Understanding the variables that are associated with failure to achieve an acceptable symptom state after reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundThe patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) was developed to improve the subjective interpretation of patient reported outcomes (PROs) and the minimum score necessary for the patient to “feel good.” The purpose of this study was to compare range of motion (ROM), final PROs, and individual responses on PROs between patients achieving or failing to meet a PASS after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA).MethodsA retrospective review of multi-center prospectively maintained database of RSAs between 2015 and 2018 was conducted. Primary RSAs with minimum 2-year follow-up were included. Patients were stratified into 2 groups by whether they achieved or failed to meet PASS scores at a minimum of 2 years of 76 for the ASES score or 75.5 for the SANE score. The primary goals of the study were to compare outcomes, range of motion (ROM) and individual ASES and WOOS survey responses for patients above and below the PASS score.Results87 patients were included. Using the ASES cutoff for PASS, 33% failed to meet a PASS while 45% failed to meet a PASS defined by the SANE. The most notable difference between patients above and below ASES PASS was a significant difference in VAS pain scores (3.1 vs. 0.3; P < .001). Overall, ROM was similar between patients above and below the ASES PASS, with slight, but statistically improved rotational motion in those achieving an ASES PASS (ER(90) 14 degrees improved, P = .005, IR(90) 10 degrees improved, P = .011). Similarly, patients failing to meet the SANE PASS had twice as high VAS pain scores (1.9 vs. 0.8; P = .017). Patients failing to meet the ASES PASS had almost universally statistically higher rates of reporting “very difficult” or “unable to do” for pain, ADL and work/sports questions on the ASES and globally more symptoms on every domain of questions for the WOOS. Similarly, for the PASS defined by SANE, patients reported higher levels of pain and dysfunction on nearly every question and domain of the ASES and WOOS.ConclusionsAt least one quarter of patients do not achieve a PASS after RSA. Pain appears to be the primary driver for this finding, while ROM is very similar between patients achieving or failing to meet a PASS regardless of PRO used to define the PASS. Patients who fail to achieve PASS after RSA report doing poorly in all domains of their outcome.Level of evidenceLevel III; Retrospective Comparative Study     

Outcomes of nonoperative management of acromial stress fractures after reverse shoulder arthroplasty

IntroductionAcromial stress fractures (ASF) and stress reactions (ASR) are common complications after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), and have been shown to compromise outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine the functional outcomes of patients with ASF and ASR treated nonoperatively.MethodsA total of 958 patients that underwent RSA were retrospectively reviewed. 43 (4.5%) were found to have ASF and 56 (5.7%) were found to have ASR. ASF were defined by tenderness over the acromion with identified fracture on radiographic imaging, and ASR was defined as tenderness without radiographic evidence of fracture. Functional outcomes were assessed via American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Simple Shoulder Test (SST) and VAS (Visual Analog scale) pain at a minimum of 2 years after RSA and one year from diagnosis of acromial pathology. The ASF patients were matched 3:1 to RSA controls without acromial pathology based on age, sex, indication, and implant.ResultsTwenty seven ASF and 35 ASR patients met inclusion criteria with a mean follow-up of 50.3 months after surgery (range: 24-108 months). Symptom onset after RSA occurred at 8.1 ± 8.9 months (range: 0.8-49.8) in ASFs and 7.5 ± 6.8 months (range: 1.0-41.3) in ASRs (P = .700). The ASF group included 20 (74%) females with an average age of 71.8 years, and the ASR group included 30 (86%) females with an average age of 72.9 years. ASF patients had inferior outcomes compared to controls in ASES (57.8 vs. 76.0, P = .001), SANE (59.1 vs. 78.8, P = .001), SST (5.1 vs. 7.5, P = .001), and VAS (3.3 vs. 1.2, P = .002). Additionally, ASF patients had significantly worse scores compared to ASR patients by VAS Pain (3.3 vs 1.7, P = .020), ASES (57.8 vs. 76.7, P = .001), SANE (59.1 vs. 81.1, P = .001), and SST (5.1 vs. 7.5, P = .001). Patients with ASR had comparable pain and function to controls in ASES (P = .858), SANE (P = .508), SST (P = .956), and VAS (P = .264) scores. Twenty-one (77.7%) ASF patients experienced fracture displacement and 13 (48.1%) went on to nonunion.ConclusionEarly follow-up of patients treated nonsurgically for ASF after RSA demonstrated worse pain and function compared to controls. The majority demonstrated further displacement after diagnosis and almost half developed a nonunion. Patients with ASR experienced temporary dysfunction with little impact on final outcome. Strategies to prevent and treat ASFs remain an area in need of innovation.Level of evidenceLevel IV; Case series     

Utilization of reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of glenohumeral arthritis among American Board of Orthopaedic Surgery (ABOS) Part II candidates, 2008-2019

BackgroundDespite advances in shoulder arthroplasty, treatment options for advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) remain limited. Surgical management includes total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), and hemiarthroplasty. The rates of TSA and RSA for the treatment of GHOA in the United States has increased in recent years. Trends in shoulder arthroplasty in recently trained surgeons have not been explored. The purpose of the study was to examine the trends in arthroplasty use (TSA, RSA, and hemiarthroplasty) for primary GHOA among American Board of Orthopedic Surgeons (ABOS) Part II examinees, and to identify patterns based on geographic region or fellowship training.MethodsABOS Part II examinees with at least 1 shoulder arthroplasty in the examination years 2008-2019 were collected. Hemiarthroplasty, TSA, and RSA performed from 2007-2018 for a diagnosis of primary GHOA were included. Arthroplasty for primary or secondary diagnoses of fracture, infection, tumor, rotator cuff arthropathy or tear, revision, and non-arthroplasty procedures were excluded. Proportion and volume of cases were evaluated, with sub-analyses of geographic region and fellowship training. Univariate logistic regression determined statistical significance (P< .05).ResultsA total of 946,946 cases from 8609 ABOS Part II examinees were submitted, with 8733 shoulder arthroplasties performed. Overall, 3923 arthroplasties for primary GHOA were included (44.9% of all shoulder arthroplasties). TSA was used in 50.9% of cases. The proportion of RSA performed for primary GHOA has increased over the past 11 years, with RSA surpassing TSA as the most common procedure for primary GHOA over the last 4 years (P< .001). Hemiarthroplasty is less commonly. TSA and RSA were performed in similar proportions across regions, with the largest volume in the Midwest. Most procedures (91.5%) were completed by surgeons in sports medicine, shoulder and elbow, and those completing multiple fellowships. From 2008-2019 the number of RSA procedures performed for primary GHOA by sports medicine and shoulder and elbow surgeons has increased approximately 1100% and 800%, respectively (P< .001).ConclusionUtilization of RSA for treatment of primary GHOA by ABOS Part II examinees has increased significantly over the past twelve years. Among ABOS Part II examinees, RSA has recently surpassed TSA as the most common arthroplasty utilized for treatment of primary GHOA. Examination of early-career surgical practice allows for consideration of training influence in treatment of GHOA. As volume of shoulder arthroplasty continues to increase, trends and procedure volume have implications for clinical practice and patient outcomes.Level of EvidenceLevel IV; Case-series Database Study     

The influence of mental health on outcomes following total shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundAnxiety and depression symptoms have been associated with higher pain and lower functional scores in patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA). The influence of mental health on outcomes following total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for GHOA has not been fully investigated .MethodsThis observational cohort study included 143 shoulders in 135 subjects undergoing TSA for GHOA. Preoperative imaging was assessed for glenoid wear pattern. Patients completed preoperative and postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Visual Analog Pain Scale (VAS), and PROMIS Upper Extremity (UE), Physical Function (PF), and Pain Interference (PI) scores. The Western Ontario Osteoarthritis Score (WOOS) was collected postoperatively. Mean postoperative pain and functional scores, improvement from preoperative scores, and surgical regret were compared between varying severity of anxiety or depression and pattern of glenoid wear.ResultsCompared to subjects without anxiety, those with moderate-to-severe anxiety reported worse postoperative ASES (p=0.019), WOOS (p<0.01) and PROMIS UE (p=0.02) and higher PROMIS PI scores (p<0.01). Compared to those without depression, those with moderate-to-severe depression reported worse postoperative ASES and WOOS and higher VAS and PROMIS Pain scores (p<0.01). Linear regression showed that anxiety and concentric glenoid wear were associated with worse postoperative PROMIS scores. There were no significant differences in pre-to-postoperative improvement in any outcome measures among those with and without anxiety or depression. Patients with moderate-to-severe depression were less likely to want to undergo the same procedure again (p=0.035).DiscussionPatients with anxiety and depression report similar improvements in pain and function following TSA similar to those without depression or anxiety. Despite the similar improvement, those with moderate-to-severe depression and anxiety symptoms reported persistently lower functional and higher pain scores. Though most patients are satisfied following TSA, those with moderate-to-severe depression may be more likely to regret undergoing surgery. Future studies should identify mental health symptoms preoperatively and evaluate the effect of preoperative intervention on postoperative outcomes following TSA.     

The effect of humeral stem alignment in reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundThe impact of stem alignment on hip arthroplasty outcomes has been thoroughly evaluated, but there is limited data assessing this relationship in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). In this study, we investigated the association of humeral stem alignment with patient outcomes following RSA.MethodsUsing our prospectively maintained institutional registry, we identified patients who underwent reverse shoulder arthroplasty between July 2015 and September 2017 with minimum 2-year follow-up. Two raters independently assessed stem alignment using full-length humeral view radiographs. Stem alignment was correlated to American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score, range of motion, complications, and scapular notching at 2-year follow-up.ResultsOf the 117 patients that fit our inclusion criteria, 68 (58%) had neutral or valgus alignment and 49 (42%) had varus alignment. ASES score, VAS pain score, range of motion, complications, and scapular notching showed no differences between the 2 cohorts at 2-years postoperatively. Change (mean, SD) in ASES scores (52.5 ± 17.7 vs. 41.3 ± 21.2, P = .01) and VAS pain scores (−5.7 ± 2.5 vs. −4.6 ± 2.6, P = .02) were greater in the neutral/valgus cohort compared to the varus cohort. Demographics analysis revealed that the neutral or valgus cohort had a larger female population (74% vs. 59%, P < .01) while men were more likely to be in the varus cohort.ConclusionHumeral stem alignment does not appear to affect clinical outcomes at 2-years postoperatively. Improvement in ASES score and VAS pain score were slightly inferior in varus patients, however this difference was not clinically relevant. There may be a correlation between male gender and varus alignment, likely due to better bone quality and larger musculature. Further investigation into the association between stem angulation and clinical outcomes is warranted.Levels of EvidenceLevel III; Retrospective Cohort Study.     

Clinical and patient-reported outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty in patients receiving Social Security Disability Insurance or workers’ compensation

BackgroundEvidence suggests that reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) patients receiving workers’ compensation (WC) have worse patient-reported outcomes (PROs) than those not receiving WC. It is unknown whether Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) recipients also have worse outcomes of RSA. Our goals were to (1) compare PROs and range of motion (ROM) after RSA according to whether patients were receiving SSDI, WC, or neither form of assistance, and (2) identify factors associated with poor PROs.MethodsFrom a US institutional database of 454 patients who underwent RSA from January 2009 through December 2016, we identified 19 SSDI recipients and 25 WC recipients. From the same database, we created a control group of 81 patients not receiving SSDI or WC, matched by demographic variables. Between groups, we compared age, sex, operative arm dominance, preoperative diagnosis, number of previous shoulder surgeries, primary or revision arthroplasty, and Charlson Comorbidity Index value. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively by physical examination, including range of motion, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, L'Insalata score, Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) score. Significance was set at P< .05. Clinical relevance of improvements in forward flexion and abduction, VAS for pain, ASES, and SST were evaluated using established minimal clinically important difference (MCID) values.ResultsBoth the SSDI and WC groups experienced statistically significant improvements from preoperatively to postoperatively; these improvements exceeded MCID thresholds for forward flexion and abduction, VAS for pain, ASES (except in WC group), and SST score (all, P< .05). These outcomes were not significantly different between the SSDI and WC groups. Compared with the control group, both the SSDI and WC groups had statistically significantly worse outcomes for these same measures. The only factor associated with poor clinical outcomes was having undergone ≥2 previous surgical procedures on the same shoulder for which RSA was performed in both SSDI (odds ratio = 2.4, 95% confidence interval: 1.0-5.4) and WC (odds ratio = 1.6, 95% confidence interval: 1.1-4.5) groups.ConclusionAmong RSA patients, SSDI recipients did not have worse clinical outcomes than WC recipients. Having undergone ≥2 previous procedures on the same shoulder was associated with poor outcomes in both groups. These findings should be considered when determining the appropriateness of RSA for SSDI and WC recipients.Level of evidenceLevel III; Retrospective Cohort Comparison; Treatment Study     

Failure rates and outcomes after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty are equivalent irrespective of subscapularis repair technique

BackgroundSubscapularis management during total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) remains an area of debate. Although subscapularis-sparing techniques exist, most TSAs are performed through a deltopectoral interval with the subscapularis released and repaired. A paucity of literature exists comparing transosseous repair (TOR) with direct primary tendon repair (PTR) of a subscapularis tenotomy. Our study compared outcomes after TOR and PTR in patients undergoing anatomic TSA.MethodsThis retrospective study included patients who underwent primary anatomic TSA through a deltopectoral approach with subscapularis tenotomy using either PTR or TOR for repair. Outcome measures included subscapularis failure rates, visual analog scale (VAS) scores, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) survey scores, internal rotation range of motion and strength, complications, and reoperation rates at 3 months, 1 year, and 2 years.ResultsInstitutional database query identified 306 patients who had primary anatomic TSA, 114 of whom had PTR and 192 TOR. Postoperative ASES and VAS scores were significantly improved at all time points in both groups compared with the preoperative scores (P < .001). Average active internal rotation was significantly improved at all time points in the PTR group (P < .001). In the TOR group, significant improvement was noted at 1 and 2 years but not at 3 months. Overall, subscapularis failure occurred in 13 patients, and complications that did not require surgery were noted in 28 patients. Reoperation was performed in 18 patients. However, subscapularis failures, complications not requiring surgery, and reoperations were not significantly different between the two groups. The difference in average internal rotation range of motion between the TOR and PTR groups was statistically significant at 3 months (P = .015) but not at 1 year (P = .265), although the difference trended toward significance again at the 2-year mark (P = .080). No significant differences were noted between the two groups in internal rotation strength, VAS scores, and ASES averages.ConclusionBoth transosseous and primary soft-tissue repair techniques after subscapularis tenotomy result in good outcomes after primary anatomic TSA. No differences were found between groups regarding clinical subscapularis failure rate, internal rotation range of motion or strength, VAS, or ASES scores at 2-year follow-up.Level of evidenceLevel III, Retrospective Comparative Study     

Is there a threshold of preoperative function that predicts failure to achieve clinically significant outcomes after total and reverse shoulder arthroplasty?

BackgroundThe purpose of this study was to determine if there is a threshold of preoperative function that is predictive of postoperative outcomes and the likelihood of achieving clinically significant outcomes following shoulder arthroplasty (SA).MethodsWe retrospectively identified patients who underwent a primary SA at our institution. Patients with preoperative and postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores (ASES) were included in our analysis. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was utilized to reach a preoperative ASES threshold correlated with achievement of the following clinically significant outcomes: minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptom state. This analysis was performed for our entire SA cohort and subanalyzed for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Fischer exact tests were used to analyze categorical data while continuous data were analyzed using t-tests. For the ROC, area under the curve (AUC) was calculated, along with bootstrap 95% confidence intervals and P values, with <0.05 as significant.ResultsA total of 516 patients were included (164 TSA and 352 RSA). ROC analysis yielded a preoperative ASES above 54 as predictive of failure to achieve MCID for all SAs (AUC, 0.77; P < .001), above 49 for TSA (AUC 0.74, P < .001), and above 56 for RSA (AUC 0.79, P < .001). Patients with preoperative ASES scores above 54 were significantly less likely to achieve MCID (odds ratio 5.1, P < .001) and SCB (odds ratio 7.2, P < .001); however, they had higher postoperative ASES scores (84 vs. 78, P < .001). A preoperative ASES score of 73 corresponded to a 50% chance of achieving MCID. ROC analysis also yielded a preoperative ASES score above 51 as predictive of failure to achieve SCB for all SA, TSA, and RSA (AUC: 0.79, 0.78, and 0.80, respectively, all P < .001). A preop ASES score of 52 corresponded to a 50% chance of achieving SCB.ConclusionPreoperative ASES scores above 49-56 are predictive of failure to achieve MCID and SCB following TSA and RSA. Although patients above these preoperative thresholds achieve higher absolute ASES scores at the final follow-up, they experienced less relative improvement from baseline. This will help surgeons counsel individual patients about appropriate expectations after arthroplasty.     

Can the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty provide as good of an outcome as an anatomic shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundReverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is an excellent treatment option for a variety of shoulder pathologies. Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) remains an excellent treatment for patients with glenohumeral arthritis and a functioning rotator cuff. RTSA has become a much more common procedure than TSA in recent times. It is currently unclear if patients who have a good outcome following TSA outperform patients who have a good outcome following RTSA. The purpose of this study was to compare the 2-year outcomes of patients with good outcomes, defined as having forward flexion of >130° and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score of >70, following TSA and RTSA.MethodsAll patients who underwent TSA or RTSA between 2015 and 2019 with minimum 2-year follow-up were eligible for inclusion. Patients were included if their postoperative forward flexion was >130° and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was >70. Patients were excluded if they were a revision surgery, were treated with an arthroplasty for fracture, or had a latissimus transfer. Demographic variables were analyzed between groups. Range of motion (ROM), strength, and patient-reported outcome (PRO) scores were compared between groups.ResultsOverall, 318 TSAs were included; 155 (49%) met the criteria for a “good” outcome. Among RTSAs, 428 were included; 154 (36%) met the criteria for a “good” outcome. When comparing PROs between groups, RTSA patients had worse preoperative and postoperative PRO scores (all P < .05). When comparing preoperative physical examination findings, RTSA patients had worse ROM and strength (all P < .05) and worse Constant Power scores and Constant scores (P < .001 in both cases). Postoperatively, RTSA patients had worse ROM and strength (all P < .05) and worse Constant scores (P = .028). The magnitude of change (delta) from preoperative to postoperative function was often greater following RTSA than TSA. There were no significant differences in whether expectations were met or exceeded between RTSA and TSA patients in regards to pain control (99% vs. 98%; P = .177), motion and strength (93% vs. 96%; P = .559), ability to return to activities of daily living (98% vs. 99%; P = .333), or return to sporting activities (95% vs. 91%; P = .268).ConclusionPatients do well following both TSA and RTSA. In patients who have a good outcome following either TSA or RTSA, those patients who underwent TSA have superior outcomes to patients following RTSA. However, the change in outcome scores from pre- to post-surgery is often more significant with RTSA, as they often start out with worse motion and clinical scores.     

Minimum clinically important difference for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score after revision shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundPatients undergoing revision total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) typically achieve smaller improvements in outcome measurements than those undergoing primary TSA. The minimum clinically important difference (MCID) in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) questionnaire for primary shoulder arthroplasty ranges from 13.6 to 20.9, but the MCID for revision shoulder arthroplasty remains unclear. This study aims to define the MCID in ASES score for revision TSA and ascertain patient factors that affect achieving the MCID threshold.MethodsPatients were identified from an institutional shoulder arthroplasty database. Prospective data collected included demographic variables, prior shoulder surgeries, primary and revision implants, indication for revision, and pre- and postoperative ASES scores. All patients provided informed consent to participate. An anchor-based method was used with a binary answer choice. The MCID was calculated using the receiver-operator curve (ROC) method, and the sensitivity, specificity, and area under the curve were obtained from the ROC. MCID values were compared between groups using Student's t-test. Multivariate logistic regression modeling was used to determine significant predictors for reaching MCID. Significance was defined as P< .05.ResultsA total of 46 patients underwent revision TSA with minimum 2-year follow-up. The MCID using ROC method was 16.7 with 71% sensitivity and 62% specificity. There was a trend toward males being more likely to reach MCID after revision arthroplasty (P= .058). There were also trends toward increased forward flexion and abduction range of motion in patients who met MCID (P= .08, P= .07). Multivariate logistic regression modeling demonstrated male sex to be associated with achieving MCID (P= .03), while younger age and fewer prior shoulder surgeries demonstrated a trend to association with achieving MCID (P= .06, P= .10).ConclusionThe MCID for ASES score in patients undergoing revision shoulder arthroplasty is similar to previously reported MCID values for patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty. Younger, male patients with fewer prior shoulder surgeries were more likely to achieve MCID after revision TSA.Level of EvidenceLevel III; Retrospective Comparative Treatment Study     

Outcomes after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with long-term disability claims

BackgroundStudies have shown that patients with workers' compensation claims have worse clinical outcomes after various orthopedic procedures. This study aimed to determine the influence of disability status on 2-year clinical outcomes after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA).MethodsReview of an institutional database identified patients on disability with a minimum of 2-year follow-up and compared them to a comorbidity-matched cohort of patients without disability claims. Assessments between patients included preoperative and postoperative Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores, strength, range of motion (ROM), and postoperative complications.ResultsForty-eight shoulders (45 patients) were in the ATSA cohort (24 with disability, 24 without disability) and 46 shoulders (45 patients) in the RTSA cohort (23 with disability, 23 without disability). Patients in the ATSA cohort with disability claims had higher 3-month and 2-year VAS scores (4 vs. 1, P = .003; 4 vs. 1, P = .02, respectively), lower 2-year ASES scores (58 vs. 87, P = .015), and decreased forward elevation ROM and internal rotation ROM (150 vs. 170, P = .017; 60 vs. 62.5, P = .024, respectively) compared to the cohort without disability. Significant differences in baseline values also were noted between cohorts (lower preoperative ASES: 31.7 vs. 40.5, P = .033; higher VAS: 7 vs. 6, P = .03; decreased forward elevation ROM: 90 vs. 110, P = .02). Patients in the RTSA cohort with disability claims had higher 3-month and 2-year VAS (5 vs. 1, P = .02; 3 vs. 0.5, P = .04, respectively) scores than those without claims. The baseline values for the disability cohort with RTSA demonstrated lower ASES (22.1 vs. 43.6, P = .005) and higher VAS (8 vs. 4, P = .004) scores. No significant differences were noted in improvement for the ATSA or RTSA cohorts in any parameter. The ATSA with disability cohort had a higher complication rate (45% vs. 16.6%, P = .0299). No differences were noted in complication rates in the RTSA group.ConclusionPatients who have reported disability status demonstrated worse outcomes after ATSA and RTSA compared to patients without disability claims. However, there was no significant difference in the amount of change in outcomes between groups, indicating that patients on disability can still realize significant improvements after shoulder arthroplasty.     

High prevalence of early stress shielding in stemless shoulder arthroplasty

IntroductionThe rates of early stress shielding in stemless total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in current literature are very low and inconsistent with our observations. We hypothesized that the incidence of early stress shielding in stemless TSA would be higher than previously reported.MethodsAll stemless TSA in a prospective database using a single humeral implant comprised the study cohort of 104 patients, of which 76.0% (79 patients) had a minimum one year radiographic and clinical follow-up. Radiographs were reviewed for humeral stress shielding, humeral radiolucent lines, and humeral or glenoid loosening/migration. Stress shielding and radiolucent lines were classified by location. Demographics and clinical outcomes, including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score and visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, were compared between patient cohorts with and without stress shielding.ResultsAt one year, 41.8% of patients had humeral stress shielding. Medial calcar osteolysis was seen in 32.9% of all patients and 78.8% of the stress shielding cohort. There were no cases of radiolucent lines or humeral or glenoid loosening/migration. There was no significant difference in age between cohorts (P = .308), but there were significantly more females (P = .034) and lower body mass index in the stress shielding cohort (P = .004). There were no significant differences in preoperative ASES (P = .246) or VAS scores (P = .402) or postoperative ASES (P = .324) or VAS scores (P = .323).ConclusionStress shielding in stemless TSA is more prevalent than previously published, largely due to infrequently reported medial calcar osteolysis. Stress shielding is more common in women and patients with lower body mass index. At early follow-up there were no significantly worse outcomes in the stress shielding cohort, but longer-term follow-up is needed to fully understand the impact of stress shielding on function and stability.     

Arthroscopic glenoid removal for aseptic loosening in total shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundGlenoid loosening is the most common long-term complication of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and frequently necessitates revision. Though arthroscopic glenoid removal is an accepted treatment option for glenoid loosening, there is a paucity of outcomes literature available. The purpose of this study was to report the long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of arthroscopic glenoid removal for failed or loosened glenoid component in TSA. We hypothesized that arthroscopic glenoid removal would produce acceptable clinical and patient-reported outcomes while limiting the need for further revisions.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of 11 consecutive patients undergoing 12 arthroscopic glenoid removals for symptomatic glenoid loosening by a single orthopedic surgeon between March 2005 and March 2018. Indication for arthroscopic glenoid removal included symptomatic glenoid loosening with radiographic evidence of a 1-2 mm radiolucent line around the glenoid. Shoulder range of motion, functionality (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test), and pain (visual analog scale [VAS]) were evaluated. Radiographs were assessed for glenohumeral subluxation, humeral superior migration, and glenohumeral offset following glenoid removal.ResultsThe mean follow-up period since arthroscopic glenoid removal was 55 months (range, 20-172 months). Glenoid component removal significantly reduced forward elevation, with a mean decrease from 147 ± 13° preoperatively to 127 ± 29° postoperatively (P= .031). However, there was no significant change in external rotation (44 ± 9° vs. 43 ± 19°; P= .941) or internal rotation (L4 vs. L4; P= .768). Importantly, glenoid removal significantly decreased VAS pain scores from 7 ± 3 preoperatively to 5 ± 3 postoperatively (P= .037). Additionally, improvement in ASES approached statistical significance, increasing from 33 ± 25 preoperatively to 53 ± 28 postoperatively (P= .055). With regard to radiographic outcomes, there was no evidence of glenohumeral subluxation and humeral superior migration developed in 1 patient. However, there was significant medialization of the greater tuberosity relative to the acromion, with a mean lateral offset of 6 ± 7 mm preoperatively and −2 ± 4 mm postoperatively (P= .002). Two patients required conversion to reverse TSA for persistent pain. There were no complications.DiscussionThese findings suggest that arthroscopic glenoid removal for symptomatic glenoid loosening is a viable option to improve pain while limiting the need for additional reoperations and decreasing the risks associated with revision arthroplasty. However, continual follow-up to monitor medialization is recommended.Level of EvidenceLevel IV; Case Series; Treatment Study     

Humeral osteophyte size and clinical outcomes after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundThe severity of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (PGOA) has been associated with advanced radiographic findings including inferior humeral head osteophytes. The primary objective of this study is to analyze for any correlation between the size of the inferior humeral head osteophyte and functional outcomes in patients undergoing anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for PGOA.MethodsA retrospective review of a multi-surgeon database was performed to identify all patients with PGOA from 2015 to 2019 with a minimum of two-year clinical follow-up. Preoperative anteroposterior and Grashey views were used for all included patients to obtain measurements of the inferior humeral osteophyte. Two groups at the extremes of osteophyte width were identified: 1) patients with absent or minimal osteophytes (lowest quartile of width, < 4.9 mm) and those with large osteophytes (highest quartile of width, > 10.1 mm). Change in active range of motion (ROM) from baseline, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), strength and complications were assessed at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively and compared between the two groups.ResultsDemographics were similar for the large osteophyte group (n = 57) and small osteophyte group (n = 56). There was a higher percentage of patients with more significant glenoid deformity in the large osteophyte group compared to the small osteophyte group (P = .009 for A1 deltoid). The large osteophyte group had significantly more restricted preoperative ROM for all measures (P < .05 for all). There were no significant differences in final ROM achieved between the two groups. Patients in the large osteophyte group had greater improvement from baseline for external rotation at the side (31° vs 21°, P = .015), external rotation at 90° abduction (38° vs 20°, P = .004), and internal rotation at 90° abduction (30° vs 12°, P < .001) compared to the small osteophyte group. Overall, there were very few differences between the small and large osteophyte groups in final PROs, with the exception of a higher American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score in the large osteophyte group (90.8 vs 85.9, P = .048).ConclusionPatients with large humeral osteophytes have significantly greater restrictions in preoperative ROM compared to patients with small osteophytes. Patients with large osteophytes experience greater improvements in rotational motion after anatomic TSA compared to patients with small osteophytes, although the final ROM achieved was similar between groups. Overall, PROs after anatomic TSA were similar between patients with small and large osteophytes preoperatively.     

The effect of an early mobilization rehabilitation protocol on outcomes after reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundGiven the continued growth of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), it is important to optimize factors that contribute to successful outcomes. Rehabilitation after RSA is critical to achieve successful outcomes including patient function and satisfaction; however, the ideal rehabilitation program has not been established. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of early mobilization (EM) compared with delayed mobilization (DM) on outcomes and function after RSA.MethodsA retrospective study of prospectively collected data was performed comparing 67 patients who underwent RSA in two groups: the EM group began a rehabilitation program immediately after surgery, and the DM group began after 4-6 weeks postoperatively. Preoperative and postoperative Constant shoulder score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Penn Shoulder Score (PSS), shoulder satisfaction value as well as demographics, opioid usage, range of motion, 90-day complications, reoperation, and readmission rates were collected. Statistical analysis was performed between each group’s outcomes and for the change (delta) of outcomes from baseline to each postoperative time point.ResultsAt 6 weeks postoperatively, the EM group showed significantly higher scores in ASES function, PSS, active forward elevation, passive forward elevation, active external rotation, and passive external rotation. There was significantly lower narcotic usage in the EM group at 6 weeks. At 3 months postoperatively, the EM group showed a lower numerical rating score for pain and higher active forward elevation. At the last follow-up, there was a lower numerical rating score and greater degree for all ranges of motion for the EM group than that for the DM group. A greater change from baseline to 6 weeks postoperatively was seen for the EM group in shoulder satisfaction value, ASES function, PSS, active forward elevation, passive forward elevation, and internal rotation. From baseline to 3 months postoperatively, ASES pain, PSS, active forward elevation, and passive forward elevation improved significantly in the EM group. At the final follow-up, active forward elevation increased greater for the EM group. There were 3 complications (2 hematomas and 1 infection) in the DM group and none in the EM group.ConclusionThe EM rehabilitation protocol after RSA achieved lower opioid usage at 6 weeks, lower pain scores at each time point, and better range of motion during the final follow-up than DM protocol. There were no complications reported with the EM protocol, suggesting it is a safe alternative for postoperative recovery. Orthopedic surgeons should consider the EM rehabilitation protocol after RSA.     

Shoulder arthroplasty in patients with ipsilateral hemiparesis: a safe and durable procedure? A case series

HypothesisShoulder arthroplasty is a safe and durable procedure that provides pain relief, improved range of motion (ROM), and minimal complications for shoulder pain and dysfunction in patients with ipsilateral hemiparesis.MethodsThis is a retrospective review of all adult patients who underwent primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) or total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in the hemiparetic upper extremity at a single quaternary care academic medical center from 1988 to 2019. Patients were excluded if their neurologic insult was secondary to a spinal-cord injury, cerebral palsy, or inflammatory arthritis, if they underwent a hemiarthroplasty, if they exhibited mild hemiparesis (Medical Research Council Scale of ≥4), or if they had less than 30 days of radiographic follow-up. The primary clinical outcome was revision surgery for any reason. The secondary clinical outcomes included pain using the visual analog scale, ROM via active-assisted manual muscle testing (AAROM), and postoperative complications. The primary radiographic outcome was implant lucency using a standard scale.ResultsA total of 5 shoulders in 5 patients were included, 4 RSAs and 1 TSA with a mean clinical follow-up of 6.2 years (range: 1.42-14.2 years) and mean radiographic follow-up of 3.7 years (range: 31 days-13.5 years). No patient underwent revision surgery. The mean visual analog scale score significantly improved from 7.6 to 1.4 at the last follow-up (P = .005). The mean forward elevation AAROM improved from 27° preoperatively to 88° at the last follow-up (P = .015). There was no significant difference in external rotation at the last follow-up (P = .105). One patient had asymptomatic grade 1 glenoid component lucency with superior subluxation of the humerus after undergoing TSA at a final follow-up of 4.5 years. No other complications were reported.ConclusionShoulder arthroplasty is a durable procedure that provides pain relief, improved AAROM, and minimal complications in patients with ipsilateral hemiparesis. The increase in active-assisted forward elevation ROM can improve caregiver ease with hygiene and dressing. Patients in this study who underwent RSA did not have subsequent glenohumeral dislocation. Larger numbers of patients would be required for adequate power analysis regarding instability in this cohort of patients who may be at risk; our small series did not identify any instability events.Level of evidenceLevel IV; Treatment Study     

Defining maximal outcome improvement thresholds for patient satisfaction after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a minimum two-year follow-up study

BackgroundPrevious research has investigated the percentage of maximal outcome improvement (MOI) for the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Simple Shoulder Test scores after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA); however, few other outcome scores have been validated. The purpose of this study was to establish thresholds of MOI percentage for the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) and subjective Constant-Murley (Constant) scores associated with patient satisfaction at 2 years following rTSA.MethodsA retrospective review of institutional registry data for all patients who underwent primary rTSA between 09/2016 and 02/2018 was performed. All patients completed the ASES, SANE, and Constant outcome measures preoperatively and at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively. Changes were assessed with Wilcoxon signed-rank tests. MOI percentage was defined as the score improvement from baseline divided by the highest possible improvement from baseline based on the maximum value of the outcome score used. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses were used to determine optimal MOI percentage thresholds associated with postoperative satisfaction. Stepwise multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify variables associated with achieving the MOI.ResultsA total of 105 patients were included in the final analysis, with a mean (±standard deviation) age of 70.0 ± 7.5 years and BMI of 28.9 ± 5.6 kg/m². The majority of patients were satisfied postoperatively (81.0%). Statistically significant increases were observed from baseline to 2 years postoperatively for the outcome measures assessed (P < .001 for all). ROC analysis demonstrated that the optimal MOI percentage threshold for achieving satisfaction was 66.9% for ASES ([Area under curve, AUC]: 0.87), 71.0% for SANE (AUC: 0.89), and 37.5% for Constant (AUC: 0.85). The linear regression model fit between the proportion of satisfied patients and the calculated MOI percentages was moderate for SANE (r² = 0.313, P < .001) and weak for Constant (r² = 0.228, P < .001). Multivariate logistic regression demonstrated that comorbid diabetes was associated with a decreased likelihood of MOI achievement for SANE ([Odds Ratio, OR]: 0.66, P = .020) and Constant (OR: 0.72, P = .027). Preoperative diagnosis of rotator cuff arthropathy (OR: 0.84, P = 0.049) was associated with a decreased likelihood of MOI achievement for Constant. No factors were significantly associated with MOI achievement for ASES.ConclusionAchieving 66.9%, 71.0%, and 37.5% of the MOI for the ASES, SANE, and Constant scores is associated with postoperative satisfaction following rTSA. Comorbid diabetes and diagnosis of rotator cuff arthropathy were significantly associated with a decreased likelihood of MOI achievement.Level of evidenceLevel III; Retrospective Case Series (Prognostic)     

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty for patients with preserved preoperative motion

BackgroundFor patients with end-stage glenohumeral osteoarthritis, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) serves as a reliable option for pain relief and improving function. It is not well understood if patients with pain due to osteoarthritis but preserved preoperative active range of motion (ROM) experience a similar postoperative benefit compared with those with more pronounced preoperative ROM deficits.MethodsA multicenter shoulder arthroplasty registry was queried to identify all patients who underwent TSA with minimum 2-year clinical follow-up. These patients were separated into two cohorts: (1) preserved preoperative active motion, defined as both forward flexion (FF) and external rotation (ER) at the side a minimum of one standard deviation greater than the mean (>140° FF and >45° ER), and (2) a control group with restrictions in preoperative motion, defined by both preoperative FF < 140° and ER < 45°. Controls were matched 2:1 to study patients by preoperative visual analog pain scale ± 1.5 points, sex, and age ± 2 years. Outcome measures were patient-reported outcomes, active ROM, and strength and satisfaction at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively.ResultsThirty patients were identified in the preserved preoperative motion group (mean baseline 154 ± 10° FF and 57 ± 11° ER). Sixty control patients with restricted motion were matched (mean baseline 97 ± 24° FF and 23 ± 16° ER). There were no significant differences in other baseline patient characteristics other than the Constant-Murley score and strength. At 2-year follow-up, there were no significant differences in visual analog pain scale (0.8 vs. 1.1, P = .446), all patient-reported outcomes, or any ROM measures other than FF which was higher in the preserved group (158 ± 15° vs. 146 ± 19°, P = .003). The change in ROM was significantly higher for all ROM measurements in the restricted motion cohort with restricted preoperative motion compared with study patients. Patients with restricted motion had a significantly greater increase in Constant scores than those with preserved motion (32.6 vs. 19.0, P < .001). There were no significant differences in rates of patients who were satisfied with their surgical result for all domains assessed between groups.ConclusionPatients undergoing TSA with preserved preoperative active ROM can expect similar final pain levels and improvement in pain compared with patients with greater limitations in preoperative ROM. As expected, patients with more restricted preoperative ROM have substantially greater improvement in ROM after TSA. However, there are no differences in satisfaction at 2 years after TSA regardless of preoperative active ROM.Level of evidenceLevel III; Retrospective Cohort Comparison; Treatment Study     

Clinical and radiographic results of eccentric glenoid reaming in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundOne option for treating glenoid bone loss in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is eccentric reaming of the glenoid, but the effect on clinical results is unclear. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between medialization of the bone-baseplate interface (herein, ‘medialization’) caused by eccentric reaming of the glenoid and scapular notching, baseplate loosening, and clinical outcomes after RSA.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed data for 91 patients who underwent primary RSA between January 2014 and December 2016 with a lateralized implant and a minimum 2-year follow-up. The amount of medialization was estimated using a 3-dimensional computed tomography scan-based computer planning software. The average amount of medialization estimated by the 3-dimensional planning software was 3.4 mm (range, 0.5-10 mm). Outcomes included range of motion (ROM), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and the rates of scapular notching and baseplate loosening. The association between the estimated medialization and the outcomes of interest was evaluated using multivariate models.ResultsAfter controlling for age, sex, diagnosis, subscapularis repair, glenosphere size, and baseline ROM, medialization was not associated with the postoperative abduction (P = .35), external rotation (ER) at 90° (P = .16), internal rotation at 90° (P = .08), and internal rotation at the back (P = .06). However, we found a significant association between medialization and postoperative ER at the side (P = .02). According to the multivariate model, for a 1-mm increase in medialization during surgery, a decrease of 1.6° in postoperative ER would be expected. We found no association between medialization and the postoperative ASES score (P = .48), SST score (P = .59), or VAS score (P = .27). At a minimum of 2 years of follow-up, we found no baseplate loosening or radiographic signs of baseplate loosening in any patient. Scapular notching of grades 1 to 2 was observed in 22 patients (24%). We were not able to detect a difference in scapular notching when medialization was > 1 mm ver when medialization ≤ 1 mm (odds ratio, 2.5; 95% confidence interval: 0.28-23).ConclusionsIncreasing medialization due to eccentric reaming after RSA with a lateralized implant was associated with a decrease in postoperative ER at the side. However, increasing medialization was not associated with worse patient-reported outcome scores or increased baseplate loosening at short-term follow-up.