Anatomic vs. reverse shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis with intact rotator cuff: a retrospective comparison of patient-reported outcomes using the systems outcomes database with up to 5-year follow-up

BackgroundThe growing enthusiasm for the use of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) with an intact rotator cuff is based on data derived from single-center studies with limited generalizability and follow-up. This study compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) between RSA and total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for the treatment of primary GHOA with up to 5-year follow-up and examined temporal trends in the treatment of GHOA between 2012 and 2021.MethodsA retrospective review was performed on patients with primary GHOA undergoing primary arthroplasty surgery from the Surgical Outcomes System global registry between 2012 and 2021. PROs including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, and visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were compared between RSA and TSA at 1, 2, and 5 years postoperatively.ResultsA total of 4451 patients were included, with 2693 (60.5%) undergoing TSA and 1758 (39.5%) undergoing RSA. Both RSA and TSA provided clinically excellent outcomes at 1 year postoperatively (ASES: 80.8 ± 17.9 vs. 85.9 ± 15.2, respectively; SANE: 74.8 ± 24.7 vs. 79.5 ± 22.9; VAS pain: 1.3 ± 2.0 vs. 1.1 ± 1.7; all P < .05) that were maintained at 2 years (ASES: 81.3 ± 19.3 vs. 87.3 ± 14.9; SANE: 74.8 ± 26.2 vs. 79.7 ± 24.7; VAS pain: 1.3 ± 2.1 vs. 1.0 ± 1.6; all P < .05) and 5 years (ASES: 81.7 ± 16.5 vs. 86.9 ± 15.3; SANE: 71.6 ± 28.5 vs. 78.2 ± 25.9; VAS pain: 1.0 ± 1.7 vs. 1.0 ± 1.7; all P < .05), with statistical significance favoring TSA. After controlling for age and sex, there was an adjusted difference of 4.5 units in the ASES score favoring TSA (P = .005) at 5 years postoperatively but no differences in adjusted SANE (P = .745) and VAS pain (P = .332) scores. The use of RSA for GHOA grew considerably over time, from representing only 17% of all replacements performed for GHOA in 2012 to nearly half (47%) in 2021 (P < .001).ConclusionRSA as a treatment for GHOA with an intact rotator cuff seems to yield PROs that are largely clinically equivalent to TSA extending to 5 years postoperatively. The observed statistical significance favoring TSA appears to be of marginal clinical benefit based on established minimal clinically important differences and may be a result of the large sample size. Further research using more granular clinical data and examining differences in range of motion and complications is warranted as it may change the value analysis.     

Three-dimensional measurement of radiographic bone–implant contact lengths of zygomatic implants in zygomatic bone: a retrospective study of 66 implants in 28 patients

Zygomatic implant treatment is widely applied for severe maxillary atrophy to help rehabilitate the maxillary dentition. This retrospective study was performed to evaluate the actual radiographic bone–implant contact (rBIC) lengths of zygomatic implants. The records of 28 patients who underwent zygomatic implant surgery and subsequent follow-up examinations between August 2013 and September 2018 in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Taipei Tzu Chi Hospital were reviewed. The surgeries were performed by a single surgeon using the same treatment protocol. All patients had a computed tomography scan at 1 year after the surgery. Using three-dimensional imaging software, an investigator measured the rBIC lengths of 66 implants and documented their clinical status. The implant survival rate was 100%. The mean rBIC length was significantly longer in male patients than in female patients (20.80 ± 5.88 mm versus 17.79 ± 6.34 mm; P = 0.028). The mean rBIC length of double zygomatic implants was significantly longer when compared to that of single implants (21.11 ± 6.23 mm versus 17.75 ± 5.85 mm; P = 0.027). This article is novel in reporting the exact rBIC lengths of zygomatic implants in a clinical setting. The results showed that zygomatic implants are a viable treatment modality for full-mouth rehabilitation.