Nonprosthetic glenoid arthroplasty with humeral hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty yield similar self-assessed outcomes in the management of comparable patients with glenohumeral arthritis

Imaging of glenohumeral osteoarthritis: Reliability and reproducibility of radiological classifications

BACKGROUND

Glenohumeral degenerative joint disease may affect up to 20% of the population. There are several classification systems of this disease in the scientific literature.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to determine the reliability and reproducibility of glenohumeral osteoarthritis classification systems.

METHODS

We assessed glenohumeral plain radiographs performed in a University Hospital. These radiographs were graded into nine radiological classification systems by two observers on two evaluations. Patients who have performed CT/MRI scan were staged according to the Walch classification. The intra-observer and inter-observer reliability of the classification schemes were determined by using Cohen's weighted kappa coefficient.

RESULTS

A total of 752 patients were included in the study (52.4% females and 47.6% males), mean aged 66.2 ± 16.3 years. The intra-observer and inter-observer reliabilities were 0.543 (observer 1), 0.630 (observer 2), and 0.760 (inter-observer) for the Weinstein grading system; 0.661, 0.706, and 0.761 for the Guyette grading system; 0.575, 0.679 and 0.704 for the Kellgren and Lawrence classification; 0.817, 0.816 e 0.871 for the Samilson and Prieto classification; 0.791, 0.811 and 0.847 for the Allain modification; 0.797, 0.842 and 0.860 for the Gerber modification; 0.773, 0.827 and 0.828 for the Buscayret modification; 0.584, 0.648 and 0.755 for the Hawkins and Angelo classification; 0.661, 0.749 and 0.764 for the Rosenberg classification. Intra-observer reliability for MRI was 0.757 (observer 1) and 0.675 (observer 2), while intra-observer reliability for CT was 0.811 (observer 1) and 0.653 (observer 2). Inter-observer reliabilities were 0.790 for MRI and 0.673 for CT.

CONCLUSION

The classification systems according to Weinstein, Guyette, Hawkins and Angelo, Rosenberg and the modifications of the Samilson and Prieto classification according to Allain, Gerber and Buscayret showed a comparable reliability with the commonly used glenohumeral osteoarthritis grading systems, Samilson and Prieto and Kellgren and Lawrence. Thus, they are recommended for clinical and especially scientific purposes.

Pyrocarbon hemiprostheses show little glenoid erosion and good clinical function at 5.5 years of follow-up

BACKGROUND

The success of traditional shoulder hemiarthroplasty (HA) with cobalt-chromium heads is limited by painful glenoid erosion with problematic bone loss. Hemiprostheses with pyrolytic carbon (PyC) heads have shown reduced glenoid erosion in experimental laboratory studies. Few in vivo data are available.

METHODS

We performed a single-center consecutive cohort study of 31 of 34 patients (91%) who underwent PyC HA between September 2013 and June 2018. In 11 of these patients, concentric glenoid reaming was additionally performed. The mean follow-up period was 5.5 years (range, 3.5-7 years). Standardized radiographs were taken, and clinical function (Constant score) and pain (visual analog scale score) were recorded. Anteroposterior radiographs were analyzed according to an established method by 2 independent observers: A line parallel to the superior and inferior glenoid rim was translated to the most medial point of the glenoid surface. A further parallel line was placed on the spinoglenoid notch. The distance between these 2 lines was measured. Measurements were scaled using the known diameter of the implanted humeral head component. To assess eccentric erosion, anteroposterior and axial images were classified according to Favard and Walch, respectively.

RESULTS

Mean medial glenoid erosion measured 1.4 mm at an average of 5.5 years of follow-up. In the first year, 0.8 mm of erosion was observed, significantly more than the average erosion per year of 0.3 mm (P < .001). Mean erosion per year was 0.4 mm in patients with glenoid reaming vs. 0.2 mm in those without reaming (P = .09). An evolution of glenoid morphology was observed in 6 patients, of whom 4 had a progression of the erosion grade. The prosthesis survival rate was 100%. The Constant score improved from 45.0 preoperatively to 78.0 at 2-3 years postoperatively and 78.8 at latest follow-up (5.5 years postoperatively) (P < .001). The pain score on a visual analog scale decreased from 6.7 (range, 3-9) preoperatively to 2.2 (range, 0-8) at latest follow-up (P < .001). There was a weak correlation (r = 0.37) between erosion and pain improvement (P = .039) and no correlation between erosion and change in Constant score (r = 0.06).

CONCLUSION

PyC HA caused little glenoid erosion and a sustained improvement in clinical function in our cohort at mid-term follow-up. PyC demonstrates a biphasic development of glenoid erosion, with a reduced rate after the first year. PyC HA should therefore be considered as an alternative to cobalt-chromium HA and to anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty for patients with a high risk of glenoid component complications.

Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty with Nonprosthetic Glenoid Arthroplasty: The Ream-and-Run Procedure

»

Glenoid component wear and loosening are the principal failure modes of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA).

»

The ream-and-run (RnR) procedure is an alternative glenohumeral arthroplasty for patients who wish to avoid the risks and limitations of a prosthetic glenoid component.

»

During the RnR procedure, the arthritic glenoid is conservatively reamed to a single concavity, while the prosthetic humeral component and soft tissues are balanced to provide both mobility and stability of the joint.

»

The success of the RnR procedure depends on careful patient selection, preoperative education and engagement, optimal surgical technique, targeted rehabilitation, and close postoperative communication between the surgeon and the patient.

»

While the RnR procedure allows high levels of shoulder function in most patients, the recovery can be longer and more arduous than with aTSA.

»

Patients who have undergone an RnR procedure occasionally require a second closed or open procedure to address refractory shoulder stiffness, infection, or persistent glenoid-sided pain. These second procedures are more common after the RnR than with aTSA.

[Interpretation of 2020 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) on the Management of Glenohumeral Joint Osteoarthritis Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline]

The 2020 Management of Glenohumeral Joint Osteoarthritis Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline which was prepared by the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) were publicated on October 2020. The guideline involves the following 8 chapters: drug therapy and injectable biologics, physical therapy and non-surgical treatments, radiographs, prognostic factors, surgical treatments, intraoperative hemostasis measure (tranexamic acid), management of supraspinatus tears, multimodal pain management and discharge. In this paper, the guideline is interpreted to provide cutting-edge information for domestic glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis researchers.

In vitro comparison of wear characteristics of PyroCarbon and metal on bone: Shoulder hemiarthroplasty

BACKGROUND

There are concerns regarding glenoid erosion with metal shoulder hemiarthroplasty. PyroCarbon may offer an alternative because of favorable wear characteristics and preservation of the glenoid. The purpose of this study was to assess in vitro bone wear characteristics of PyroCarbon relative to cobalt chromium alloy hemiarthroplasty in a shoulder wear simulator.

METHODS

Wear of PyroCarbon and cobalt chromium prostheses articulating with bone were characterized by means of bone wear penetration rate, changes to surface roughness, and wear particle analysis.

RESULTS

PyroCarbon prostheses produced significantly less damage to bone and were less damaged by the bone than cobalt chromium prostheses. Cobalt chromium testing was halted at approximately 320,000 cycles because the bone was consumed. Wear testing of PyroCarbon specimens continued through five million cycles. Linearized bone penetration rate, bone volume loss rate, and surface roughness for cobalt chromium test specimens were 30 times greater than for PyroCarbon.

CONCLUSIONS

Results demonstrate significantly less damage to bone in simulated shoulder function testing for PyroCarbon hemiarthroplasty implants relative to conventional cobalt chromium implants. Our study supports use of PyroCarbon in humeral head hemiarthroplasty as a viable alternative to conventional metal hemiarthroplasty. Further investigation of PyroCarbon performance in clinical settings is warranted.

Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty with All-Polyethylene Glenoid Component for Primary Osteoarthritis with Glenoid Deficiencies

This study evaluated the ability of shoulder arthroplasty using a standard glenoid component to improve patient self-assessed comfort and function and to correct preoperative humeral-head decentering on the face of the glenoid in patients with primary glenohumeral arthritis and type-B2 or B3 glenoids.

Wireless Technologies for Implantable Devices

Wireless technologies are incorporated in implantable devices since at least the 1950s. With remote data collection and control of implantable devices, these wireless technologies help researchers and clinicians to better understand diseases and to improve medical treatments. Today, wireless technologies are still more commonly used for research, with limited applications in a number of clinical implantable devices. Recent development and standardization of wireless technologies present a good opportunity for their wider use in other types of implantable devices, which will significantly improve the outcomes of many diseases or injuries. This review briefly describes some common wireless technologies and modern advancements, as well as their strengths and suitability for use in implantable medical devices. The applications of these wireless technologies in treatments of orthopedic and cardiovascular injuries and disorders are described. This review then concludes with a discussion on the technical challenges and potential solutions of implementing wireless technologies in implantable devices.

Pyrocarbon interposition shoulder arthroplasty in young arthritic patients: a prospective observational study

BACKGROUND

We evaluated survival and midterm results of pyrocarbon interposition shoulder arthroplasty (PISA) in arthritic patients younger than 65 years.

METHODS

Fifty-eight PISAs (InSpyre; Tornier-Wright, Bloomington, MN, USA), implanted in 56 patients between 2010 and 2015, were prospectively observed. The mean age at surgery was 52 ± 13 years. The cause was primary osteoarthritis (18), fracture sequelae (16), post-instability arthritis (15), aseptic necrosis (3), inflammatory disease (2), and failed hemiarthroplasty (4); 34 shoulders (61%) had previously undergone surgery. Glenoid erosion was assessed in 4 grades according to the Sperling classification. Humeral erosion was also assessed in 4 grades. Multivariate analysis was used to determine predisposing risk factors for both humeral and glenoid erosion.

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up of 47 ± 15 months, survival rate was 90%. Six patients (10%) required conversion to reverse total shoulder prosthesis for painful glenoid erosion (n = 2) and humeral erosion with greater tuberosity stress fractures (n = 4). The mean Constant score and subjective shoulder value significantly increased from 36 ± 14 points to 70 ± 15 points and 32% ± 14% to 75% ± 19%, respectively (P < .001). Humeral medialization was observed in 78% of the cases with increased pain score. Uncorrected anteroposterior implant subluxation (12 cases) was associated with lower Constant score (50 points vs. 72 points; P = .02) and lower subjective shoulder value (53% vs. 78%; P = .002). On multivariate analysis, no risk factors for glenoid or humeral erosion were found.

CONCLUSION

At midterm follow-up, PISA does not protect from progressive glenoid erosion and can lead to greater tuberosity erosion and stress fractures. Longer follow-up is required to see whether PISA survival will be superior to that of hemiarthroplasty.

Long-term follow-up of total shoulder replacement surgery with inset glenoid implants for arthritis with deficient bone

BACKGROUND

Total shoulder replacement surgery has been a successful treatment for patients with shoulder arthritis. However, long-term results are limited by complications such as glenoid loosening, wear, and instability. Also, glenoid bone deficiency limits available treatment options and outcomes. Successful short-term outcomes have been reported previously using inset glenoid implants for deficient arthritic bone, but long-term outcomes have not been reported using this technique.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on 21 of 24 consecutive patients treated with inset glenoid implants for severe glenohumeral joint arthritis with bone deficiency with prospectively collected data. Inclusion criteria were patients with shoulder arthritis and severe glenoid bone deficiency, defined by perpendicular glenoid vault depth less than 15 mm. No bone grafts were used. All patients were evaluated preoperatively and after surgery with physical examination, radiographic studies, and outcome measures. There were 10 males and 11 females, 17 cases with osteoarthritis and 4 with inflammatory arthritis, and 5 patients with rotator cuff tears (3 full thickness and 2 partial tears). Mean age was 68 years.

RESULTS

There were no surgical complications. At a mean follow-up of 8.7 years, there were statistically significant improvements (P < .001) in visual analog pain scores (7.7 to 0.1), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons outcome scores (23 to 95), and range of motion. There were no loose glenoids. No patients required any revision surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

This study documents the long-term efficacy and safety of total shoulder replacement surgery with inset glenoid implants used to reconstruct deficient, arthritic glenoid bone.

Return to Sport Following Hemiarthroplasty With Concentric Reaming Versus Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Matched Pair Analysis

The purpose of this study was to establish functional outcomes regarding return to sport activity for patients receiving anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) vs the ream and run procedure (hemi RR). Patients who underwent hemi RR and who underwent aTSA with a polyethylene glenoid component for end-stage glenohumeral arthritis were retrospectively identified from 2000 to 2014. Patients were matched regarding age, body mass index, sex, and hand dominance. Patients were surveyed to determine their level of sport and satisfaction after surgery. At a mean follow-up of 69.1±24.8 months, a total of 26 hemi RR and 30 aTSA patients met inclusion/exclusion criteria. Mean±SD age at the time of surgery was 53.0±8.5 years. There was no statistical difference between the two cohorts regarding patients who reported no postoperative problems (69.2% vs 76.7%, P=.529), reoperation (11.5% vs 6.7%, P=.522), return to overall sport (94.4% vs 86.4%, P=.395), return to high-demand upper-extremity sport (92.3% vs 81.3%, P=.390), and return to same or better level of intensity sport (83.3% vs 72.7%, P=.424). Patients returned to sport at a mean of 7.5±5.7 months and 6.2±3.6 months in the hemi RR and aTSA cohorts, respectively (P=.485). Radiographic measurements of medialization (mean, -2.4±5.0 vs -2.2±5.7; P=.913) and postoperative decentering (mean, 3.6%±2.6% vs 4.3%±3.3%; P=.795) were equivalent for the two cohorts. Hemi RR was found to have high and equivalent rates of sporting outcomes, clinical outcomes, and radiographic outcomes compared with aTSA. As appropriately indicated patients are counseled for surgery, realistic expectations regarding sports should be discussed. [Orthopedics. 2019; 42(5):276-284.].

Comparative analysis of work-related outcomes in hemiarthroplasty with concentric glenoid reaming and total shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) has demonstrated high levels of return to work, although there are fears of glenoid component loosening with higher work demand.

METHODS

A retrospective query was performed of all patients who received hemiarthroplasty with ream-and-run resurfacing (Hemi RR) between 2005 and 2014. Included patients were matched to an aTSA cohort by age, body mass index, sex, and hand dominance. Preoperative and postoperative work status, by level of duty and occupation, was collected.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients receiving Hemi RR and 28 patients receiving TSA completed this questionnaire (82.8% compliance). Mean follow-up was 69.1 ± 24.8 months. In total, 100% of Hemi RR patients returned to work, and 89.3% of TSA patients returned to work (P = .091). The Hemi RR patients had higher rates of return to work for heavy-duty workers only (7 of 7 vs. 2 of 4, P = .038), although only 1 patient in the TSA group reported failure to work was due to shoulder reasons. Mean duration of return to work was 2.5 ± 4.8 months for patients receiving Hemi RR and 1.98 ± 2.6 months for those receiving TSA (P = .653).

CONCLUSIONS

Hemi RR had a high return to heavy-duty work, likely due to fewer surgeon-imposed restrictions. The results of this study may help manage return to work expectations after Hemi RR according to the level of duty and suggest Hemi RR is a viable option for heavy-duty laborers with end-stage glenohumeral arthritis.

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of a Posteriorly Augmented Glenoid Component in Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty for Primary Osteoarthritis with Posterior Glenoid Bone Loss

BACKGROUND

The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the ability of a posteriorly stepped augmented glenoid component, used in patients with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis with B2 or B3 glenoid morphology, to correct preoperative retroversion and humeral head subluxation and to identify factors associated with radiographic radiolucency and patient-reported clinical outcomes.

METHODS

We identified 71 shoulders with B2 or B3 glenoid morphology that underwent anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with use of a posteriorly stepped augmented glenoid component and with a preoperative 3-dimensional computed tomography (3D-CT) scan and a minimum of 2 years of clinical and radiographic follow-up. The Penn Shoulder Score (PSS), shoulder range of motion, glenoid center-peg osteolysis, and postoperative version and humeral head subluxation were the main outcome variables of interest.

RESULTS

Follow-up was a median of 2.4 years (range, 1.9 to 5.7 years); the mean patient age at treatment was 65 ± 7 years (range, 51 to 80 years). PSS, range of motion, humeral head centering, and glenoid version were significantly improved among all patients (p < 0.0001). Patients with persistent posterior subluxation of the humeral head postoperatively had worse preoperative fatty infiltration of the teres minor and greater postoperative component retroversion (p < 0.05). Patients with center-peg osteolysis had more preoperative joint-line medialization and posterior glenoid bone loss (p < 0.05). Patients with more preoperative humeral head posterior subluxation had a lower PSS, adjusting for confounders (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Posteriorly stepped augmented glenoid components can improve pathologic retroversion and posterior subluxation of the humeral head in B2 and B3 glenoids, with significant improvements found in clinical outcome scores at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up in the vast majority of patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Short-term Clinical Outcomes of Hemiarthroplasty With Concentric Glenoid Reaming: The Ream and Run Procedure

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of humeral hemiarthroplasty and concentric glenoid reaming ("ream and run" procedure) and to compare the outcomes with those of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for glenohumeral arthritis. Patients with glenohumeral arthritis who underwent the ream and run procedure with a minimum follow-up of 2 years were retrospectively reviewed. The primary outcome was revision to TSA. Secondary outcome measures included functional outcome scores, range of motion, and radiographic assessment. The outcome measures were compared with those of age- and sex-matched control patients who underwent anatomic TSA during the study period. One patient in the ream and run group required revision to TSA 14 months after the surgery because of excessive shoulder pain. There were significant improvements in the postoperative outcome scores and range of motion and external rotation in the ream and run group. Postoperative radiographs showed concentric glenoids without posterior subluxation in all except 1 shoulder. The outcome measures in the ream and run group were similar to those in the TSA control group except for active forward elevation and external rotation. The ream and run procedure provides improved pain relief and shoulder function at short-term follow-up for patients with shoulder arthritis. [Orthopedics. 2018; 41(6):e854-e860.].

The subchondral bone layer and glenoid implant design are relevant for primary stability in glenoid arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Clinical studies suggest that reaming of the subchondral bone layer to achieve good implant seating is a risk factor for glenoid loosening. This study aims to evaluate (1) the importance of the subchondral bone layer and (2) the influence of the design of the glenoid component.

METHODS

Different techniques for preparation of an A1 glenoid were compared: (1) preserving the subchondral bone layer; (2) removal of the subchondral bone layer; (3) implantation of a glenoid component that does not adapt to the native anatomy. Artificial glenoid bones (n = 5 each) were used with a highly standardized preparation and implantation protocol. Biomechanical testing was performed during simulated physiological shoulder motion. Using a high-resolution optical system, the micromotions between implant and bone were measured up to 10,000 motion cycles.

RESULTS

At the 10,000 cycle measuring point, significantly more micromotions were found in the subchondral layer removed group than in the subchondral layer preserved group (p = 0.0427). The number of micromotions in the nonadapted group was significantly higher than in the subchondral layer preserved group (p = 0.0003) or the subchondral layer removed group (p = 0.0207).

CONCLUSION

Conservative reaming proved important to diminish the micromotions of the glenoid component. Implantation of a glenoid component that matches with the bony underlying glenoid can help to preserve the subchondral bone layer without sacrificing proper implant seating.

Establishing maximal medical improvement after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

As a heightened emphasis continues to be placed on value-based health care, quality outcomes following orthopedic procedures must be properly defined. With knowledge of the time to maximal medical improvement following total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), physician resources can be justly allocated to optimize value in ambulatory orthopedic care.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic review was conducted to identify studies reporting sequential follow-up at several time points, up to a minimum of 2 years after TSA. Assessment for clinically significant improvements between time intervals was made by using the minimal clinically important difference specific to each patient-reported outcome measure.

RESULTS

We identified 13 studies that fit the criteria to be included in this review, amounting to 984 patients who underwent TSA. Clinically significant improvements in patient-reported outcome scores were appreciated up to 1 year following TSA, but no further clinical significance was seen from 1 year to 2 years. Objective physical examination measurements followed a similar trend, with clinically significant improvements in abduction occurring up to 1 year postoperatively. For both the subjective and objective outcomes, the majority of improvements occurred in the first 3 months after the procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Following TSA, clinically significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes and objective clinical measurements are seen up to 1 year postoperatively but not beyond this time. This result is important for counseling patients and modifying their expectations prior to surgery as well as for establishing a time frame for maximized outcome evaluation to define the value received from TSA.

The "tipping point" for 931 elective shoulder arthroplasties

BACKGROUND

A patient with arthritis usually experiences the progression of symptoms over time. At some stage, the patient may decide that the symptoms have reached a level of severity that leads him or her to elect to proceed with joint replacement; we refer to this degree of symptom severity as the "tipping point." Our goal was to study the factors that influenced the tipping point for patients undergoing elective shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

We analyzed the characteristics of 931 patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty to determine the factors affecting the tipping point as characterized by the patients' comfort and function at the time they determined their symptoms had progressed to the point when this elective surgery was merited.

RESULTS

The preoperative Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score for all patients averaged 3.6 ± 2.7. The average tipping points were different for the ream-and-run procedure (mean SST score, 5.0 ± 2.5), hemiarthroplasty (mean SST score, 3.1 ± 3.3), total shoulder arthroplasty (mean SST score, 3.0 ± 2.4), cuff tear arthropathy arthroplasty (mean SST score, 2.8 ± 2.5), and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (mean SST score, 1.5 ± 1.8). A number of other factors were significantly associated with a higher tipping point: younger age, better health, male sex, commercial insurance, married, nonuse of narcotics, use of alcohol, and shoulder problem not related to work.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of the tipping point-the patients' self-assessed comfort and function at the point they decide to undergo shoulder joint replacement-provides a means by which surgeons can understand the factors influencing the indications for these procedures.

Primary Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty: What Can Be Learned From 359 Cases That Were Surgically Revised?

BACKGROUND

Primary shoulder hemiarthroplasty is used to address a range of glenohumeral disorders, including fracture, arthritis, avascular necrosis, and capsulorrhaphy arthropathy; some patients with hemiarthroplasties undergo revision surgery for persistent pain or residual shoulder dysfunction. The literature does not clarify the features of the hemiarthroplasties having repeat surgery in a way that can guide surgeons' efforts to minimize the need for revision. To help address this gap, we analyzed the characteristics of patients from our region for whom we performed surgical revision of a prior humeral hemiarthroplasty QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What are the common characteristics of shoulder hemiarthroplasties having a revision? (2) What are the common characteristics of the subset of revised shoulder hemiarthroplasties that were performed for fracture? (3) What are characteristics of the subset of all revised hemiarthroplasties that were associated with glenoid bone erosion?

METHODS

Data for 983 patients for whom we performed a surgical revision of any type of shoulder arthroplasty between January 1991 and January 2017 were identified in our longitudinally maintained institutional arthroplasty revision database. In each case, revision had been elected by shared patient and surgeon decision-making after consideration of the disorder, degree of compromised comfort and function, treatment alternatives, and the risks of surgery. Of these 983 patients, 359 (37%) had a revision of a prior primary hemiarthroplasty; these patients were the subjects of this investigation. In this group of patients, we investigated the patient demographics, shoulder characteristics, prerevision radiographic findings, and findings at revision surgery. No patients were excluded. The patients having revision of primary hemiarthroplasties had severe loss of self-assessed shoulder comfort and function, with Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores averaging 2.2 ± 2.2 of the maximum score of 12. The majority of these patients (81%) were women. The medical records of these 359 patients were abstracted to determine the diagnosis for the index primary hemiarthroplasty, clinical characteristics before surgery, and findings at surgical revision. One hundred twelve of the arthroplasties had been performed for fracture-related diagnoses; a subgroup analysis was performed on these patients. Two hundred seventy-three of the 359 patients (76%) had plain radiographs performed within 3 months before revision surgery that were adequate for assessing the radiographic characteristics of the glenoid, humerus, humeral component, and glenohumeral relationships; a subgroup analysis was performed on these patients. The degree of glenoid erosion was measured by a single observer in accordance with established criteria: Grade 1 is no erosion, Grade 2 is erosion limited to subchondral bone, Grade 3 is moderate erosion with medialization, and Grade 4 is medialization beyond the coracoid base. Some patients were included in both of these subgroups.

RESULTS

Common characteristics of the revised hemiarthroplasties included female sex (81%), rotator cuff (89 of 359; 25%) or subscapularis (81 of 359; 23%) failure, problems related to prior fracture (154 of 359; 43%), glenoid erosion 125 of 359; 35%), and component malposition (89 of 359; 25%). Hemiarthroplasties performed for fracture-related problems often were associated with tuberosity malunion or nonunion (58 of 79; 73%) and decentering of the humeral component on the glenoid surface (45 of 71; 63%). Major erosion of the bony glenoid (Grade 3 or 4) was more common in decentered hemiarthroplasties (42 of 102; 41%) than for centered hemiarthroplasties (36 of 146; 25%) (Fisher's exact p = 0.008) and more common for hemiarthroplasties positioned in valgus (28 of 50; 56%) than for those positioned in neutral or varus (40 of 188; 21%) (Fishers' exact p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that some revisions of primary hemiarthroplasties may be avoided by surgical techniques directed at centering the prosthetic humeral articular surface on the glenoid concavity using proper humeral component positioning and soft tissue balance, by avoiding valgus positioning of the humeral component, and by managing glenoid disorders with a primary glenohumeral arthroplasty rather than a hemiarthroplasty alone. When durable security of the subscapularis, rotator cuff, and tuberosities is in question, the surgeon may consider a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, therapeutic study.

Functional Outcomes of the Ream-and-Run Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Concise Follow-up of a Previous Report

We previously reported the results at an average of 4.5 years after treatment of 176 patients with the ream-and-run arthroplasty. In the present study, we present the patient self-reported functional outcomes and clinical implant survival of the original cohort at a mean of 10 years (range, 5 to 16 years). Twenty-eight (16%) of the 176 patients had a subsequent procedure, 11 (6%) died, and 30 (17%) had <5 years of follow-up. The Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score at the time of the latest follow-up was a median of 11 points (interquartile range, 9 to 12 points) and a mean (and standard deviation) of 10 ± 2.6 points, out of a possible 12 points. The present study demonstrates that the improvement in function and comfort derived from the ream-and-run procedure can be sustained at the time of mid-term follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Survivorship of Hemiarthroplasty With Concentric Glenoid Reaming for Glenohumeral Arthritis in Young, Active Patients With a Biconcave Glenoid

INTRODUCTION

Hemiarthroplasty with concentric glenoid reaming (known as "ream and run") may be an option for treating glenohumeral arthritis in younger patients with a biconcave glenoid. The goal of this study was to evaluate early results of this technique.

METHODS

Two senior, fellowship-trained shoulder surgeons (G.R.W. and M.D.L.) performed a retrospective review of 23 patients (24 shoulders) with a biconcave glenoid and end-stage degenerative glenohumeral arthritis treated with hemiarthroplasty with concentric glenoid reaming. The mean patient age at the time of surgery was 50 years. We evaluated the Penn Shoulder Score (PSS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score or the time to revision surgery.

RESULTS

Twenty-four humeral hemiarthroplasties with concentric glenoid reaming were performed in 23 patients. Twenty patients (21 shoulders) reached the end point of 2-year follow-up or revision surgery. Six shoulders (25%) required revision surgery at an average of 2.7 years (range, 0.7 to 7.2 years), and three were lost to follow-up. The remaining 14 patients (15 shoulders) were followed up for an average of 3.7 years (range, 2.3 to 4.9 years). At 2-year follow-up, these 15 shoulders did not require revision surgery and had an average SANE score, PSS, and SST score of 74.5%, 82.9, and 10.4, respectively. Increasing age correlated positively with the SANE score (r = 0.62; P = 0.015), PSS (r = 0.52; P = 0.047), and SST score (r = 0.63; P = 0.012). Early postoperative forward elevation correlated weakly with the PSS (r = 0.24; P = 0.395), and early postoperative external rotation correlated moderately with the PSS (r = 0.53; P = 0.044). Final external rotation correlated moderately with the PSS (r = 0.69; P = 0.005).

DISCUSSION

Modest results were achieved with a hemiarthroplasty and concentric glenoid reaming in young patients with end-stage glenohumeral arthritis and a biconcave glenoid. Younger age and stiffness were associated with worse outcomes. Given the high revision rate and the percentage of patients who had unsatisfactory results, this procedure should be performed only after careful patient selection. Patients who are willing and able to undergo aggressive physical therapy focused on achieving early range of motion are more likely to have a satisfactory outcome after humeral hemiarthroplasty with concentric glenoid reaming.

Is the Simple Shoulder Test a valid outcome instrument for shoulder arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND

The Simple Shoulder Test (SST) is a brief, inexpensive, and widely used patient-reported outcome tool, but it has not been rigorously evaluated for patients having shoulder arthroplasty. The goal of this study was to rigorously evaluate the validity of the SST for outcome assessment in shoulder arthroplasty using a systematic review of the literature and an analysis of its properties in a series of 408 surgical cases.

METHODS

SST scores, 36-Item Short Form Health Survey scores, and satisfaction scores were collected preoperatively and 2 years postoperatively. Responsiveness was assessed by comparing preoperative and 2-year postoperative scores. Criterion validity was determined by correlating the SST with the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey. Construct validity was tested through 5 clinical hypotheses regarding satisfaction, comorbidities, insurance status, previous failed surgery, and narcotic use.

RESULTS

Scores after arthroplasty improved from 3.9 ± 2.8 to 10.2 ± 2.3 (P < .001). The change in SST correlated strongly with patient satisfaction (P < .001). The SST had large Cohen's d effect sizes and standardized response means. Criterion validity was supported by significant differences between satisfied and unsatisfied patients, those with more severe and less severe comorbidities, those with workers' compensation or Medicaid and other types of insurance, those with and without previous failed shoulder surgery, and those taking and those not taking narcotic pain medication before surgery (P < .005).

CONCLUSION

These data combined with a systematic review of the literature demonstrate that the SST is a valid and responsive patient-reported outcome measure for assessing the outcomes of shoulder arthroplasty.

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of the Ream-and-Run Procedure for Primary Glenohumeral Arthritis

BACKGROUND

The ream-and-run procedure can provide improvement in shoulder function and comfort for selected patients with primary glenohumeral arthritis who wish to avoid a prosthetic glenoid component. The purpose of this study was to evaluate factors associated with medialization of the humeral head after this procedure as well as the relationship of medialization to the clinical outcome.

METHODS

We collected patient, shoulder, and procedure characteristics along with Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores before surgery and at the time of follow-up. Medialization was determined by comparing the position of the humeral head prosthesis in relation to the scapula on postoperative baseline radiographs made within 6 weeks after surgery with that on comparable follow-up radiographs made ≥18 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Two-year clinical outcomes were available for 101 patients (95% were male). Comparable radiographs at postoperative baseline and follow-up evaluations were available for 50 shoulders. For all patients, the mean SST score (and standard deviation) increased from 4.9 ± 2.8 preoperatively to 10.3 ± 2.4 at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Significant clinical improvement was observed for glenoid types A2 and B2. Shoulders with a type-A2 glenoid morphology, with larger preoperative scapular body-glenoid angles, and with lower preoperative SST scores, were associated with the greatest clinical improvement. Clinical outcome was not significantly associated with the amount of medialization.

CONCLUSIONS

The ream-and-run procedure can be an effective treatment for advanced primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis in active patients. Further study will be necessary to determine whether medialization affects the clinical outcome with follow-up of >2 years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

What Factors are Predictive of Patient-reported Outcomes? A Prospective Study of 337 Shoulder Arthroplasties

BACKGROUND

Although shoulder arthroplasties generally are effective in improving patients' comfort and function, the results are variable for reasons that are not well understood.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We posed two questions: (1) What factors are associated with better 2-year outcomes after shoulder arthroplasty? (2) What are the sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative predictive values of a multivariate predictive model for better outcome?

METHODS

Three hundred thirty-nine patients having a shoulder arthroplasty (hemiarthroplasty, arthroplasty for cuff tear arthropathy, ream and run arthroplasty, total shoulder or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty) between August 24, 2010 and December 31, 2012 consented to participate in this prospective study. Two patients were excluded because they were missing baseline variables. Forty-three patients were missing 2-year data. Univariate and multivariate analyses determined the relationship of baseline patient, shoulder, and surgical characteristics to a "better" outcome, defined as an improvement of at least 30% of the maximal possible improvement in the Simple Shoulder Test. The results were used to develop a predictive model, the accuracy of which was tested using a 10-fold cross-validation.

RESULTS

After controlling for potentially relevant confounding variables, the multivariate analysis showed that the factors significantly associated with better outcomes were American Society of Anesthesiologists Class I (odds ratio [OR], 1.94; 95% CI, 1.03-3.65; p = 0.041), shoulder problem not related to work (OR, 5.36; 95% CI, 2.15-13.37; p < 0.001), lower baseline Simple Shoulder Test score (OR, 1.32; 95% CI, 1.23-1.42; p < 0.001), no prior shoulder surgery (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.18-2.70; p = 0.006), humeral head not superiorly displaced on the AP radiograph (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.15-4.02; p = 0.017), and glenoid type other than A1 (OR, 4.47; 95% CI, 2.24-8.94; p < 0.001). Neither preoperative glenoid version nor posterior decentering of the humeral head on the glenoid were associated with the outcomes. The model predictive of a better result was driven mainly by the six factors listed above. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve generated from the cross-validated enhanced predictive model was 0.79 (generally values of 0.7 to 0.8 are considered fair and values of 0.8 to 0.9 are considered good). The false-positive fraction and the true-positive fraction depended on the cutoff probability selected (ie, the selected probability above which the prediction would be classified as a better outcome). A cutoff probability of 0.68 yielded the best performance of the model with cross-validation predictions of better outcomes for 236 patients (80%) and worse outcomes for 58 patients (20%); sensitivity of 91% (95% CI, 88%-95%); specificity of 65% (95% CI, 53%-77%); positive predictive value of 92% (95% CI, 88%-95%); and negative predictive value of 64% (95% CI, 51%-76%).

CONCLUSIONS

We found six easy-to-determine preoperative patient and shoulder factors that were significantly associated with better outcomes of shoulder arthroplasty. A model based on these characteristics had good predictive properties for identifying patients likely to have a better outcome from shoulder arthroplasty. Future research could refine this model with larger patient populations from multiple practices.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, therapeutic study.

Biologic resurfacing arthroplasty with acellular human dermal allograft and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in young patients with glenohumeral arthritis-average of 60 months of at mid-term follow-up

BACKGROUND

The treatment of young patients with glenohumeral arthritis has been challenging. Alternative treatment options include activity modification, arthroscopic débridement, and arthroplasty. Addressing the glenoid during arthroplasty in this population of patients continues to be a significant challenge. In this study, we evaluated the midterm outcomes of hemiarthroplasty with biologic resurfacing of the glenoid with human dermal matrix allograft.

METHODS

Between 2004 and 2011, 55 patients underwent hemiarthroplasty and biologic resurfacing of the glenoid with human dermal matrix allograft. The average age was 50 ± 9 years. Subjective evaluation was performed with the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, visual analog scale, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. Patients returned to the clinic for clinical examination and radiographic evaluation. The average follow-up was 60 months.

RESULTS

The average postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 76 ± 22, and the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index score was 76% ± 22%. The visual analog scale score was 2.4 ± 2.6. The average preoperative Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score was 33% ± 22%, which significantly improved to 72% ± 22% postoperatively. Eighty-one percent of the patients were satisfied (10/47) or highly satisfied (28/47) with their result. With radiographic evaluation, the average joint space was 1 ± 1 mm preoperatively and 2 ± 1 mm postoperatively. A total of 5 cases (9.1%) were revised to anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with implantation of a glenoid component.

DISCUSSION

Hemiarthroplasty with biologic resurfacing of the glenoid using human dermal matrix allograft can lead to successful midterm outcomes with satisfactory complication and revision rates. Both patient satisfaction and clinical outcome remain high regardless of radiographic outcome.

Assessment of glenoid chondral healing: comparison of microfracture to autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis in a novel rabbit shoulder model

BACKGROUND

Management of glenohumeral arthrosis in young patients is a considerable challenge, with a growing need for non-arthroplasty alternatives. The objectives of this study were to develop an animal model to study glenoid cartilage repair and to compare surgical repair strategies to promote glenoid chondral healing.

METHODS

Forty-five rabbits underwent unilateral removal of the entire glenoid articular surface and were divided into 3 groups--untreated defect (UD), microfracture (MFx), and MFx plus type I/III collagen scaffold (autologous matrix-induced chondrogenesis [AMIC])--for the evaluation of healing at 8 weeks (12 rabbits) and 32 weeks (33 rabbits) after injury. Contralateral shoulders served as unoperated controls. Tissue assessments included 11.7-T magnetic resonance imaging (long-term healing group only), equilibrium partitioning of an ionic contrast agent via micro-computed tomography (EPIC-μCT), and histologic investigation (grades on International Cartilage Repair Society II scoring system).

RESULTS

At 8 weeks, x-ray attenuation, thickness, and volume did not differ by treatment group. At 32 weeks, the T2 index (ratio of T2 values of healing to intact glenoids) was significantly lower for the MFx group relative to the AMIC group (P = .01) whereas the T1ρ index was significantly lower for AMIC relative to MFx (P = .01). The micro-computed tomography-derived repair tissue volume was significantly higher for MFx than for UD. Histologic investigation generally suggested inferior healing in the AMIC and UD groups relative to the MFx group, which exhibited improvements in both integration of repair tissue with subchondral bone and tidemark formation over time.

DISCUSSION

Improvements conferred by AMIC were limited to magnetic resonance imaging outcomes, whereas MFx appeared to promote increased fibrous tissue deposition via micro-computed tomography and more hyaline-like repair histologically. The findings from this novel model suggest that MFx promotes biologic resurfacing of full-thickness glenoid articular injury.

Self-assessed and radiographic outcomes of humeral head replacement with nonprosthetic glenoid arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Active and young patients who place frequent demands on their shoulder present a treatment dilemma when glenohumeral arthritis progresses to a point at which surgical intervention is considered. Humeral head replacement with nonprosthetic glenoid arthroplasty ("ream-and-run") has been proposed to address the limitations of total shoulder arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty in this population. Several reports from a single institution have shown substantial improvement in self-assessed comfort and function after this procedure. However, to the best of our knowledge, no clinical results pertaining to this technique have been reported from other institutions.

METHODS

Hemiarthroplasty with nonprosthetic glenoid arthroplasty was performed in 17 patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients were clinically evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively with physical examination, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, visual analog scale, and standardized radiographs. Preoperative radiographs and patient demographics were assessed for correlation with outcome measures.

RESULTS

Improvement of >30% of preoperative SST score was noted in 14 of 17 patients at a mean follow-up of 3.9 years (range, 2.0-6.8 years). SST score improved from mean 3.2 ± 3.1 preoperatively to 10.0 ± 2.6 at latest follow-up (P < .0001). American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved from mean 42 ± 23 to 90 ± 13 (P < .0001). Male patients had higher SST scores (P = .03) and greater external rotation (P = .03) at latest follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Nonprosthetic glenoid arthroplasty demonstrated results that correlate with prior data published by the center at which the procedure was initially described. Patients with concentric glenoid morphology preoperatively did not demonstrate results superior to those of patients with eccentric glenoids.

Glenoid bone loss in anatomic shoulder arthroplasty: literature review and surgical technique

Despite major advances in total shoulder arthroplasty, management of severe posterior glenoid bone loss remains controversial. Several companies have provided alternative treatment options for type C glenoids associated with posterior subluxation of the humeral head. However, preoperative planning, proper selection of glenoid size, and recognition of the operative pitfalls are crucial for successful outcomes. A review of the literature and presentation of the surgical technique for the management of severe posterior glenoid bone loss are presented.

Surgical Treatment Options for Glenohumeral Arthritis in Young Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to compare surgical treatment options for young patients with glenohumeral arthritis.

METHODS

A systematic review of the English-language literature was conducted by searching PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus with the following term: "(shoulder OR glenohumeral) AND (arthritis OR osteoarthritis) AND (young OR younger)." Studies that reported clinical or radiological outcomes of nonbiologic surgical treatment of generalized glenohumeral arthritis in patients younger than 60 years of age were included. Data were extracted to include study and patient characteristics, surgical technique, outcome scores, pain relief, satisfaction, functional improvement, return to activity, health-related quality of life, complications, need for and time to revision, range of motion, and radiological outcomes. Study quality was assessed with the Modified Coleman Methodology Score.

RESULTS

Thirty-two studies containing a total of 1,229 shoulders met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Pain scores improved significantly more after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) than after hemiarthroplasty (HA) (P < .001). Patient satisfaction was similar after HA and TSA. Revision surgery was equally likely after HA, TSA, and arthroscopic debridement (AD). Complications were significantly less common after AD than after HA (P = .0049) and TSA (P < .001). AD and TSA afforded better recovery of active forward flexion and external rotation than did HA. At radiological follow-up, subluxation was similarly common after HA and TSA.

CONCLUSIONS

According to current Level IV data, TSA provides greater improvement of pain and range of motion than does HA in the surgical treatment of young patients with glenohumeral arthritis. AD is an efficacious and particularly safe alternative in the short term for young patients with concerns about arthroplasty.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.

Primary partial humeral head resurfacing: outcomes with the HemiCAP implant

BACKGROUND

Humeral head defects such as degenerative disease or avascular necrosis are often treated with stemmed hemiarthroplasty or total shoulder arthroplasty. Despite its historical and clinical significance, stemmed humeral head replacement poses inherent technical challenges to placing spherical implants at the anatomically correct head height, version, and neck-shaft angle.

PURPOSE

The aim of this study was to assess humeral head inlay arthroplasty as a joint-preserving alternative that maintains the individual head-neck-shaft anatomy. Humeral head inlay arthroplasty also allows intraoperative surface mapping and placement of a contoured articular component that is matched to the patient's defect size, location, and individual surface geometry.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

This retrospective case series included 19 patients (20 shoulders), with an average age of 48.9 years (range, 32-58 years; 16 men, 3 women). Preoperative diagnoses were osteoarthritis in 16 shoulders and osteonecrosis in 4 shoulders. Pre- and postoperative evaluations included physical examination, radiographic assessment, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, the Simple Shoulder Test, a pain visual analog scale, and patient satisfaction rating.

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 32.7 months (range, 17-66 months). The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved from 24.1 to 78.8, mean Simple Shoulder Test score from 3.95 to 9.3, mean visual analog scale score from 8.2 to 2.1, mean forward flexion from 100° to 129°, and mean external rotation from 23° to 43° (P < .001 for all). Radiographic follow-up showed no evidence of periprosthetic fracture, component loosening, osteolysis, or device failure. Patient shoulder self-assessment was 90% poor before surgery and improved to 75% good to excellent at last follow-up; 20% of patients self-rated as somewhat good to somewhat poor, and 5% self-rated as poor. Ninety percent of patients were satisfied with the choice of the procedure. Three patients had postoperative complications unrelated to the implants, including a partial rotator cuff tear treated with physical therapy, preexisting glenoid wear treated with arthroscopic debridement and microfracture, and infection complicated by subscapularis rupture requiring several subsequent surgical procedures but with retention of the implant.

CONCLUSION

Humeral head inlay arthroplasty is effective in providing pain relief, functional improvement, and patient satisfaction. Rather than delaying shoulder arthroplasty to end-stage osteoarthritis, humeral head inlay arthroplasty is a promising new direction in primary shoulder arthroplasty for younger and active patients with earlier stage disease.

The ream and run: not for every patient, every surgeon or every problem

PURPOSE

The purpose of this paper is to provide some essential and basic information concerning the ream and run technique for shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

In a total shoulder arthroplasty, the humeral head prosthesis articulates with a polyethylene glenoid surface placed on the bone of the glenoid. Failure of the glenoid component is recognised as the principal cause of failure of total shoulder arthroplasty. By contrast, in the ream and run procedure, the humeral head prosthesis articulates directly with the glenoid, which has been conservatively reamed to provide a stabilising concavity and maximal glenohumeral contact area for load transfer. While no interpositional material is placed on the surface of the glenoid, animal studies have demonstrated that the reamed glenoid bone forms fibrocartilage, which is firmly fixed to the reamed bony surface. Glenohumeral motion is instituted on the day of surgery and continued daily after surgery to mold the regenerating glenoid fibrocartilage. When the healing process is complete - as indicated by a good and comfortable range of motion - exercises and activities are added progressively without concern for glenoid component failure. 

RESULTS

The experience to date indicates that a technically well done ream and run procedure can restore high levels of comfort and function to carefully selected patients with osteoarthritis, capsulorrhaphy arthroplathy, and posttraumatic arthritis.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients considering the ream and run procedure should understand that this technique avoids the risks and limitations associated with a polyethylene glenoid component, but that it requires strong motivation to follow through on a rehabilitation course that may require many months. The outcome of this procedure depends on the body's regeneration of a new surface for the glenoid and requires rigorous adherence to a daily exercise program. This paper explains in detail the principal factors in patient selection and the key technical elements of the procedure. Clinical examples and outcomes are demonstrated.

Addressing glenoid bone deficiency and asymmetric posterior erosion in shoulder arthroplasty

Glenoid bone deficiency and eccentric posterior wear are difficult problems faced by shoulder arthroplasty surgeons. Numerous options and techniques exist for addressing these issues. Hemiarthroplasty with concentric glenoid reaming may be a viable alternative in motivated patients in whom glenoid component failure is a concern. Total shoulder arthroplasty has been shown to provide durable pain relief and excellent function in patients, and numerous methods and techniques can assist in addressing bone loss and eccentric wear. However, the ideal amount of version correction in cases of severe retroversion has not yet been established. Asymmetric reaming is a commonly used technique to address glenoid version, but correction of severe retroversion may compromise bone stock and component fixation. Bone grafting is a technically demanding alternative for uncontained defects and has mixed clinical results. Specialized glenoid implants with posterior augmentation have been created to assist the surgeon in correcting glenoid version without compromising bone stock, but clinical data on these implants are still pending. Custom implants or instruments based on each patient's unique glenoid anatomy may hold promise. In elderly, sedentary patients in whom bone stock and soft-tissue balance are concerns, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty may be less technically demanding while still providing satisfactory pain relief and functional improvements.

Shoulder hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures: comparisons between the deltopectoral and anterolateral deltoid-splitting approaches

BACKGROUND

Shoulder hemiarthroplasty is a widely accepted method for treating complex proximal humeral fractures, and the deltopectoral approach is the most popular route for this procedure. The purpose of the current study was to define and compare outcomes of shoulder hemiarthroplasty when using deltopectoral or anterolateral deltoid-splitting approaches.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Two cohorts of patients were compared for clinical and radiographic outcomes at the same postoperative follow-up periods: a deltopectoral group (DP group) of 15 patients, from November 2004 to April 2007, and an anterolateral deltoid-splitting group (DS group) of 17 patients, from May 2007 to December 2009. Pain scores, goniometric measurements of the range of motion, and Constant scores were recorded for clinical assessment. Radiographic evaluations were recorded for stem osteolysis, tuberosity absorption, joint subluxation, and acromiohumeral distance.

RESULTS

The 2 groups did not differ significantly in demographic data, preoperative fracture classification, surgical timing, early postoperative radiographic findings, and 2-year radiographic results. The DS group had less immediate postoperative pain (P = .025). At the 2-year follow-up assessment, the groups did not difference significantly in shoulder abduction and forward flexion. All prostheses survived until the 2-year assessment.

CONCLUSION

When performing shoulder hemiarthroplasty for complex proximal humeral fractures, we found that the anterolateral deltoid-splitting approach provides an easier route for assessing posterior fracture fragments and managing rotator cuff tissue. The anterolateral deltoid-splitting approach was shown to be an acceptable alternative route for shoulder hemiarthroplasty than the standard deltopectoral approach.

Glenohumeral chondrolysis: part II--results of treatment

PURPOSE

The objective of this 2-part study is to report on the etiology and disease progression (part I) and results of treatment (part II) of glenohumeral chondrolysis.

METHODS

Forty patients presented with glenohumeral chondrolysis after treatment elsewhere. Twenty patients have been followed since their initial presentation and before prosthetic shoulder arthroplasty (group 1), and 20 patients were referred either for management of complications arising after shoulder arthroplasty or for evaluation only (group 2). All patients underwent standardized clinical and radiographic examination and completed shoulder-specific self-assessment questionnaires at initial presentation and after prosthetic shoulder arthroplasty for patients in group 1.

RESULTS

Thirty of 40 patients underwent subsequent arthroscopy for debridement, chondroplasty, capsular release, or a combination of these procedures. Of these, 23 patients (77%) required additional surgery, comprising 18 prosthetic shoulder arthroplasties performed at a mean 13 months of follow-up (range, 3 to 33 months), as well as 5 repeated arthroscopies. At most recent follow-up, 15 of 20 patients in group 1 had undergone shoulder arthroplasty, with improvements in active forward elevation from 92.6° to 140.0° (P < .0001), active abduction from 81.6° to 131.3° (P < .0001), active external rotation from 22.1° to 49.3° (P < .0001), and active internal rotation from the gluteal region to the T12 spinous process (P < .001). Pain scores improved from 6.4 to 3.4 (P < .01), and self-assessed outcome also improved significantly. Twelve patients in group 2 underwent shoulder arthroplasty, so overall 27 of 40 patients (68%) underwent prosthetic shoulder arthroplasty for chondrolysis at a mean of 32 months (range, 9 to 66 months) after the index procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Postarthroscopic glenohumeral chondrolysis is a devastating condition that strikes young patients, responds poorly to arthroscopic interventions, and often requires shoulder arthroplasty within a few years. Patients can expect improved range of motion and outcome after shoulder arthroplasty, but pain relief is often incomplete.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic case series.

The prognosis for improvement in comfort and function after the ream-and-run arthroplasty for glenohumeral arthritis: an analysis of 176 consecutive cases

BACKGROUND

Knowledge of the factors affecting the prognosis for improvement in function and comfort with time after shoulder arthroplasty is important to clinical decision-making. This study sought to identify some of these factors in 176 consecutive patients undergoing the ream-and-run procedure.

METHODS

The time course for improvement in patient function and comfort was determined for the entire group as well as for subsets by sex, age, diagnosis, preoperative function, and surgery date. Patients having repeat surgery were analyzed in detail.

RESULTS

Shoulder comfort and function increased progressively after the ream-and-run procedure, reaching a steady state by approximately twenty months. The shoulders in 124 patients with at least two years of follow-up were improved by a minimal clinically important difference. The shoulders in sixteen patients with at least two years of follow-up were not improved by the minimal clinically important difference. Twenty-two patients had repeat procedures, but only seven had revision to a total shoulder arthroplasty. Fourteen patients did not have either a known revision arthroplasty or two years of follow-up. The best prognosis was for male patients over the age of sixty years, with primary osteoarthritis, no prior surgical procedures, a preoperative score on the simple shoulder test of ≥5 points, and surgery after 2004. Repeat surgical procedures were more common in patients who had a greater number of surgical procedures before the ream-and-run surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is unique in that it characterizes the factors affecting the time course for improvement in shoulder comfort and function after a ream-and-run procedure. Improvement occurs after this procedure for at least 1.5 years. This procedure appears to be best suited for an older male patient with reasonable preoperative shoulder function without prior shoulder surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level II. See Instructions for authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Total shoulder replacement surgery with custom glenoid implants for severe bone deficiency

BACKGROUND

Treatment of patients with shoulder arthritis and severe glenoid bone loss is controversial. Medial and posterior bone loss limits the size of the glenoid vault, which is the structural support of all current glenoid designs. This study presents short-term outcomes of a treatment using inset glenoid implants during shoulder replacement surgery in deficient glenoid bone.

METHODS

This study presents short-term outcomes of total shoulder replacement surgery using custom inset glenoid implants in deficient glenoid bone. Seven consecutive patients (3 men, 4 women; mean age 70 years) treated with inset glenoid implants for severe bone deficiency were retrospectively evaluated at a minimum 3-year follow-up. Severely deficient bone was defined by a neutral glenoid vault depth of less than 15 mm. No bone grafts were used. All patients were evaluated before and after surgery with physical examination, radiographic studies, and outcome measures. All patients had a diagnosis of osteoarthritis. No patients had rotator cuff tears or a history of instability.

RESULTS

No surgical complications occurred. At an average of 4.3 years, the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon score improved 68 points. There were statistically significant improvements in range of motion (forward flexion 33°, external rotation 34°, internal rotation 6 spinal levels) and in pain (6.9 to 0.1). Independent radiographic analysis determined all implants were classified as "low risk" for glenoid loosening.

DISCUSSION

The treatment of shoulder arthritis with severe glenoid bone loss is controversial and the results are mixed. Current treatments consist of hemiarthroplasty with or without glenoid reaming, total shoulder replacement without version correction, and total shoulder replacement with bulk bone grafting and version correction. The surgical technique and clinical results described in this case series demonstrate a novel approach of inset glenoid fixation for severely deficient bone.

CONCLUSIONS

This study documents for the first time the possibility of safely and effectively using inset glenoid implants to reconstruct deficient bone for which standard implants are contraindicated.

The glenoid in total shoulder arthroplasty

Management of glenohumeral arthrosis with a total shoulder prosthesis is becoming increasingly common. However, failure of the glenoid component remains one of the most common causes for failure. Our understanding of this problem has evolved greatly since the first implants were placed in the 1970's. However glenoid failure remains a challenging problem to address and manage. This article reviews the current knowledge regarding the glenoid in total shoulder arthroplasty touching on anatomy, component design, implant fixation, causes of implant failure, management of glenoid failure and alternatives to glenoid replacement.

Shoulder hemiarthroplasty with concentric glenoid reaming in patients 55 years old or less

BACKGROUND

Glenohumeral arthritis in younger individuals is challenging because of the complex pathology, need for extended durability, and high expectations of the patients. Humeral hemiarthroplasty combined with concentric glenoid reaming is a surgical option for the management of glenohumeral arthritis that avoids the risks of glenoid component failure and avoids the challenges of tissue interposition. The results of this procedure in young patients have not been previously reported.

METHODS

Sixty-five shoulders in patients who were 55 years old or less at the time of surgery underwent humeral hemiarthroplasty combined with concentric glenoid reaming and were followed for a minimum of 2 years or until the time of revision surgery. Patient self-assessments of shoulder comfort and function were compared before and after surgery. For 22 of these shoulders, standardized radiographs were available for follow-up evaluation.

RESULTS

Nine shoulders required revision surgery. These shoulders had 3 ± 3 prior surgeries, in comparison to 1 ± 1 prior surgeries for the unrevised group. For the 56 unrevised shoulders, the number of Simple Shoulder Test functions that could be performed improved from a mean of 4.1 before surgery to a mean of 9.5 at an average follow-up of 43 months (range, 24-85) (P < .001). For the 22 shoulders with radiographic follow-up, medial glenoid erosion averaged 1.1 mm (range, 0.0-6.3 mm) at an average of 44 months after the procedure.

CONCLUSION

In selected patients 55 years or younger with glenohumeral arthritis, this procedure can provide significant improvement in self-assessed shoulder comfort and function.

Management of glenohumeral arthritis in the young adult

The majority of cases of glenohumeral arthritis in older adults are primary osteoarthritis and treatment algorithms are well defined, with shoulder arthroplasty providing reliable pain relief and functional improvement of satisfactorily duration. In younger adults, however, diagnoses are more complex and arthroplasty outcomes are less durable. Arthroscopy may be useful both as a diagnostic tool for characterizing lesions and as a therapeutic tool for debridement. Arthroscopic debridement is most likely to benefit patients with mild glenohumeral arthritis, small lesions, and involvement of only one side of the glenohumeral joint. Reconstruction of the humeral joint surface may consist of cartilage repair or reconstruction, resurfacing arthroplasty, or arthroplasty with a stemmed component. Patients treated with hemiarthroplasty avoid glenoid implant loosening, but the procedure provides less predictable pain relief than does total shoulder arthroplasty and may lead to increased postoperative glenoid erosion.

Treatment of glenohumeral arthrosis

The successful diagnosis and treatment of glenohumeral arthrosis in the young and active patient can be challenging to even the most experienced of clinicians. A thorough preoperative evaluation, including a detailed understanding of patient expectations, facilitates the selection of a treatment strategy. Arthroscopy is the gold standard for detecting chondral injuries, and it is increasingly used as an effective first line of management. In patients who fail arthroscopic debridement and reparative techniques, further treatment should proceed with an algorithmic decision-making approach encompassing patient-based and disease-based factors. Restorative and reconstructive techniques may provide improvements in pain and functional outcome while delaying the need for total shoulder arthroplasty, although the longevity of these treatments has yet to be established in the literature. Hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty have historically proven to be the most durable and reliable options in properly selected patients. However, concerns about progressive glenoid erosion and glenoid component loosening have led many to pursue alternative nonarthroplasty techniques for the management of arthrosis in active young individuals.

The simple shoulder test is responsive in assessing change following shoulder arthroplasty

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study with repeated measures.

OBJECTIVE

To establish the responsiveness of the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) in comparison to other commonly used clinical outcomes in patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND

Responsiveness statistics are a useful means to compare different outcomes in terms of their ability to detect clinical change. While the responsiveness of the SST has been established for rotator cuff repair, it has not been determined for patients undergoing arthroplasty.

METHODS

Patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty (n=120) were evaluated prior to surgery and 6 months after. The evaluation included the SST, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire, range of motion, and isometric strength. Responsiveness to change was assessed using standardized response mean (SRM), while longitudinal construct validity was evaluated using Pearson correlation. Receiver operating characteristics curves were plotted to determine clinically important difference of SST.

RESULTS

The SST and Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire were highly responsive (SRM, >1.70) for this population. For the assessment of impairment, range of motion (SRM, 0.64-1.03) was moderately to highly responsive, while isometric strength was minimally to moderately responsive (SRM, 0.32-0.69). The clinically important difference of the SST was established at 3.0 SST points. Pearson correlations indicated moderate associations between the change scores of the SST and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand questionnaire (r=0.49).

CONCLUSIONS

The SST has been previously shown to be valid and highly reliable. The present results show that the SST is also responsive following shoulder arthroplasty and that it has a clinically important difference of 3.0 SST points. This should provide confidence to clinicians who wish to use a brief shoulder-specific measure in their practice.

Shoulder hemi arthroplasty radiological and clinical outcomes at more than two years follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Humeral head replacement is used for glenohumeral osteoarthritis in young or active patients, for conditions sparing glenoid cartilage or when glenoid implantation does not appear feasible. These surgical procedures usually give satisfactory results but there is a risk of glenoid erosion and a possible deterioration of long-term outcomes.

HYPOTHESIS

There is a risk of glenoid erosion after humeral head replacement which can be radiographically measured. The importance and progression of this erosion should be evaluated to determine its clinical relevance.

PATIENT AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study in 15 patients (19 shoulders) who underwent humeral head replacement between 1999 and 2006. There were 11 women and four men with an average age of 54.5 years. Etiologies were avascular necrosis (11 cases) and glenohumeral osteoarthritis (eight cases). All patients were reviewed in 2008 with more than two years follow-up. Clinical evaluation included measurements of range of motion and determination of the Constant and Murley score. In addition, the patients were asked to provide a subjective evaluation of their shoulder. Radiographic analysis included computer-assisted measurements.

RESULTS

The average follow-up was 45.8 months (26-108). At one year postoperative and at the final follow-up, clinical parameters such as the Constant and Murley score (37.4/100 preoperative to 64.4/100 at final follow-up) were significantly increased. During the first year, the rate of glenoid wear was 1.03 mm/year in case of avascular necrosis and 0.27 mm/year in case of osteoarthritis (p<0.001). Glenoid depth at the final follow-up was 6.97 mm for osteoarthritis compared to 4.59 mm for avascular necrosis (p<0.01). We did not find any correlation between glenoid erosion severity and clinical results.

DISCUSSION

Isolated humeral head replacement may result in glenoid erosion. The rate of progression of this erosion is clearly influenced by the etiology and therefore by the preexisting condition of the glenoid cartilage. At the average follow-up, the radiological glenoid deterioration is not correlated with pain or deterioration of clinical results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV. Therapeutic study.

Cost effectiveness analysis of hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and hemiarthroplasty (HA) are two viable surgical treatment options for glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Recent systematic reviews and randomized trials suggest that TSA, while more costly initially, may have superior outcomes with regard to pain, function and quality of life with lower revision rates. This study compared the cost-effectiveness of TSA with HA.

METHODS

A Markov decision model was constructed for a cost-utility analysis of TSA compared to HA in a cohort of 64-year-old patients. Outcome probabilities and effectiveness were derived from the literature. Costs were estimated from the societal perspective using the national average Medicare reimbursement for the procedures in 2008 US dollars. Effectiveness was expressed in quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. Principal outcome measures were average incremental costs, incremental effectiveness, incremental QALYs, and net health benefits.

RESULTS

In the base case, HA resulted in a lower number of average QALYs gained at a higher average cost to society and was, therefore, dominated by the TSA strategy for the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. The cost effectiveness ratio for TSA and HA were $957/QALY and $1,194/QALY respectively. Sensitivity analysis revealed that if the utility of TSA is equal to, or revision rate lower than HA, TSA continues to be a dominant strategy.

CONCLUSION

Total shoulder arthroplasty with a cemented glenoid is a cost-effective procedure, resulting in greater utility for the patient at a lower overall cost to the payer. These findings suggest that TSA is the preferred treatment for certain populations from both a patient and payer perspective.

The glenoid in shoulder arthroplasty

Total shoulder arthroplasty is a common treatment for glenohumeral arthritis. One of the most common failure modes of total shoulder arthroplasty is glenoid loosening, causing postoperative pain, limitation of function, and potentially, the need for revision surgery. The literature has devoted considerable attention to the design of the glenoid component; efforts to better understand the biomechanics of the reconstructed glenohumeral joint and identify factors that contribute to glenoid component loosening are ongoing. This article reviews the current state of knowledge about the glenoid in total shoulder arthroplasty, summarizing the anatomic parameters of the intact glenoid, variations in component design and fixation, the mechanisms of glenoid loosening, the outcomes of revision surgery in the treatment of glenoid component failure, and alternative treatments for younger patients.