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

Comparison of Humeral-Head Replacement with Glenoid-Reaming Arthroplasty (Ream and Run) Versus Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Matched-Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Glenoid component failure is a major concern after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). Ream and run (RnR) is an alternative procedure that may avoid glenoid-related complications. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of RnR versus aTSA in younger patients with advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

METHODS

This was a retrospective matched-cohort study of 110 patients who underwent aTSA and 57 patients who underwent RnR; patients were <66 years of age and had a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Propensity matching was performed using 21 preoperative variables. Pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) scores, satisfaction with outcome, and revision data were analyzed. Mixed-effects models examined the association of preoperative variables with outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patient pairs were matched. All patients were male, with a mean age of 58.6 ± 7.3 years and a mean follow-up 4.4 ± 2.3 years. The aTSA cohort had better final Simple Shoulder Test (SST) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores. However, in the mixed-effects model analysis, arthroplasty type was not associated with outcome. At 2 years postoperatively, a significantly greater percentage of aTSA patients achieved the substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for the ASES (100% versus 79.2%; p = 0.01) and the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) (89.7% versus 75%; p = 0.02) for the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain. At >5-year follow-up, there were no significant differences between the cohorts in the percentage who achieved the MCID, SCB, or patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) for the ASES, SST, and VAS for pain. Three patients underwent revision arthroplasty for pain after RnR, at a mean of 1.9 ± 1.7 years. Two patients underwent revision arthroplasty for glenoid loosening at 9.2 and 14 years after aTSA.

CONCLUSIONS

RnR and aTSA had comparable outcomes in most analyses. The greater early revision rate after RnR should focus attention on optimizing patient selection and postoperative management. Revision for glenoid loosening is a concern among younger and active patients. Longer-term study is needed to better understand the relative benefits and disadvantages of these procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

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

Early outcome of humeral head replacement with glenoid reaming arthroplasty (Ream and Run) for treatment of advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis

INTRODUCTION

Long-term outcomes of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) can be compromised by glenoid loosening and failure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short- and midterm outcomes of humeral head replacement with glenoid reaming arthroplasty (Ream and Run) for the treatment of advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis, and to identify associations between preoperative factors and outcomes.

METHODS

Forty-nine shoulders (mean age 60 ± 7 years) with minimum 2-year follow-up (mean 4.6 ± 1.7) were evaluated. Forty-three (87.8%) were male. Thirteen (26.5%) had previous nonarthroplasty shoulder surgery. There were 19 (38.8%) Walch type A and 30 (61.2%) type B glenoids. Pre- and postoperative shoulder motion, patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were assessed. Pre- and postoperative plain radiographs were evaluated. Mixed effects models were used to investigate factors associated with outcomes.

RESULTS

Active forward elevation and active external rotation improved from 111.7° ± 23.8° to 139.2° ± 21.1° and 13.3° ± 20.7° to 38.7° ± 14.7°, respectively (P < .001). The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and visual analog scale (VAS) shoulder pain scores at the most recent follow-up were 86.6 ± 19.9, 10.1 ± 14.1, 10.5 ± 2.2, and 1.5 ± 2.3, respectively. The mean changes of PROMs were significant and exceeded the minimal clinically important difference for aTSA. The percentage maximal possible improvement for ASES, DASH, and SST were greater than 75%. Male sex (P < .008) and not having prior shoulder surgery (P < .04) were significantly associated with better absolute and greater change in PROMs. Age, preoperative shoulder motion, and Walch glenoid classification were not associated with PROMs. Five (10.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8%-18.6%) patients underwent revision for pain. Three additional patients were dissatisfied at final follow-up without undergoing revision, resulting in 16.7% (95% CI 6.1%-27.2%) of patients being dissatisfied with their outcome after their initial RnR. Mean Short Form-6 Dimensions scores improved from 0.66 ± 0.12 to 0.77 ± 0.13 and mean EuroQol-5 Dimensions scores improved from 0.68 ± 0.20 to 0.85 ± 0.17 (P < .001). Improvement in HRQoL was significantly associated with nondominant arm treatment, increased age, and greater preoperative SST score. Annual medialization of the humeral head center of rotation was 0.56 ± 1.6 mm/yr. No radiographic measure was associated with long-term PROMs.

CONCLUSION

Ream and Run can provide significant and clinically important improvement in PROMs and HRQoL for a high percentage of patients at short- and midterm follow-up. This procedure is an appropriate alternative to aTSA in select patients.

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

Based on peer-reviewed systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials published between January 2000 and June 2019 with regards to the management of glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis (GJO), the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) established the clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of GJO. The guidelines provided practice recommendations including risk factors, non-surgical treatment, surgical treatment, prosthesis selection, and perioperative management for GJO. The recommendations were graded according to different evidence strength. This paper interprets the guidline in order to provide reference for domestic medical workers.

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.

Anatomic Augmented Glenoid Implants for the Management of the B2 Glenoid

The B2 glenoid is defined by Walch et al. as a glenoid that is biconcave with posterior erosion accompanied by posterior humeral head subluxation. This creates unique challenges for the treating orthopedic surgeon. Bone loss, excessive retroversion, and posterior subluxation make anatomic shoulder arthroplasty in this setting fraught with increased complications, including instability, glenoid component loosening, and poor clinical outcomes. Many techniques have been devised to treat the arthritic shoulder with a B2 glenoid, including hemiarthroplasty, total shoulder arthroplasty using eccentric reaming, bone grafting and custom implantation, and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. In this review, we will focus on anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty using augmented glenoid implants to treat the B2 glenoid. Indications, clinical results, and basic science analyses of augmented anatomic glenoids are also discussed.