Open reduction internal fixation vs. reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of acute displaced proximal humerus fractures

BackgroundProximal humerus fractures are a frequent fragility fracture in the aging population and represent a challenge to the orthopedic surgeon. Open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of these fractures is viable but technically challenging and associated with a high complication rate. Recently, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) with tuberosity repair has become a popular and successful option for treating these fractures. The purpose of this study is to compare outcomes of ORIF and RTSA for treatment of proximal humerus fractures.MethodsAn age-matched group of 50 patients treated with ORIF (25) and RTSA (25) were assessed at an average follow-up of 4.4 years. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES) and Simple Shoulder Test (SST), radiographs, range of motion, and complications were evaluated between the two groups.ResultsThe reoperation rate and major complications were higher in the ORIF group compared to RTSA. No major complications were observed in the RTSA group. Forward flexion in the RTSA patients (143.2 ± 23.1) was shown to be significantly greater than ORIF patients (121.4 ± 35.1) (p= 0.0125) but no significant differences were observed for shoulder external rotation or internal rotation. There was no difference in ASES and SST scores between groups.ConclusionThe current study demonstrates good clinical outcomes for both RTSA and ORIF. However, reoperation rate was higher with ORIF with locked plating compared to RTSA for fracture with tuberosity repair in an age matched population. RTSA may be a better treatment option than ORIF for 3- and 4-part fractures in patients older than 65.Level of evidenceLevel III     

Outcomes of acute but not delayed reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fracture are equal to those for rotator cuff arthropathy

BackgroundThe utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) for the treatment of proximal humerus fractures in the elderly is increasing. Recent results support the use of RTSA for this indication over hemiarthroplasty or open reduction internal fixation (ORIF). However, there are limited data on the outcomes of RTSA for fracture or fracture sequelae as compared to RTSA for cuff tear arthropathy (CTA). We hypothesized that patients undergoing RTSA for fracture or fracture sequelae would have worse outcomes compared to patients undergoing RTSA for CTA.MethodsThis was a retrospective analysis of a prospectively collected outcomes database of all patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty at a single institution between 2008 and 2019. Patients were included if they underwent primary RTSA for a diagnosis of acute fracture, fracture nonunion or malunion, failed hemiarthroplasty or ORIF for proximal humerus fracture, or rotator cuff arthropathy. The primary outcome was American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score at the most recent follow-up, with minimum 1-year follow-up. Secondary outcomes included range of motion (ROM) at most recent follow-up, patient satisfaction with surgery, and revision or reoperation rates. Analysis of variance was used to compare continuous variables between the groups, while chi-square or Fisher's exact test were used to compare categorical variables. Linear regression analysis was used to perform multivariable analysis. Prosthesis survival rates were calculated using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Significance was defined as P< .05.ResultsThere were 287 patients included in the final cohort, including 62 with fracture and 225 with CTA. Sex, diagnosis, increasing patient comorbidities, and diagnosis (malunion/nonunion and failed prior surgery) were associated with worse ASES scores on univariate analysis (P < .05). On multivariate analysis, there was no difference in outcomes (ASES and ROM) between the acute fracture and CTA cohorts (P > .05). Outcomes of delayed RTSA for malunion/nonunion and hemiarthroplasty/ORIF were significantly worse than those for acute fracture/CTA (P < .01). Three-year prosthesis survival was 95% for CTA, 97% for acute fracture, 97% for malunion/nonunion, and 78% for failed prior surgery.ConclusionTreatment of acute proximal humerus fractures with RTSA leads to similar improvements in patient outcomes compared to elective treatment for CTA, but outcomes of delayed RTSA for fracture are considerably worse. These findings provide further guidance to clinicians counselling patients on treatment options and outcomes for proximal humerus fractures.Level of evidenceLevel III; Retrospective comparative study     

Failed prior rotator cuff repair is associated with worse clinical outcomes after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundThe purpose of this study is to determine the comparative risk profile and clinical outcomes for patients undergoing reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) for cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) without failed prior rotator cuff repair (RCR) compared with RTSA for CTA with prior RCR.MethodsFrom 2006 to 2014, all patients who underwent RTSA by two surgeons after failed RCR with minimum 2-year follow-up were identified. Patients who underwent RTSA with failed prior RCR were matched in a 1:1 ratio to patients undergoing primary RTSA, while controlling for demographic factors, prosthesis design, and surgeon. Postoperative active forward elevation and active external rotation were recorded. Outcome measures included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and Simple Shoulder Test. Perioperative complications and rates of secondary reoperation were noted, and comparative multivariate analysis was performed.ResultsOf 262 patients, 192 (73.3%) were available at minimum 2-year follow-up. The prior RCR group had a significantly higher complication rate (17.4%, n = 15) than the primary RTSA group (3.8%, n = 4) (P = .001), although no significant difference in periprosthetic infection (P = .469) or secondary revision rate (P = .136) was observed. At mean 36.3 ± 26.1-month follow-up, the prior RCR group had statistically worse American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (P < .001), VAS (P = .001), Simple Shoulder Test (P < .001), and active forward elevation (P = .006). Patients with multiple failed RCR attempts (n = 38) before RTSA demonstrated no significant differences versus isolated failed RCR (n = 48; P > .05).ConclusionThis study demonstrated that patients with RTSA after prior failed RCR have significantly worse patient-reported outcomes and greater rate of perioperative complications than patients undergoing primary RTSA for CTA.     

Acute versus delayed reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures in the elderly: Mid-term outcomes

BackgroundTreatment of proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) via reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has shown early promise when compared to historical treatment modalities. Ideal surgical timing remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of early versus delayed RTSA for PHF. We hypothesized that acute RTSA would display superior outcomes compared to those receiving delayed surgical intervention.MethodsThis multicenter study retrospectively analyzed 142 patients who underwent RTSA for fracture. Patients treated within 4 weeks of injury were placed in the acute group (n = 102), and patients treated longer than 4 weeks after injury were placed in the chronic group (n = 38). A comprehensive panel of patient reported outcome measures, VAS pain scores, range of motion, and patient satisfaction were evaluated.ResultsThe acute group had significantly better final follow-up SPADI scores (20.8 ± 23.9 vs. 30.7 ± 31.7) (p<0.05). No further differences were detected in other postoperative range of motion measurements, subjective outcomes, or VAS scores.ConclusionsOur results suggest that patients treated acutely display similar mid-term outcomes to those who receive delayed treatment. With this in mind, surgeons may first give consideration to a period of nonoperative treatment.Level of evidenceLevel II.     

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     

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.     

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     

Predictors of patient satisfaction and outcomes following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundObjective clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction via patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) can vary following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). The purpose of this study was to analyze patient specific preoperative factors that may predict postoperative PROMs and satisfaction following rTSA.MethodProspective data was collected on 144 consecutive patients who underwent primary rTSA at our institution between 2012 and 2018, all with minimum 2 year follow-up. Age, gender, race, BMI, previous surgery on the index shoulder, and comorbidity burden were analyzed as potential predictors. Shoulder specific clinical measures were collected both pre- and postoperatively via range of motion testing with active abduction, internal, and external rotation. PROMs included global shoulder function, Simple Shoulder Test (SST) and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scoring systems, and cumulative patient satisfaction. Statistical analysis included comparison of pre- and postoperative outcome measures across the cohort as a whole and between each of the potential predictors in question. The relationship between predictors and postoperative cumulative satisfaction was investigated, with specific attention to identify the strongest predictors and account for confounding variables. Statistical significance was determined at P < .05.ResultsAll range of motion scores and PROMs were significantly improved from preoperative to postoperative assessment. Patient satisfaction was excellent with 92% rating their shoulder as “much better” or “better.” Women and minority patients displayed significantly worse preoperative active abduction, SST, and ASES, but were found to have no significant difference in these measures postoperatively. Younger age was associated with a significantly worse postoperative ASES score. Female sex was associated with significantly higher postoperative satisfaction, while minority status was associated with significantly lower cumulative satisfaction. Postoperative global shoulder function, SST, and ASES were not significantly influenced by sex, race, previous surgery, BMI, or comorbidity burden. Postoperative ASES and global shoulder function demonstrated to be independent predictors of “much better” satisfaction rating.ConclusionPostoperative PROMs and cumulative satisfaction are not influenced by BMI, previous surgery, or comorbidity burden in our cohort. Relative to their respective counterparts, older patients, females, and white patients are more likely to demonstrate higher satisfaction with their outcome following rTSA as measured by PROMs or cumulative satisfaction. Improvements in the ASES and global shoulder function scores most consistently predict higher postoperative satisfaction.Level of evidenceLevel IV; Case Series; Treatment Study     

Comparison of complication rates in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty performed for degenerative conditions versus proximal humerus fractures

BackgroundIndications for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) have been expanding. In addition to degenerative joint disease (DJD), RTSA is now being used to treat proximal humerus fractures (PHF). The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative complications in RTSA performed for DJD versus PHF.MethodsA retrospective analysis of the PearlDiver National Database was performed. International Classification of Diseases 10 codes were used to identify RTSA patients from 2015-2018 and separate them into DJD and PHF cohorts. Demographics, comorbidities, and hospital data were identified and compared using a two-sample t-test and chi-squared test. Systemic complications at 90 days and surgical complications at 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years were compared using multivariable logistic regression.ResultsFifteen thousand six hundred seventy eight patients (92.6% DJD, 7.4% PHF) were identified. PHF patients were more likely to be older (70.3 vs. 69.7 years, P = .026), female (83.5% vs. 62.2%, P < .001), and have more medical comorbidities (Charlson Comorbidity Index 3.42 vs. 3.17, P = .006) than DJD patients. After controlling for patient factors, PHF patients were more likely than DJD patients to develop urinary tract infection (odds ratio [OR] 1.65, P < .001), deep vein thrombosis (OR 1.76, P = .024), and hematoma (OR 3.83, P < .001) within 90 days of RTSA. At 90 days, 1 year, and 2 years postoperatively, RTSA for PHF patients were also more likely than RTSA for DJD patients to sustain a periprosthetic fracture (OR 2.57, P < .001) and instability (OR 2.02, P < .001).ConclusionsPatients with DJD and PHF undergoing RTSA represent different patient populations with distinct postoperative clinical outcomes. RTSA for PHF has inferior outcomes, which is significant in an era of bundled payments.     

Impact of humeral component retroversion on clinical outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with humeral lateralization

BackgroundThe effect of humeral component retroversion on clinical outcomes after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is unclear. Intended retroversion intraoperatively may not produce the same retroversion of the humeral component postoperatively.MethodsThis retrospective study was conducted on consecutive patients who received RTSA using a single product with humeral lateralization at a targeted 25° of humeral retroversion from 2014 to 2019 with minimum 1-year clinical follow-up and postoperative computed tomography (CT). Forty-five patients were enrolled, and humeral component retroversion was measured three-dimensionally. Correlation and regression analyses were conducted between humeral retroversion and postoperative isometric strength and range of motion in forward flexion (FF), external rotation (ER), and internal rotation (IR). Group comparison between a ≤25° group and a >25° group was conducted as sub-analysis to verify possible confounders.ResultsThe actual humeral retroversion was 21.7 ± 11.9°, and it was significantly correlated with postoperative FF [Pearson's correlation coefficient (PCC) = 0.464, P= .003], ER (PCC = 0.481, P = .002), and IR (PCC = 0.471, P = .002) strengths. Multivariable regression analysis showed that humeral retroversion was significantly associated with postoperative FF (Exp(B) = 0.492, P = .003), ER (Exp(B) = 0.336, P = .002), and IR (Exp(B) = 0.578, P = .002) strengths. Two groups in sub-analysis showed no significant difference in pre- or intraoperative variables other than humeral component retroversion. Some functional outcome scores including the Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and activity scales were significantly higher in the >25° group.ConclusionDiscrepancies between intraoperatively targeted humeral retroversion angle and actual postoperative angle after RTSA should be considered by operators and researchers. Increased humeral component retroversion than recommendation can yield acceptable outcomes and might be associated with higher postoperative strength, and possibly with better functional outcome after RTSA with humeral lateralization.Level of evidenceLevel III; Retrospective Comparative Study     

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.     

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humeral fractures: better clinical midterm outcome after primary reverse arthroplasty versus secondary reverse arthroplasty after failed ORIF in the elderly

BackgroundJoint replacement surgery as a treatment for complex proximal humeral fractures is an established option, especially in the elderly. In light of the increased attention to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), this study has analyzed the outcomes of patients with primary reverse arthroplasty and after secondary reverse arthroplasty for failed osteosynthesis.MethodsWe retrospectively reviewed 57 patients with an average age of 76 years (min. 55; max. 94; SD 7) from 2010 and 2015 who underwent primary rTSA (30) and secondary rTSA after the failure of plate osteosynthesis (27) after proximal humeral fractures. The functional outcome of the operated shoulder was evaluated by clinical scores (Constant-Score, ASES, DASH and Oxford), range of motion (RoM), pain and activity level.ResultsPrimary rTSA had a significantly better functional outcome, mean-follow-up 37.3 months, measured by Constant-Score (57.13 vs 45.78 points; p= .015) compared to secondary RTSA, mean follow-up 42.1 months. A significantly better active abduction (P= .002), forward flexion (P = .003) and internal rotation (P = .037) was observed in the primary rTSA group, especially in the follow-up > 35 months.ConclusionReverse shoulder arthroplasty is an effective treatment for proximal humeral fractures as primary or revision surgery. The reliable clinical outcome especially in the follow-up to 40 months after primary reverse arthroplasty may suggest to prefer rTSA for complex humeral fractures in the elderly.Level of evidenceLevel III; Retrospective comparative 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)     

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.     

Outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty are similar in rotator cuff-intact and rotator cuff-deficient shoulders

BackgroundControversy exists regarding the biomechanical and clinical effects of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) in shoulders with an intact versus a torn rotator cuff (RC). We compared clinical and radiographic outcomes at a minimum of 2 years after RTSA for cuff-intact or cuff-deficient conditions.MethodsRetrospective review identified 182 patients with at least 2 years of follow-up: 32 with an intact rotator cuff but advanced glenoid bone loss and 150 with a torn rotator cuff. Revision arthroplasties and those for osteonecrosis or trauma were excluded, and a matched cohort was created to compare 32 cuff-intact to 32 cuff-deficient shoulders. Assessments included preoperative and postoperative visual analog pain scores (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores, narcotic use, strength, range of motion (ROM), complications, and revisions. Radiographs were analyzed for signs of loosening or mechanical failure.ResultsMean age for all patients was 71.7 (61-82) years, and the mean follow-up was 2.7 (2.0-5.5) years. Preoperatively, the groups were similar in almost every functional preoperative category, with no differences in gender, laterality, age, preoperative narcotic use, body mass index, or other co-morbidities. Postoperatively, no significant differences were found regarding VAS pain, ASES, ROM, strength, complication rate, revision rate, narcotic use, implant loosening, or mechanical failure; both groups showed significant improvements in all categories measured.ConclusionsRTSA provides reliably good functional and radiographic outcomes with low complication rates in indicated patients, regardless of the preoperative status of the rotator cuff.Level of evidenceLevel III; Retrospective Comparative Study     

Anatomic versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty for post-traumatic sequelae of operatively and nonoperatively treated proximal humerus fractures

BackgroundThis study aimed to determine whether there is a long-term difference in outcomes between anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) performed for proximal humerus fracture (PHF) sequelae. Hypotheses were as follows: (1) patients undergoing aTSA would have improved functional outcomes but a greater incidence of adverse events (AEs) and reoperation than those undergoing rTSA and (2) patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty after open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) would have worse outcomes with more AEs and reoperations than those undergoing shoulder arthroplasty for sequelae of nonoperatively managed PHF.MethodsA prospectively collected database was queried for patients with PHF sequelae undergoing aTSA or rTSA between 2007 and 2020 with minimum 2-year follow-up. Baseline demographics, perioperative data, postoperative AEs, functional outcomes, and range of motion (ROM) were compared between aTSA and rTSA groups. A secondary analysis was performed to compare patients treated with prior PHF ORIF vs. those treated nonoperatively.ResultsThere were 17 patients in the aTSA group and 83 patients in the rTSA group. Type I PHF sequelae predominated among patients who underwent aTSA (71% vs. 40%, P = .026). Incidence of total postoperative AEs was greater after aTSA than that after rTSA (12% vs. 5%, P = .277), with a significantly higher rate of glenoid aseptic loosening after aTSA (6% vs. 0%, P = .026). All AEs required reoperation except one in the rTSA group. The mean follow-up was 66 months for aTSA compared with 45 months for rTSA (P = .002). No differences in functional outcomes or ROM between aTSA and rTSA persisted beyond 3 months or at the final follow-up except external rotation, which favored aTSA for 3 years postoperatively. In the secondary analysis, there were 33 patients in the ORIF group and 67 in the non-ORIF group. One (3%) postoperative AE occurred in the ORIF group vs. five (7%) in the non-ORIF group (P = .385). At a mean follow-up of 4 years, there were no differences in functional outcome scores or ROM between ORIF and non-ORIF groups, except for patient-reported shoulder function (6.3 vs. 7.4, respectively, P = .037).ConclusionFor treatment of PHF sequelae, aTSA may result in a higher incidence of postoperative AEs and reoperation than rTSA, particularly due to glenoid aseptic loosening. No difference in functional outcome scores between aTSA and rTSA persists beyond 3 months or at the final follow-up. Although active external rotation is significantly improved after aTSA for the first 3 years postoperatively, no differences in ROM exist beyond 4 years at the final follow-up. Patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty for PHF sequelae have comparable outcomes regardless of prior ORIF or nonoperative management.Level of evidenceLevel III; Retrospective Cohort Design; Treatment 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     

Return to golf and golf-specific performance after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundGolf is a common sporting activity that patients continue to participate into older age, including after joint replacement surgery. The influence of shoulder replacement on golf performance remains unclear. We hypothesized that patients undergoing anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) would have significantly better return to play rates and better performance metrics, including handicap, driving distance, and 7-iron distance, after shoulder replacement relative to those treated with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA).MethodsPatients were retrospectively surveyed after anatomic TSA and RTSA with regards to return to golf and golf performance before and after shoulder replacement. Patients reported if they were able to return to golf after shoulder replacement, timing of return to golf, and driving distance, 7-iron distance, handicap, and difficulty with specific shot types upon returning to golf. Significance was defined as P < .05.ResultsThe survey was completed by 31 patients with a total of 37 replaced shoulders (68.0 ± 8.1 years; 87% male) out of 44 patients who indicated they played golf. The overall return to golf rate was 74%. Patients undergoing anatomic TSA returned at a significantly higher rate relative to patients treated with RTSA (93% [14 of 15] vs. 56% [9 of 16], P= .037). There was no difference between groups with regards to drive distance, 7-iron distance, and handicap. There were also no differences between preoperative and postoperative values for patients who were able to return to golf. Overall, patients played golf less frequently afterward than they did prior to shoulder replacement (P= .013).ConclusionPatients are able to return to golf after shoulder replacement, at an overall rate of 74%, including a rate of 93% for patients with anatomic TSA and 56% for patients with RTSA. Golf performance was similar before and after shoulder replacement surgery for both groups among those who were able to return to play, though overall frequency was decreased after shoulder replacement.Level of EvidenceLevel III; Retrospective Cohort Comparative Study     

The impact of subscapularis integrity on functional outcome in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty utilizing a 135˚ stem

BackgroundReverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) predictably restores overhead function and provides pain relief in patients with glenohumeral arthritis and rotator cuff deficiency. Implant design with an anatomic inclination angle of 135˚ may provide an advantage in the healing rates of subscapularis tendon (SST) repairs. The purpose of this study was to use ultrasound to evaluate the subscapularis repair healing rate, and secondarily, to compare outcomes between healed and non-healed SSTs, in patients undergoing RSA with a 135˚ inclination angle.MethodsA prospectively collected, multicenter shoulder arthroplasty registry was queried to identify patients undergoing RSA with a 135˚ inclination stem with a minimum of 1 year follow-up. Ultrasound analysis was performed at final follow-up to assess subscapularis integrity. Exclusion criteria included RSA for fracture, fracture sequelae or failed prior arthroplasty. Outcome measures included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS), Single Anatomic Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and Constant scores. Additionally, subscapularis functional assessments included range of motion, belly-press and shirt-tuck tests. Statistical analysis was performed using ANOVA, Chi-square, and student t-tests with SPSS. Results were considered significant at P < .05.ResultsSeventy-eight patients meeting the inclusion criteria were identified from the registry, however, only seventy-five patients had ultrasound and healing data. The subscapularis was repaired in 60 patients and healing via ultrasound was noted in 56.7% (34/60). In most cases, a subscapularis peel was performed, with lesser tuberosity osteotomy performed in 9.38% of cases. Patients whose subscapularis was repaired were found to be older (72.2 vs. 64.9, P < .001) and the majority of patients with an unrepaired subscapularis were male (13/15, 86.7% unrepaired vs. 27/60, 45.0% repaired). Both healed and non-healed patient cohorts showed statistical improvement in all pain and functional outcome scores from their baselines. However, there were no significant differences in outcome scores between healed and non-healed SST. With regards to SST repair, only overall WOOS (Δ+15.62, P = .049) and physical component of the WOOS score (Δ+15.97, P = .040) were higher in patients with nonrepaired SST. There was no correlation between the ability to perform a belly-press or shirt-tuck test and subscapularis repair or evidence of radiographic healing. Patients who did not have their subscapularis repaired demonstrated greater passive external rotation at the side from 31° to 51° (P = .044). A significant increase in passive forward flexion was noted in patients with healed subscapularis from 117° to 135° (P = .042). There was no statistical difference in active range of motion between either the repaired/nonrepaired or healed/non-healed cohorts.ConclusionOur study demonstrates a healing rate of 57% following repair in patients undergoing RSA with a 135˚ angle. Standardized outcome measures overall demonstrated no difference between patients with a healed subscapularis compared to those with a non-healed or unrepaired subscapularis.Level of EvidenceIV, case series, treatment study.