Regarding "Distal peripheral neuropathy after open and arthroscopic shoulder surgery: an under-recognized complication"

Concomitant Total Shoulder Arthroplasty and Ipsilateral Carpal Tunnel Release: Is it Safe?

PURPOSE

Symptomatic carpal tunnel syndrome in patients with advanced ipsilateral glenohumeral arthritis requiring total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) may be easily overlooked. Even when diagnosed beforehand, most upper extremity surgeons have historically chosen to perform TSA and carpal tunnel release (CTR) separately. We hypothesized that combined single-stage TSA and CTR is feasible and yields results comparable with those when the 2 procedures are performed separately, while avoiding 2 surgeries.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of patients who underwent single-stage primary TSA and ipsilateral CTR between 2015 and 2019. The shoulder outcomes included pain, range of motion, and validated quality of life (QoL) questionnaires: Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) and Penn Shoulder Score. The CTR outcomes included pain, grip, pinch, VR-12, shortened Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH), and Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. The time to the initiation of rehabilitation and complications were also analyzed. The comparison group consisted of patients who underwent independent TSA or CTR during the same period.

RESULTS

Forty-one patients underwent concomitant TSA and CTR, 248 underwent isolated TSA, and 154 underwent isolated CTR. The shoulder outcomes of patients who underwent the combined procedure were similar to those of patients who underwent isolated TSA in terms of pain, range of motion, general QoL (VR-12), and shoulder-specific QoL (Penn Shoulder Score). The outcomes of patients who underwent the combined procedure were similar to those of patients who underwent isolated CTR in terms of pain, grip and pinch, general QoL (VR-12), QuickDASH, and Boston Carpal Tunnel Questionnaire. The time to the initiation of rehabilitation was also comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

Concomitant CTR and TSA are feasible. The functional outcomes and QoL of patients who underwent the concomitant treatment were comparable with those of patients who underwent the 2 procedures separately.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Distal Mononeuropathy Before and After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair: A Prospective Investigation

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to characterize the occurrence of distal mononeuropathy (DMN) in patients before and after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) as well as resolution of the symptoms.

METHODS

One hundred one patients over the age of 18 undergoing arthroscopic RCR +/- concurrent procedures completed a questionnaire regarding the presence of a symptomatic DMN. Patients with history of diabetic neuropathy, cervical radiculopathy, brachial plexopathy, or Spurling sign were excluded. All patients underwent physical examination to determine the characteristics and location of symptoms. Postoperatively, patients underwent repeat examination at 2, 6, and 12 weeks.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, 19% (19/101) of RCR patients described DMN symptoms (9 median nerve symptoms, 5 ulnar nerve symptoms, 4 nonspecific symptoms, one with both ulnar and median nerve symptoms). Ninety percent (17/19) patients with preoperative DMN symptoms described resolution within the final 12 weeks of follow-up. A portion of previously asymptomatic RCR patients (12/82) developed new DMN symptoms (6 nonspecific symptoms, 3 ulnar nerve symptoms, 2 median nerve symptoms, one radial sensory nerve symptoms) postoperatively, with 92% (11/12) having resolution by the final 12-week follow-up. At the final 12 weeks, 3 RCR patients had DMN symptoms with 2 of those 3 patients having their symptoms existing preoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the hypothesis that DMN can be a preexisting finding in patients undergoing arthroscopic RCR. Similarly, it is common for patients undergoing arthroscopic RCR to develop new DMN symptoms following their procedure. Regardless, there is good evidence to show that a large majority of both groups of patients will go on to have resolution of their symptoms.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, prospective case series.