Is reverse total shoulder arthroplasty a feasible treatment option for failed shoulder arthroplasty? A retrospective study of 44 cases with special regards to stemless and stemmed primary implants

Radiologic, clinical, and patient-reported outcomes in stemless reverse shoulder arthroplasty at a mean of 46 months

BACKGROUND

The humeral stem can be a cause of problems in shoulder arthroplasty, for example, loss of bone stock, intraoperative and postoperative periprosthetic fractures, or postoperative infections involving the medullary canal. Therefore, stemless reverse shoulder arthroplasty (slRSA) has gained popularity, particularly in terms of preserving bone stock. However, there are limited data available on the midterm outcomes of slRSA. The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical, radiologic, and patient-reported outcomes of slRSA at a minimum follow-up period of 2 years.

METHODS

Data on all stemless reverse shoulder prostheses implanted between January 2016 and October 2020 were collected. Patients were followed up at 6 weeks and 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively. Clinical and radiologic data as well as patient-reported outcome measures were assessed with validated questionnaires (University of California at Los Angeles Shoulder Score [UCLA], American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form [ASES], Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire [Quick-DASH], visual analog scale [VAS] for pain, Subjective Shoulder Value [SSV], and Constant-Murley score [CS]). All patients had a minimum follow-up of 2 years.

RESULTS

During the observation period, 26 shoulders in 25 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The mean follow-up was 46.8 months (range 25-66). The mean age was 70.1 years (range 59.9-86.4). At the most recent follow-up, a significant improvement was noted in the ASES score (55.9 ± 19.9 vs. 85.6 ± 10.7, P < .001), SSV (44.3 ± 18.7 vs. 85.3 ± 10.4, P < .001), Quick-DASH score (40.6 ± 22.0 vs. 17.8 ± 13.9, P < .001), VAS pain score (4.6 ± 3.2 vs. 0.9 ± 1.2, P < .001), and range of motion in flexion (66 ± 53 vs. 154 ± 22, P < .001) as well as in the absolute (44.1 ± 18.7 vs. 83.1 ± 10.1, P < .001) and relative CS (62.1 ± 27.8 vs. 111.9 ± 13.3, P < .001). Scapular notching was observed in 16% of cases, and radiolucent lines were detected in 28% of cases without symptoms of implant loosening. No revision was necessitated by any causes related to the stemless humeral component. Hence, implant survivorship was 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

With an ASES score showing a 30-point improvement and thus exceeding the minimal clinically important difference of 21 points and no revisions due to the stemless component, these results indicate that slRSA is a viable option, providing good to excellent midterm outcomes that are comparable to those of stemmed reverse shoulder prostheses, with the added advantage of bone stock preservation.

Anatomic glenohumeral arthroplasty: State of the art

Anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty in its modern form where it reproduces the normal shoulder has been utilized clinically for more than half a century. As the technology and the designs have changed to recreate the humeral and glenoid sides of the joint, the sophistication of design has resulted in the growing number of cases annually worldwide. This increase is due in part to the increasing number of indications that the prosthesis can treat with successful results. On the humeral side, there have been design changes to better reflect the proximal humeral anatomy, and humeral stems are increasingly placed safely without cement. Platform systems which allow conversion of a failed arthroplasty to a reverse configuration without stem extraction is another design change. Similarly, there has been increasing utilization of short stem and stemless humeral components. Extensive experience with shorter stem and stemless devices, however, has yet to demonstrate the purported advantages of these devices, as recent studies have demonstrated equivalent blood loss, fracture rates, operative times, and outcome scores. Easier revision with these shorter stems remains to be definitively established, with only one study comparing the ease of revision between stem types. On the glenoid side, hybrid cementless glenoids, inlay glenoids, cementless all-polyethylene glenoids, and augmented glenoids have all been investigated; however, the indications for these devices remain unclear. Lastly, innovative surgical approaches to implanting shoulder arthroplasty and the use of patient specific guides and computerized planning, while interesting concepts, still await validation before they are utilized on a widespread basis. While reverse shoulder arthroplasty has been increasingly used to reconstruct the arthritic shoulder, anatomic glenohumeral replacement maintains a significant role in the armamentarium of the shoulder surgeon.

Outcomes of different stem sizes in shoulder arthroplasty

Background

The successive refinement in implant design and operative technique alongwith improved understanding has resulted in increased incidence of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Simultaneously, the indications of TSA have widened and include a range of shoulder pathologies.

Methods

Using the keywords and relevant literature, we have described an overview of the different stem sizes used in shoulder arthroplasty. Relevant description of clinical and radiological outcome is done with regards to different stem sizes.

Discussion

There are plethora of shoulder replacement systems, based on unique philosophy and having their own advantages and disadvantages. Additionally, the rise in ageing population had increased the need for revision TSA, thereby necessitating the judicious choice of implant at primary TSA. We further present the role of cemented and uncemented humeral stems and discuss the findings of finite element analysis. The choice of humeral stem size and use of cemented or uncemented stems have been reported to affect the clinical and radiological outcomes.

Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty for Failed Operative Treatment of Proximal Humeral Fractures

Introduction

Failure after operative treatment of complex proximal humeral fractures (PHF) can prove challenging even for experienced surgeons. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) seems to offer a satisfactory revision procedure with good clinical outcomes.

Materials and Methods

We present a case series of 14 patients, who were treated during a 3.5 years period (from 01/2016 until 06/2019). They all underwent revision surgery with RSA for failed operative treatment of PHF. Their mean age was 68 years (range, 51-84 years). 2 patients (14.3%) had been primarily treated with open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF), 5 patients (35.7%) with hemiarthroplasty, 3 patients (21.4%) with closed reduction and percutaneous fixation and 4 patients (28.6%) with transosseous suture fixation (TSF). We evaluated their absolute Constant score (CS), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, and Range of Motion at their final follow-up, and we made a full clinical and radiological assessment to detect any postoperative complications.

Results

The mean absolute CS, VAS score, active anterior elevation, active abduction significantly improved compared with the preoperative status. Less significant difference was found in external rotation when comparing with the preoperative status (P = .0304). No significant differences were found when comparing RSA for different failed primary techniques (P > .05). No complications were detected following the revision surgeries of all patients.

Conclusion

RSA is an appropriate treatment as a revision technique for failed primary surgical treatment of PHFs. Though challenging it can offer good clinical results and pain relief.

Mid-term outcomes of a stemless ceramic head anatomic total shoulder replacement

Background

In an anatomic shoulder replacement (aTSR) good results have been reported with the use of a stemless humeral prosthesis. In vitro a ceramic articulation with polyethylene has been shown to produce less polyethylene wear particles than with metal. This study aims to evaluate clinical and radiographic results of a stemless aTSR with a ceramic head articulating with a polyethylene glenoid component, with mid-term follow-up.

Methods

All patients (n = 92) in this prospective study had an aTSR utilizing a stemless humeral component with a ceramic head and a cemented double pegged cemented polyethylene glenoid component for glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Pre- and postoperative clinical evaluations at 2 years were performed using the ASES score, Constant score, SPADI score, DASH score, VAS pain score, patient satisfaction and range of motion. There was a 5-year evaluation of SPADI, ASES, pain, and satisfaction, plus radiographic assessment of glenoid component radiolucent lines and humeral osteolysis.

Results

Seventy-four cases (68.1 ± 7.1 years) had a five-year follow-up and demonstrated active elevation improvement from 91.3° preoperatively to 151.1° (p < 0.001). Further improvement was identified with the ASES from 41.6 to 94.3, the SPADI from 62.9 to 4.3, VAS pain from 5.6 to 0.4 (0–10), and satisfaction levels were at 96%. Sixty-two cases had no glenoid radiolucent lines with a maximum Lazarus score of 2 in one patient. Constant scores, available up to 2 years, improved significantly from 30.3 to 77.9 (p < 0.001). There was one case that required revision for glenoid loosening.

Conclusions

Overall, the 5-year results of this ceramic head prosthesis demonstrated good radiographic and clinical outcomes.

Trial registration

ACTRN12613001183774. Registered: 29 October 2013 - Retrospectively registered.

Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR).

Revision Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients 65 Years Old and Younger: Outcome Comparison to Older Patients

Background

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is a procedure growing in prevalence among younger populations. Consequently, its use in revision arthroplasty is growing in this demographic. However, studies examining the functional outcomes of revision RTSA in younger populations compared with older populations are lacking. The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the functional outcomes of revision RTSA in patients 65 years old and younger compared with older patients who underwent revision RTSA. We hypothesized that younger patients would have similar outcomes to older patients and both groups would demonstrate improvement in outcomes.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted on a prospectively collected research database at a single tertiary referral center of all patients who underwent RTSA between 2007 and 2018. Patients 65 years old or younger who underwent a revision RTSA and had minimum 2-year follow-up were evaluated. A control group of patients ≥70 years old who underwent revision RTSA were also evaluated. Demographics, surgical factors, active range of motion (ROM), and patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) were compared. The ROM parameters measured were forward elevation, abduction, external rotation, and level of internal rotation. The PROMs collected included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test score, University of California–Los Angeles score, Constant score, normalized Constant, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index 130. The differences in outcomes were compared against the minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit reported for primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Results

A total of 81 patients undergoing revision RTSA were evaluated at a mean follow-up of 4.5 years with 42 patients in the study group and 39 patients in the control group. Both groups demonstrated similar demographics and rates of prior surgeries. Preoperative outcome scores were lower in the study group (≤65 years old) than those in the older control group with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test score, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index 130 remaining worse postoperatively. Both groups experienced statistically significant improvements in ROM from before operation to after operation, with slightly higher improvements in overhead motion in the younger cohort. Both the study group and the control group demonstrated statistically significant improvements in all PROMs with improvement above the substantial clinical benefit for the Constant and Simple Shoulder Test scores. Despite lower functional outcomes reported in the study group postoperatively, the improvement from before operation to after operation in all PROMs was similar between groups.

Conclusion

Revision RTSA is a viable option for patients ≤65 years old with a poorly functioning shoulder arthroplasty. ROM and outcome improvements are similar compared with older patients undergoing revision RTSA, but the preoperative and postoperative functional outcomes are worse in the younger patients.

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.

Results of stemless shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Stemless shoulder arthroplasty relies solely on cementless metaphyseal fixation and is designed to avoid stem-related problem such as intraoperative fractures, loosening, stress shielding or stress-risers for periprosthetic fractures.

Many designs are currently on the market, although only six anatomic and two reverse arthroplasty designs have results published with a minimum of two-year follow-up.

Compared to stemmed designs, clinical outcome is equally good using stemless designs in the short and medium-term follow-up, which is also the case for overall complication and revision rates.

Intraoperative fracture rate is lower in stemless compared to stemmed designs, most likely due to the absence of intramedullary preparation and of the implantation of a stem.

Radiologic abnormalities around the humeral implant are less frequent compared to stemmed implants, possibly related to the closer resemblance to native anatomy.

Between stemless implants, several significant differences were found in terms of clinical outcome, complication and revision rates, although the level of evidence is low with high study heterogeneity; therefore, firm conclusions could not be drawn.

There is a need for well-designed long-term randomized trials with sufficient power in order to assess the superiority of stemless over conventional arthroplasty, and of one design over another.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:35-49. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200067

The modern reverse shoulder arthroplasty and an updated systematic review for each complication: part II

Background

Globally, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has moved away from the Grammont design to modern prosthesis designs. The purpose of this study was to provide a focused, updated systematic review for each of the most common complications of RSA by limiting each search to publications after 2010. In this part II, the following were examined: (1) instability, (2) humerus/glenoid fracture, (3) acromial/scapular spine fractures (AF/SSF), and (4) problems/miscellaneous.

Methods

Four separate PubMed database searches were performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Overall, 137 studies for instability, 94 for humerus/glenoid fracture, 120 for AF/SSF, and 74 for problems/miscellaneous were included in each review, respectively. Univariate analysis was performed with chi-square and Fisher exact tests.

Results

The Grammont design had a higher instability rate vs. all other designs combined (4.0%, 1.3%; P < .001), and the onlay humerus design had a lower rate than the lateralized glenoid design (0.9%, 2.0%; P = .02). The rate for intraoperative humerus fracture was 1.8%; intraoperative glenoid fracture, 0.3%; postoperative humerus fracture, 1.2%; and postoperative glenoid fracture, 0.1%. The rate of AF/SSF was 2.6% (371/14235). The rate for complex regional pain syndrome was 0.4%; deltoid injury, 0.1%; hematoma, 0.3%; and heterotopic ossification, 0.8%.

Conclusions

Focused systematic reviews of recent literature with a large volume of shoulders demonstrate that using non-Grammont modern prosthesis designs, complications including instability, intraoperative humerus and glenoid fractures, and hematoma are significantly reduced compared with previous studies. As the indications continue to expand for RSA, it is imperative to accurately track the rate and types of complications in order to justify its cost and increased indications.

The modern reverse shoulder arthroplasty and an updated systematic review for each complication: part I

Background

Globally, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has moved away from the Grammont design to modern prosthesis designs. The purpose of this 2-part study was to systematically review each of the most common complications of RSA, limiting each search to publications in 2010 or later. In this part (part I), we examined (1) scapular notching (SN), (2) periprosthetic infection (PJI), (3) mechanical failure (glenoid or humeral component), and (4) neurologic injury (NI).

Methods

Four separate PubMed database searches were performed following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Overall, 113 studies on SN, 62 on PJI, 34 on mechanical failure, and 48 on NI were included in our reviews. Univariate analysis was performed with the χ² or Fisher exact test.

Results

The Grammont design had a higher SN rate vs. all other designs combined (42.5% vs. 12.3%, P < .001). The onlay humeral design had a lower rate than the lateralized glenoid design (10.5% vs. 14.8%, P < .001). The PJI rate was 2.4% for primary RSA and 2.6% for revision RSA. The incidence of glenoid and humeral component loosening was 2.3% and 1.4%, respectively. The Grammont design had an increased NI rate vs. all other designs combined (0.9% vs. 0.1%, P = .04).

Conclusions

Focused systematic reviews of the recent literature with a large volume of RSAs demonstrate that with the use of non-Grammont modern prosthesis designs, complications including SN, PJI, glenoid component loosening, and NI are significantly reduced compared with previous studies. As the indications for RSA continue to expand, it is imperative to accurately track the rates and types of complications to justify its cost and increased indications.

Clinically significant subscapularis failure after anatomic shoulder arthroplasty: is it worth repairing?

BACKGROUND

Symptomatic subscapularis (SC) failure after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is difficult to treat. The purpose of this study was to determine the outcomes of reoperation for SC failure.

METHODS

All patients undergoing reoperation for SC failure after TSA were identified from a single-institution database. Patients underwent either revision SC repair or revision to reverse shoulder arthroplasty. At a minimum of 1 year after reoperation, complications, reoperations, and functional outcomes were collected.

RESULTS

Patients who initially underwent SC repair were significantly younger than patients who underwent revision to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (mean age, 59.3 years vs. 70.3 years; P = .004), had a better comorbidity profile (mean Charlson Comorbidity Index, 2.2 vs. 3.6; P = .04), and had a more acute presentation (mean time between injury and surgery, 9.1 weeks vs. 28.5 weeks; P = .03). Patients who underwent SC repair also had a significantly higher reoperation rate (52.9% vs. 0.0%, P = .01). At final follow-up, functional outcomes scores and patient satisfaction rates were not significantly different between treatment groups.

DISCUSSION

Decision making on how to treat patients with SC failure following TSA remains challenging and should be individualized to the patient's age, level of activity, comorbidities, timing and mechanism of SC failure, and functional expectations.

Clinical outcomes and complications of reverse shoulder arthroplasty used for failed prior shoulder surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is frequently performed in the revision setting as a salvage procedure. The purpose of this study was to report the clinical outcomes and complication, reoperation, and revision rates after revision RSA (RRSA) stratified according to the primary shoulder procedure undergoing revision.

Methods

Four databases (Embase, MEDLINE, SPORTDiscus, and Cochrane Controlled Trials Register) were searched for eligible studies published between January 1985 and September 2017. The primary outcomes of interest included pain, active range of motion, and functional outcome scores. Secondary outcomes included complication, reoperation, and revision rates.

Results

A total of 43 studies (1041 shoulder arthroplasties) met the inclusion criteria, with a mean follow-up period of 43.8 months (range, 31.1-57.2 months). Pain scores improved in all groups; however, none reached statistical significance. Range of motion improved in all groups, except for external rotation in the RSA category. RRSA demonstrated significant improvements in the Simple Shoulder Test score and Constant score (CS) in the group undergoing hemiarthroplasty (HA) for fracture, CS in the group undergoing HA for other indications, and CS in the group undergoing anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Pooled complication rates were highest in the failed RSA group (56.2%), followed by the group undergoing HA for other indications (27.7%), total shoulder arthroplasty group (23.6%), soft-tissue repair group (20.6%), open reduction and internal fixation group (19.0%), and group undergoing HA for fracture (13.6%).

Conclusions

Compared with other revision indications, RRSA for failed HA demonstrated the most favorable outcomes, whereas the highest complication and revision rates were observed in the RSA subgroup. This information is useful when establishing patient expectations regarding the risks, benefits, and complication and revision rates of RRSA.

Advances and Update on Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is a procedure that has been increasingly utilized since its inception over 20 years ago. The purpose of this review is to present the most up to date practice and advances to the RTSA literature from the last 5 years.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature on RTSA has focused on identifying complications, maximizing outcomes, and determining its cost-effectiveness. RTSA has become a valuable tool in the treatment of various shoulder pathologies from fractures to massive-irreparable rotator cuff tears. Maximizing outcomes, proper patient counseling, and limiting complications are vital to a successful procedure. RTSA can be a difficult procedure; however, when utilized appropriately, it can be an invaluable tool in the orthopedic surgeon's armament. Recent evidence suggests, more and more, that RTSA not only provides value to the patient, but it is also cost-effective.

A multicenter, prospective 2-year analysis of the Sidus stem-free shoulder arthroplasty system

Background

The purpose of this multicenter, prospective study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a stemless total shoulder arthroplasty compared with a traditional stemmed control.

Methods

Ninety-five shoulders were selected for participation in this Food and Drug Administration investigational device exemption clinical trial and underwent stemless total shoulder arthroplasty. Subjects returned for follow-up at 6 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and 2 years postoperatively. Outcome measures included pain; range of motion; American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder, and Short Form 12 scores; and radiographic review. Baseline data were compared with 2-year follow-up data to determine the rate of composite clinical success compared with the stemmed control.

Results

All outcome assessments demonstrated significant improvements (P ≤ .007). The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved from 20 to 89 (P < .0001), and the mean shoulder pain score decreased from 8.3 ± 1.6 to 0.7 ± 1.5 (P < .0001). The mean Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder score decreased from 1443 ± 256 to 203 ± 267 (P < .0001). On the Short Form 12, the mean physical health score increased from 33 ± 7 to 48 ± 9 (P < .0001) and the mean mental health score increased from 50 ± 13 to 54 ± 8 (P = .007). Mean active forward elevation increased from 97° ± 27° to 143° ± 25° (P < .0001), and mean active external rotation increased from 21° ± 16° to 53° ± 18° (P < .0001). Kaplan-Meier analysis showed an implant survivorship rate of 98% at 2 years. The composite clinical success rate was 87% compared with 85% for the stemmed control.

Conclusions

This study showed that a stemless rough-blasted humeral implant with metaphyseal bone fixation provides good clinical and radiographic outcomes and survivorship at 2 years, with outcomes comparable to a traditional stemmed implant.

Subscapularis Management in Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Current Evidence Comparing Peel, Osteotomy, and Tenotomy

The optimal approach to management of the subscapularis in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is controversial. Options include the subscapularis tenotomy, lesser tuberosity osteotomy (LTO), and peel. This review provides a summary of subscapularis anatomy and function, outcomes associated with subscapularis management options in TSA, and postoperative subscapularis deficiency. Based on the available literature, LTO appears to result in improved function and subscapularis integrity relative to tenotomy, while peel and LTO have generally led to equivalent outcomes. The highest level of evidence to date is derived from a randomized controlled trial that demonstrated that outcomes following peel and LTO were not significantly different. There is currently a paucity of high-quality evidence as most studies have consisted of small retrospective series with varying outcome measures. Furthermore, the optimal approach to establishing the diagnosis of subscapularis deficiency following TSA is unclear.

Good functional outcomes expected after shoulder arthroplasty irrespective of body mass index

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated how body mass index (BMI) factors into functional outcomes and complications after shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of age-matched patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), or hemiarthroplasty (HA). Patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores, range of motion (ROM), and complications were assessed. Forty-nine patients were classified into the following groups: normal (BMI <24.9 kg/m²), overweight (BMI 25-29.9 kg/m²), class I obese (BMI 30-34.9 kg/m2), class II obese (BMI 35-39.9 kg/m²), and class III morbid obese (BMI ≥40 kg/m²).

RESULTS

A total of 245 patients (134 women, 111 men; average age, 64 ± 8 years) were evaluated at an average follow-up of 48 ± 18 months. TSA was performed in 122 patients (50%), RTSA was performed in 103 (42%), and HA was performed in 20 (8%). No significant difference was found among the 5 BMI groups in arthroplasty type (P = .108) or in complications, including reoperations (P = .27). All groups had significant postoperative improvements in PROs and ROM (P < .001 for both). There were no significant differences among the BMI groups in postoperative ROM or PROs.

DISCUSSION

This study demonstrates that patients undergoing TSA, RTSA, and HA can expect good functional outcomes, with improvements in pain, function and outcome scores, irrespective of BMI.