Glenoid component placement accuracy in total shoulder arthroplasty with preoperative planning and standard instrumentation is not influenced by supero-inferior glenoid erosion

PURPOSE

Accurate glenoid component placement in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) remains challenging even with preoperative planning, especially for variable glenoid erosion patterns in the coronal plane.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 170 primary TSAs in which preoperative planning software was used. After registration of intraoperative bony landmarks, surgeons were blinded to the navigation screen and attempted to implement their plan by simulating placement of a central-axis guide pin: 230 screenshots of simulated guide pin placement were included (aTSA = 66, rTSA = 164). Displacement, error in version and inclination, and overall malposition from the preoperatively-planned target point were stratified by the Favard classification describing superior-inferior glenoid wear: E0 (n = 89); E1 (n = 81); E2 (n = 29); E3(n = 29); E4(n = 2). Malposition was considered > 10° for version/inclination errors or > 4 mm displacement from the starting point.

RESULTS

Mean displacement error was 3.5 ± 2.7 mm (aTSA = 2.7 ± 2.3 mm, rTSA = 3.8 ± 2.9 mm), version error was 5.7 ± 4.7° (aTSA = 5.8 ± 4.4°, rTSA = 5.7 ± 4.8°), inclination error was 7.1 ± 5.6 (aTSA = 4.8 ± 4.8°, rTSA = 8.1 ± 5.7°), and malposition rate was 53% (aTSA = 38%, rTSA = 59%). When compared by Favard classification, there were no differences in any measure; when stratified by TSA type, version error differed for rTSAs (P = .038), with E1 having the greatest version error (6.9 ± 5.2°) and E3 the least (4.2 ± 3.4°). When comparing glenoids without wear (E0) and glenoids with superior wear (E2 and E3), the only difference was greater version error in glenoids without wear (6.0 ± 4.9° vs. 4.6 ± 3.7°, P = .041).

CONCLUSIONS

Glenoid malposition did not differ based on coronal glenoid morphology. Although, malposition was relatively high, suggesting surgeons should consider alternate techniques beyond preoperative planning and standard instrumentation in TSA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: Retrospective Cohort Study.

Outcomes of Biceps Tenodesis Variations With Concomitant Rotator Cuff Repair: A Multicenter Database Analysis

Background

Studies to date comparing biceps tenodesis methods in the setting of concomitant rotator cuff repair (RCR) have demonstrated relatively equivalent pain and functional outcomes.

Purpose

To compare biceps tenodesis constructs, locations, and techniques in patients who underwent RCR using a large multicenter database.

Study Design

Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3.

Methods

A global outcome database was queried for patients with medium- and large-sized tears who underwent biceps tenodesis with RCR between 2015 and 2021. Patients ≥18 years of age with a minimum follow-up of 1 year were included. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, visual analog scale for pain, and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey (VR-12) scores were compared at 1 and 2 years of follow-up based on construct (anchor, screw, or suture), location (subpectoral, suprapectoral, or top of groove), and technique (inlay or onlay). Nonparametric hypothesis testing was used to compare continuous outcomes at each time point. The proportion of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at the 1- and 2-year follow-ups were compared between groups using chi-square tests.

Results

A total of 1903 unique shoulder entries were analyzed. Improvement in VR-12 Mental score favored anchor and suture fixations at 1 year of follow-up (P = .042) and the onlay tenodesis technique at 2 years of follow-up (P = .029). No additional tenodesis comparisons demonstrated statistical significance. The proportion of patients with improvement exceeding the MCID did not differ based on tenodesis methods for any outcome score assessed at the 1- or 2-year follow-up.

Conclusion

Biceps tenodesis with concomitant RCR led to improved outcomes regardless of tenodesis fixation construct, location, or technique. A clear optimal tenodesis method with RCR remains to be determined. Surgeon preference and experience with various tenodesis methods as well as patient clinical presentation should continue to guide surgical decision-making.

"Nutcracker" esophagus: diagnosis with radionuclide esophageal scintigraphy versus manometry

"Nutcracker" esophagus is a syndrome consisting of chest pain and/or dysphagia with elevation of the mean distal esophageal contractile pressure amplitude (MDA) (greater than 120 mm Hg). Its existence as a disorder of esophageal function and the proper manometric diagnostic criteria have been debated. A correlative study of radionuclide esophageal scintigraphy (RES) and manometry was performed in 31 patients with this manometric diagnosis. RES results were abnormal in 13 of 16 (81%) patients with an MDA above 150 mm Hg, and in only three of 15 (20%) patients with an MDA below this level. There was a significant difference in RES parameters (mean transit time and percentage emptying) between these two groups. Repeat manometric and RES studies showed considerable variability, but only RES showed a significant correlation between baseline and repeat studies. RES confirms a functional disorder in a subgroup of patients with the manometric diagnosis of nutcracker esophagus and supports a change in the manometric criteria for diagnosis of this disorder to an MDA above 150 mm Hg.