Superior Capsule Reconstruction for Irreparable Massive Rotator Cuff Tears: Does It Make Sense? A Systematic Review of Early Clinical Evidence

BACKGROUND

Treatment of irreparable massive rotator cuff tears (MRCTs) in patients without advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis remains a challenge. Arthroscopic superior capsule reconstruction (SCR) represents a newer method for treatment with increasing popularity and acceptance.

PURPOSE

To analyze the clinical evidence surrounding SCR and determine the current clinical outcomes postoperatively.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature was performed following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Electronic databases of PubMed, MEDLINE, Cochrane, and Google Scholar were used for the literature search. The study quality was evaluated according to the Modified Coleman Methodology Score. Studies in English evaluating SCR outcomes were included.

RESULTS

Seven studies were reviewed, including 352 patients (358 shoulders) treated with arthroscopic SCR with the mean duration of follow-up ranging from 15 to 48 months (range, 12-88 months). Fourteen patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 338 patients (344 shoulders) with clinical outcome data. Graft types included dermal allografts (n = 3 studies), fascia lata autografts (n = 3), or both (n = 1). Most commonly, a double-row technique was utilized for humeral graft fixation. The most common complication included graft tears in 13% of patients, resulting in 15 SCR revisions and 7 reverse shoulder arthroplasties. Postoperatively, improvements in visual analog scale (2.5 to 5.9), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (20 to 56), Japanese Orthopaedic Association (38.0), Subjective Shoulder Value (37.0 to 41.3), and Constant (11.6 to 47.4) scores were observed. Three studies reported respective satisfaction rates of 72.9%, 85.7% and 90%. Increases in external rotation, internal rotation, and abduction with improved strength in external rotation were observed postoperatively. Improvement of pseudoparalysis was also observed in 3 studies. One study reported return to sports in 100% of patients (2 competitively, 24 recreationally) with no adverse outcomes.

CONCLUSION

SCR showed good to excellent short-term clinical outcomes with adequate pain relief and functional improvement. The current evidence suggests that the procedure is an alternative for symptomatic patients with irreparable MRCT; however, the included studies were fair to poor in quality, and there were some notable complications. Long-term follow-up will determine the longevity and ultimate role of this new method in the treatment of irreparable MRCT.

Antibiotic cement spacer retention for chronic shoulder infection after minimum 2-year follow-up

HYPOTHESIS

The treatment of periprosthetic shoulder infections and proximal humerus osteomyelitis is challenging. The outcomes of antibiotic cement spacer retention are poorly defined in the literature. The purpose of this study was to review long-term functional and patient-reported outcomes data of patients with retained antibiotic cement spacers. We predict reasonable functional outcomes and minimal pain.

METHODS

We identified 22 patients of the senior author who have been treated with definitive antibiotic spacer placement. All patients were originally offered a 2-stage revision and declined. Twelve patients had a minimum follow-up of 2 years and were included in our cohort. Mean age was 70.7 (range 59-81), 8/12 patients were female, and the average body mass index was 27.8 (range = 17-45). Functional outcome assessments included the Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Score (QuickDASH), and visual analog scale (VAS) along with clinical range of motion examination.

RESULTS

The patients were followed up for a mean of 5.6 years. Eight patients had spacer placement for chronic shoulder arthroplasty infections, whereas 4 patients had spacer placement for chronic osteomyelitis of the proximal humerus. No patients were currently being treated with suppressive antibiotics. One patient had negative cultures at the time of antibiotic spacer placement. The most common organisms were Cutibacterium acnes (6), Staphylococcus epidermidis (6), and methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (4), with 4 patients growing more than 1 species. The average ASES score was 54 (range = 27-73), QuickDASH was 45 (range = 14-89), and VAS score 2.8 (range = 0-8). Average active range of motion was 68° of forward elevation and 35° of external rotation.

CONCLUSIONS

Retention of antibiotic cement spacer is a viable option in the treatment algorithm for chronic shoulder infections. Long-term antibiotic cement spacer may be considered for those patients who are unwilling or unable to undergo a 2-stage revision. Patients can expect a reasonable amount of function and little to no pain with an antibiotic cement spacer.

Revision shoulder arthroplasty: an analysis of indications and outcomes

BACKGROUND

We reviewed all revision operations performed by a single surgeon on previous hemi- and total shoulder arthroplasties from November 1987 to March 2005.

METHOD

Thirty-five patients' charts were reviewed to determine the causes of failures. In addition, their outcomes after the revision surgery were analyzed.

RESULTS

Overall, results were satisfactory in 71% by Neer criteria at a mean follow-up of 27.6 months. Outcomes were related to reason for failure. When failure was because of glenoid erosion, loosening, or humeral loosening, the mean improvement in forward elevation (FE) (28.9 degrees ) and external rotation (ER) (16.1 degrees ) was significantly better (P=.024 FE; P=.000 ER) than when the failure was because of infection, soft-tissue problems, or pain of undetermined origin (FE=-5.6 degrees ; ER=-6.8 degrees ).Likewise, UCLA scores in the first group were significantly better than in the second group (P=.003). In the first group, 16/18 patients were satisfied, while in the second group only 4/17 were satisfied.

CONCLUSION

Our data suggest that patients whose revisions are because of glenoid erosion or component loosening can expect to have better outcomes than those whose revisions are performed for infection, instability, or other soft-tissue problems.

The incidence and prognosis of osteosarcoma skip metastases

The poor prognosis for patients with osteosarcoma skip metastases has been established in the literature; however, most of the data in the literature concerning osteosarcoma skip metastases were collected before routine use of magnetic resonance imaging and before the use of modern multiagent chemotherapy regimens. This retrospective multiinstitutional study was done to evaluate the efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging to detect skip metastases and to evaluate the prognosis for these patients when treated with modern multiagent chemotherapy protocols. In a group of 155 patients who were younger than 26 years when diagnosed and treated for high-grade osteosarcoma of the long bones, 10 (6.5%) patients with skip metastases were identified. Eight of the 10 lesions were detected on pretreatment magnetic resonance imaging scans and two were detected only from the surgical pathology specimens. Five patients had concomitant pulmonary metastases at presentation and five patients had no other known site of diseases. All 10 patients died, with an average survival of 32.5 months (range 11-71 months). The five patients with only skip metastases at presentation survived an average of 27.2 months (range 15-44 months). Despite advances in the treatment of patients with osteosarcomas, those with skip metastases continue to have a poor prognosis, and they should be counseled regarding the limitations of current therapies.