects and obtaining good radiographic results, which do not correspond to the functional outcome of patients.

Late-Onset Radial Nerve Palsy After Closed Treatment of a Periprosthetic Humerus Fracture: A Case Report

CASE

A 58-year-old woman underwent successful reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for a proximal humerus fracture. Three years later, she sustained a periprosthetic humerus fracture after a fall and was treated conservatively. She healed with an abundance of callus and subsequently developed delayed-onset radial nerve palsy at 3 months, despite minimal change in humeral alignment and avoidance of the use of any compressive external braces or splints.

CONCLUSIONS

Minimally displaced periprosethetic humerus fractures can lead to delayed radial nerve palsy from callus entrapment, and there should be increased awareness of this potential complication when counseling and treating patients conservatively.

Post-operative periprosthetic humeral fractures after reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a review of the literature

Background and aim of the work: Post-operative periprosthetic shoulder fractures incidence is gradually raising due to aging of population and increasing of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Management of this complication represents a challenge for the orthopedic surgeon. Aim of the present study is to critically review the recent literature about epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, management and outcome of post-operative periprosthetic humeral fractures occurring on RTSA. Methods: A systematic search of Embase, Medline and Pubmed was performed by two reviewers who selected the eligible papers favoring studies published in the last ten years. Epidemiology, risk factors, diagnostic features, clinical management and outcome of different techniques were all reviewed. Results: 31 studies including reviews, meta-analysis, case reports, clinical and biomechanical studies were selected. Conclusions: Correct clinical management requires adequate diagnosis and evaluation of risk factors. Conservative treatment is rarely indicated. Locking plate fixation and revision arthroplasty are both valuable treatment methods. Surgical technique should be chosen considering age and functional demand, comorbidities, fracture morphology and location, bone quality and stability of the implant. Given the correct indication all surgical treatment can lead to satisfactory clinical and radiographic results despite a relevant complication rate. (www.actabiomedica.it)

Safety and Effectiveness of Shoulder Arthroplasties in Spain: A Systematic Review

The effectiveness and safety of shoulder arthroplasties in the general context of a Spanish patient population remains unclear. The aim of this study was to ascertain both the effectiveness and safety of primary shoulder arthroplasties and the prosthesis types used in Spain. A systematic review of all the available literature evaluating the effectiveness and safety of primary shoulder arthroplasties in Spain was performed. A narrative synthesis was performed, and evidence tables were created in four dimensions: study design, arthroplasty characteristics, safety, and effectiveness. Orthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel (ODEP) scores were used to evaluate prosthesis types. Twenty-one studies were selected that included a total of 1293 arthroplasties. The most common indication was fractures, while the prosthesis most frequently used was the Delta Xtend (ODEP 10A). The most common complication was scapular notching. Prosthesis revision rate was approximately 6% for follow-ups between 12 and 79 months. In addition, significant improvements were observed in the Constant-Murley test score after the intervention. Currently in Spain, shoulder arthroplasty can be considered a safe and effective procedure with functional recovery and pain reduction for eligible patients with humeral fracture, rotator cuff arthropathy, fracture sequelae and malunion of the proximal humerus, and degenerative disease. Future longitudinal research and population-based studies could serve to confirm these results and identify points of improvement.

Long-term humeral complications after Grammont-style reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Recent experiences with Grammont reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have revealed some problems related to the biomechanical changes of the shoulder and humeral stem complications. We analyzed humeral complications in a long-term follow-up of a large series of RSAs, searching for correlations between these and the initial etiology, the follow-up duration, and the clinical outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Preoperative and postoperative clinical and radiologic assessments of 1035 RSAs with a minimum 5-year follow-up (implanted in 7 specialized shoulder centers between 1993 and 2010) were retrospectively collected. Postoperative humeral complications, managed conservatively or surgically, were radiographically documented.

RESULTS

Overall, a 3.3% rate of postoperative humeral complications was found in our database. We identified 17 cases (1.6%) with postoperative humeral fractures, 15 cases (1.4%) with aseptic humeral loosening, and 3 cases (0.3%) with humeral stem disassembly. The humeral complications were more frequent in RSAs implanted for tumors, fracture sequelae, and revision for failed arthroplasty.

DISCUSSION

Humeral complications after RSA are not rare, increase with longer follow-up, and have a negative impact on functional outcomes. Postoperative humeral fractures are more frequent in elderly patients, operated on through a superior approach, and after cemented stem implantation. In the absence of associated humeral loosening, conservative treatment should be preferred. Proximal humeral bone loss (due to revisions and tumors) is the most significant risk factor for humeral loosening. Implant unscrewing was initially related to a technological problem, which has been solved, and this complication has disappeared.

Humeral shaft fractures

Fractures of the humeral shaft are common injuries with multiple management strategies. Many still regard nonoperative management as the standard of care; however, as the understanding of these injuries increases, treatment recommendations are also evolving. Fracture pattern, fracture location, and identifiable patient risk factors may predict poor outcome with nonoperative management, and earlier operative intervention may be recommended. Operative management includes open reduction and internal fixation through a variety of exposures, intramedullary nail fixation, and external fixation. With increasing rates of shoulder arthroplasty, periprosthetic humeral shaft fractures also deserve special consideration.

Anatomical reconstruction to treat acromion fractures following reverse shoulder arthroplasty

PURPOSE

Scapular fractures after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) are often associated with substantial shoulder impairment. Patient outcomes following either conservative or operative treatment have not been favourable, and consensus is lacking on the best treatment approach. We describe a technique for anatomic reconstruction of fractured lateral and basal acromion in patients at higher risk for diminished function or those for which conservative treatment has already failed.

METHODS

Of the 95 patients who underwent RSA at our institution between December 2013 and December 2016, three had post-operative acromion fractures (type II). Two of these patients had secondary dislocation and one underwent conservative treatment that failed. In all three cases, the acromion was reconstructed using an open technique with plate and interfragmentary screw fixation.

RESULTS

After the acromial fracture and prior to reconstructive surgery, the shoulder function decreased substantially in all three cases. Following reconstruction, forward flexion improved from 53.0° to 127°, and abduction improved from 52.0 to 125°. The range of the Constant scores at the one year follow-up was 55-71, and the subjective shoulder value (SSV) was 50-90. One patient reached the same active range of motion (ROM) as her pre-fracture status, and the two other patients improved but did not regain the previous ROM level.

CONCLUSION

Acromion fractures after RSA are serious complications that have the potential to cause severe shoulder function impairment. Our fixation technique for anatomic lateral and basal acromion reconstruction was used safely to treat three patients with poor shoulder function due to secondary dislocation or non-unions.

Surgical anatomy of the radial nerve in the deltopectoral approach for revision shoulder arthroplasty and periprosthetic fracture fixation: a cadaveric study

BACKGROUND

Radial nerve injury is a rare but clinically significant complication of revision shoulder arthroplasty and fixation of native and periprosthetic proximal humeral fractures. Understanding of the anatomic relationship between the radial nerve as it enters the humeral spiral groove and anterior shoulder landmarks in a deltopectoral approach is necessary to avoid iatrogenic radial nerve injury.

METHODS

Eight forequarter cadaveric specimens were dissected through a deltopectoral approach. Distances between the radial nerve entry into the proximal spiral groove and the coracoid process, distal lesser tuberosity/inferior subscapularis insertion, superior latissimus insertion, and inferior latissimus insertion were measured. Means, standard deviations, and ranges were determined for each distance.

RESULTS

The radial nerve entry into the proximal spiral groove averaged 133.1 mm (range, 110.3-153.0 mm) from the coracoid process, 101.9 mm (range, 76.5-124.3 mm) from the distal lesser tuberosity/inferior subscapularis insertion, 81.0 mm (range, 63.4-101.5 mm) from the superior latissimus insertion, and 39.6 mm (range, 25.5-55.4 mm) from the inferior latissimus insertion. The proximal spiral groove was distal to the inferior latissimus insertion in all specimens.

CONCLUSION

The risk of iatrogenic injury to the radial nerve at the spiral groove may be minimized through proper identification and protection or avoidance of circumferential fixation. However, if encircling fixation with cerclage cables is necessary, instrumentation proximal to the inferior edge of the latissimus dorsi insertion may reduce the risk of radial nerve injury.

Deltoid muscle activity in patients with reverse shoulder prosthesis at 2-year follow-up

PURPOSE

The reverse shoulder prosthesis (RSP) was developed to relieve pain and improve functional outcomes in patients with glenohumeral arthritis and deficiency of the rotator cuff. Even if clinical and functional outcomes regarding the use of the RSP were reported by literature, data concerning progressive deltoid adaptation to this non-anatomic implant are still missing. The purpose of our study was to correlate clinical and functional outcomes with deltoid fibers activity and muscle fatigability in patients with reverse shoulder prosthesis at 2 years follow-up.

METHODS

Twenty patients with reverse shoulder prosthesis due to symptomatic deficient or nonfunctional rotator cuff associated with osteoarthritis were referred by Cervesi Hospital Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Unit. Exclusion criteria were: axillary nerve palsy, a nonfunctioning deltoid muscle, diabetes, previous trauma, malignancy. Furthermore patients who received the RSP for revision arthroplasty, proximal humerus fractures were excluded. All the patients underwent clinical and functional evaluation with the support of electromyography measurement focused on deltoid activity.

RESULTS

RSP surgical treatment in shoulder osteoarthritis confirms his good outcome in terms of pain relief. At 2 years anterior and lateral deltoid electromyographic activity was significantly lower compared with contralateral side (p < 0.001). Posterior deltoid activity was no detectable. Range of motion at 2 years of follow-up decreased in terms of forward flexion (p = 0.045), abduction (p = 0.03) and external rotation (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates that even if the patients remain pain-free, progressive deterioration of the deltoid activity is unavoidable and may lead to poor functional outcomes overtime.

[Prosthesis replacement in periprosthetic humeral fractures]

OBJECTIVE

Stabilization of the humerus with preservation or restoration of the shoulder function.

INDICATIONS

Always in the presence of a loose prosthesis. It may become necessary in conditions of poor bone stock and if osteosynthesis is not possible.

CONTRAINDICATIONS

Noncompliant patients due to alcohol or drugs. Local infections.

SURGICAL TECHNIQUE

The loose implant is removed using an extended anterior deltopectoral approach. After exploration of the fracture and extended soft tissue release, the glenoidal components are implanted with visualization and protection of the axillary nerve. A long stemmed implant is typically needed on the humeral side. It is anchored in the distal fragment over a length of about 6 cm. Soft tissue tension is crucial, especially with reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

POSTOPERATIVE MANAGEMENT

Postoperatively, the affected limb is immobilized for 6 weeks on a 15° shoulder abduction pillow with active assisted movement therapy up to the horizontal plane. This is followed by gradual pain-adapted increases of movement, muscle coordination, and strength.

RESULTS

In 17 patients with periprosthetic fractures of the humerus surgically treated in our institution, 4 underwent revision arthroplasty because of a loose prosthesis. No intra- or postoperative complications were observed. All fractures healed except one.

Periprosthetic humeral fractures after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Case report

Periprosthetic fractures is a severe complication after joint replacement. The rapidly increase of reverse shoulder arthroplasty surgeries, periprosthetic humeral fractures, which are described as rare, may increase in the near future. We report the case of displaced humeral fracture bellow the stem of reverse shoulder prosthesis. The patient was an 85-year-old woman who had a total shoulder replacement 6 years previously. The surgical solution consisted of plate osteossynthesis and cerclage. This report describes an unprecedented case in Brazilian literature; and gives an overview of the existing literature including this injury classification.

Peri-prosthetic humeral non-union: Where biology meets bio-mechanic. A case report

INTRODUCTION

The worldwide incidence of traumatic fractures has been growing over the last years due to the progressive aging of the population. Today, the increase of arthroplasty procedures in orthopaedic surgery is related to a high rate of peri-prosthetic fractures. Healing of the fracture is a multifactorial metabolic process; if these factors are impaired, healing process could be interrupted resulting in non-union.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

We report our experience about a case of a humeral diaphysis non-union secondary to peri-prosthetic fracture (reverse shoulder arthroplasty) treated by conservative approach.

DISCUSSION

We treated this patient using a multilevel approach, consisting of revision surgery and drug therapy.

CONCLUSION

We assume that an aggressive revision surgery done with bone autograft implant and a bone healing therapy administering teriparatide off-label can reduce the convalescence in non-unions and can improve prognosis.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures in the geriatric patient: results, health-related quality of life and complication rates

PURPOSE

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in fractures is especially indicated in patients of advanced age, although the influence of age on functional outcomes, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and complication rate is unknown. We hypothesized that complication rate would decrease in the geriatric population because of their reduced activity, improving the perceived HRQoL.

METHODS

Retrospective study of 42 patients with proximal humeral fractures treated with RSA, divided into two groups: <80 years (<80y)(n = 16) and ≥80 years (≥80y)(n = 26). The assessment tools used were radiological images (functional outcome) with the Constant-Murley score(CMS); disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand (DASH) score; and HRQoL with the EQ-5D index. Mean follow-up time was 32.6 months.

RESULTS

Mean CMS adjusted for age and sex (R-CMS) was 68 % ± 29 %. Patients in the ≥80y group had a lower total CMS, 33 vs 64 (p = 0.027). Mean active range of motion at 24 months <80y/≥80y was: forward flexion: 126°/110°; abduction: 117°/105°; external rotation: 22°/20°; and internal rotation: L3/sacrum. Mean EQ-VAS was 74 ± 16 in the <80y group, and 63 ± 12.6 in the ≥80y group. Mean DASH was 29.5 ± 9.2. The EQ-5D "self-care" item in the >80y group was the most affected. The "pain/discomfort" item was lower for the two age groups than for the reference population. There were 9.5 % complications: one prosthesis dislocation, one periprosthetic fracture and two surgical wound haematoma.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results indicate that age is a critical factor for RSA success. Lower functional outcomes have been obtained in patients older than 80y, although the EQ-5D results in our sample were similar or even better than the referred population.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III.