首页 | 本学科首页   官方微博 | 高级检索  
检索        


Risk factors and reasons for revision after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty
Institution:1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sengkang General Hospital, Singapore;2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Singapore General Hospital, Singapore;3. Mount Elizabeth Medical Centre, Singapore;4. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA;1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, New England Baptist Hospital, Boston, MA, USA;2. Boston Sports and Shoulder Center, Waltham, MA, USA;3. MedStar Union Memorial Hospital, Baltimore, MD, USA;1. Orthopaedic Associates of Central Texas, Austin, TX, USA;2. Southern Oregon Orthopedics, Medford, OR, USA;3. Banner Health, Phoenix, AZ, USA;4. The Cleveland Shoulder Institute, Beachwood, OH, USA;5. University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
Abstract:BackgroundAs the indications for reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) continue to expand, the need for revision surgery after RSA will become more frequent. The objective of this study was to characterize patient-related risk factors for revision RSA and to compare reasons for early vs. late revision after RSA.MethodsPatients who underwent primary and revision RSA from 2015 to 2019 were identified in a national insurance database. Subgroups of early revision (defined as revision within 1 year postoperatively) and late revision (more than 1 year postoperatively) were also identified. The primary outcome of interest was patient-related risk factors for revision RSA. Secondary outcomes of interest were patient-related risk factors for early vs. late revision RSA and to compare surgical diagnoses for early vs. late revision RSA. Univariate analysis using chi-square tests was performed to analyze any differences in reasons for revision. Multivariate regression was subsequently utilized to control for any confounding variables when identifying risk factors for revision.ResultsA total of 28,880 patients were identified who underwent RSA, with 553 (1.9%) patients undergoing revision RSA. Three hundred eighty-five patients (69.6%) were classified as early revision (within one year), while 141 (30.4%) underwent late revision more than a year postoperatively. Risk factors for overall revisions included age <65 years (odds ratio OR] = 1.23, P = .032), male sex (OR = 2.21, P < .001), type I diabetes mellitus (OR = 1.44, P = .039), congestive heart failure (CHF) (OR = 1.79, P < .001), and depression (OR = 1.33, P = .002) in addition to RSAs performed for fracture (OR = 1.63, P < .001) and glenohumeral instability (OR = 2.25, P < .001) compared to RSA performed for arthritis. Risk factors for early revision RSA included male sex (OR = 2.54, P < .001) and CHF (OR = 1.81, P < .001) in addition to RSAs performed for fracture (OR = 1.84, P < .001) and glenohumeral instability (OR = 2.44, P < .001). Risk factors for late revision RSA included male sex (OR = 1.62, P = .004), CHF (OR = 1.83, P = .005), steroid use (OR = 1.79, P = .036), human immunodeficiency virus (OR = 3.50, P = .038), and RSA performed for glenohumeral instability (OR = 1.92, P = .004). Early revision RSA was more commonly performed for instability (63.1% vs. 25.0%, P < .001) and stiffness (5.5% vs. 1.2%, P = .021) than late revisions.ConclusionRevision RSA is uncommon at early follow-up. Overall patient-related risk factors for revision include male sex, age <65 years, type I diabetes mellitus, CHF, and depression in addition to RSAs performed for fracture and glenohumeral instability. Instability and stiffness were more common indications for early compared to late revision. Instability remained the most common reason for overall revision followed by periprosthetic infection.
Keywords:Reverse shoulder arthroplasty  Risk factors  Revision  Instability  Fracture  Arthropathy
本文献已被 ScienceDirect 等数据库收录!
设为首页 | 免责声明 | 关于勤云 | 加入收藏

Copyright©北京勤云科技发展有限公司  京ICP备09084417号