RESUMEN

Manual wheelchair users place high stress on their shoulders. We describe a 69-year-old male who developed end-stage shoulder osteoarthritis from chronic manual wheelchair (MW) use. Three prosthetic total shoulder replacements failed, reflecting his refusal to transition to an electric wheelchair. MW use must be avoided in some of these patients.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) as a revision procedure for failed anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is increasing in incidence. The purpose of this study was to analyze the results of RTSA as a revision salvage procedure for failed TSA and identify factors that influenced those outcomes. METHODS: All anatomic TSAs that were revised to RTSAs in adult patients, under the care of 2 senior surgeons at a single academic center from 2006 to 2018, were queried and reviewed. Cases in which hemiarthroplasty or RTSA was revised to RTSA were excluded. Electronic medical records and survey databases were reviewed for each subject. Demographic and surgical details were reviewed and analyzed with descriptive statistics. Preoperative and postoperative range of motion (ROM) including active forward elevation and active external rotation were evaluated. Patient-reported outcome surveys including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons survey, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and visual analog scale for pain were collected and analyzed. Improvement in ROM and outcome survey measures was assessed with 2-sample t tests. Complication and reoperation rates were analyzed with descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 75 patients (32 men and 43 women) were available for analysis at a mean of 22.3 months. The subjects were aged 60.3 ± 11.3 years at the time of TSA and 64.6 ± 9.7 years at the time of RTSA. The average period between TSA and RTSA was 4.3 years. The 3 most common indications for revision RTSA were painful arthroplasty (n = 62, 82.7%), rotator cuff failure (n = 56, 74.7%), and unstable arthroplasty (n = 25, 33.3%), but the majority of patients had multiple indications for surgery (n = 69, 92%). Significant improvements were found in all outcome measures from the time of failed TSA diagnosis to most recent follow-up after salvage RTSA with the exception of active external rotation: American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, 39 ± 15 preoperatively vs. 62 ± 25 postoperatively; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, 27 ± 23 vs. 60 ± 30; visual analog scale pain score, 5 ± 2 vs. 3 ± 3; and active forward elevation, 79° ± 41° vs. 128° ± 33°. Major complications occurred in 21 patients (28.4%) after salvage RTSA, and 9 (12%) underwent reoperation. CONCLUSIONS: RTSA for failed TSA can improve pain, function, and quality-of-life measures in patients with various TSA failure etiologies. However, postoperative ROM and patient-reported outcomes do not reach the values seen in the primary RTSA population.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The treatment of severe proximal humeral bone loss (PHBL) secondary to tumor resection or failed arthroplasty is challenging. We evaluated the outcomes and complications of reconstruction with reverse shoulder-allograft prosthesis composite (RS-APC), performed with or without tendon transfer. METHODS: An RS-APC procedure was performed in 25 consecutive patients with severe PHBL (>4 cm): 12 after failed reverse shoulder arthroplasty, 5 after failed hemiarthroplasty for fracture, 6 after failed mega-tumor prosthesis placement, and 2 after tumor resection. The median length of humeral bone loss or resection was 8 cm (range, 5-23 cm). Humeral bone graft fixation was obtained with a long monobloc reverse stem and a "mirror step-cut osteotomy," without plate fixation. Nine infected shoulders underwent a 2-stage operation with a temporary cement spacer. In addition, 9 patients (36%) underwent an associated L'Episcopo procedure. The median follow-up duration was 4 years (range, 2-11 years). RESULTS: Overall, 76% of patients (19 of 25) were satisfied. In 8 patients (32%), a reoperation was needed. At last follow-up, we observed incorporation at the allograft-host junction in 96% of the cases (24/25); partial graft resorption occurred in 3 cases and severe in 1. The median adjusted Constant score was 53% (range 18-105); Subjective Shoulder Value, 50% (range 10%-95%). Additional tendon transfers significantly improved active external rotation (20° vs. 0°, P < .001) and forward elevation (140° vs. 90°, P = .045). CONCLUSIONS: (1) Shoulder reconstruction with RS-APC provides acceptable shoulder function and high rates of graft survival and healing. (2) Additional L'Episcopo tendon transfer (when technically possible) improves active shoulder motion. (3) The use of a long monobloc (cemented or uncemented) humeral reverse stem with mirror step-cut osteotomy provides a high rate of graft-host healing, as well as a limited rate of graft resorption, and precludes the need for additional plate fixation. (4) Although rewarding, this reconstructive surgery is complex with a high risk of complications and reoperations. The main advantages of using an allograft with a reverse shoulder arthroplasty (compared with other reconstruction options) are that this type of reconstruction (1) allows restoration of the bone stock, thus improving prosthesis fixation and stability, and (2) gives the possibility to perform a tendon transfer by fixing the tendons on the bone graft to improve shoulder motion.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cutibacterium are the most common cause of periprosthetic shoulder infections, as defined by ≥2 deep cultures. Established Cutibacterium periprosthetic infections cannot be resolved without prosthesis removal. However, the decision for implant removal must be made from an assessment of infection risk before the results of intraoperative cultures are finalized. We hypothesized that the risk for a Cutibacterium infection is associated with characteristics that are available at the time of revision arthroplasty. METHODS: In a retrospective review of 342 patients having prosthetic revisions between 2006 and 2018 for whom definitive deep culture results were available, we used univariate and multivariate analyses to compare the preoperative and intraoperative characteristics of 101 revisions with Cutibacterium periprosthetic infections to the characteristics of 241 concurrent revisions not meeting the definition of infection. RESULTS: Patients with definite Cutibacterium periprosthetic infections were younger (59 ± 10 vs. 64 ± 12, P < .001), were more likely to be male (91% vs. 44%, P < .001), were more likely to have had their index procedure performed for primary osteoarthritis (54% vs. 39%, P = .007), were more likely to be taking testosterone supplements (8% vs. 2%, P = .02), had lower American Society of Anesthesiologists scores (1.9 ± 0.7 vs. 2.3 ± 0.7, P < .001), and had lower body mass indices (29 ± 5 vs. 31 ± 7, P = .005). Patients with definite Cutibacterium periprosthetic infections also had significantly higher preoperative loads of Cutibacterium on their unprepared skin surface (1.7 ± 0.9 vs. 0.4 ± 0.8, P < .001) and were more likely to have the surgical finding of synovitis (41% vs. 16%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of definite Cutibacterium periprosthetic infections is associated with observations that can be made before or at the time of revision arthroplasty.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Aims: The reasons for failure of a hemirthroplasty (HA) when used to treat a proximal humeral fracture include displaced or necrotic tuberosities, insufficient metaphyseal bone-stock, and rotator cuff tears. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is often the only remaining form of treatment in these patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome after conversions from a failed HA to rTSA. Material and Methods: A total of 35 patients, in whom a HA, as treatment for a fracture of the proximal humerus, had failed, underwent conversion to a rTSA. A total of 28 were available for follow-up at a mean of 61 months (37 to 91), having been initially reviewed at a mean of 20 months (12 to 36) postoperatively. Having a convertible design, the humeral stem could be preserved in nine patients. The stem was removed in the other 19 patients and a conventional rTSA was implanted. At final follow-up, patients were assessed using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, the Constant Score, and plain radiographs. Results: At final follow-up, the mean ASES was 59 (25 to 97) and the mean adjusted Constant Score was 63% (23% to 109%). Both improved significantly (p < 0.001). The mean forward flexion was 104° (50° to 155°) and mean abduction was 98° (60° to 140°). Nine patients (32%) had a complication; two had an infection and instability, respectively; three had a scapular fracture; and one patient each had delayed wound healing and symptomatic loosening. If implants could be converted to a rTSA without removal of the stem, the operating time was shorter (82 minutes versus 102 minutes; p = 0.018). Conclusion: After failure of a HA in the treatment of a proximal humeral fracture, conversion to a rTSA may achieve pain relief and improved shoulder function. The complication rate is considerable. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:761-6.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Is reverse total shoulder arthroplasty a feasible treatment option for failed shoulder arthroplasty? A retrospective study of 44 cases with special regards to stemless and stemmed primary implants. BACKGROUND: Due to humeral or glenoid bone-loss and rotator cuff insufficiency reverse total shoulder arthroplasty often means the only remaining treatment option in revision shoulder arthroplasty. This study investigates the clinical outcome of patients treated with a reverse total shoulder in revision cases with special regard to stemless and stemmed primary implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2010 to 2012 60 failed shoulder arthroplasties were converted to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Forty-four patients were available for follow-up after a mean of 24 months. Patients were assessed with X-rays, Constant- and ASES Score and a questionnaire about their subjective satisfaction. RESULTS: The total number of observed complications was seven (16%). Ninety-eight percent of the patients were satisfied with their clinical result. Patients achieved a mean normalized constant score of 70.2% and a mean ASES Score of 65.3. Patients with stemless primary implants achieved a higher normalized constant score than patients with stemmed primary implants (82 vs. 61.8%; p = 0009). CONCLUSION: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty provides satisfactory clinical results and a high patient satisfaction in revision shoulder arthroplasty. The complication rate needs to be considered and discussed with the patient prior to surgery. Presence or absence of a stem of revised shoulder arthroplasties interferes with the outcome. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: (Retrospective study).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: The most frequent indications for anatomic shoulder replacement are glenohumeral osteoarthritis and fractures of the humeral head. If anatomic shoulder prostheses fail, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty is often the only remaining treatment option. This study evaluates the influence of indications for primary shoulder arthroplasty on the clinical outcome after conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From 2010 to 2012, 44 failed shoulder arthroplasties were converted to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Forty-four patients were available for follow-up after a mean of 24 months (14-36 months). Twenty-three of them had received an initial shoulder replacement because of osteoarthritis, while the remaining 21 patients had been treated for a fracture of the humeral head. At follow-up, patients were assessed with X-rays, constant-, and ASES scores. RESULTS: The total number of observed complications was higher in patients revised because of failed fracture arthroplasty (24 vs. 9%). Patients initially treated for osteoarthritis achieved a higher ASES score (71 vs. 59 points; p = 0.048). The normalized constant score was not different between the two observed groups (osteoarthritis 73% vs. fracture 67%: p = 0.45). Complications occurred more often in patients who had initially suffered from a fracture of the humeral head (fracture 23.8% vs. osteoarthritis 8.7%). Scapular notching was more frequent after initial fracture arthroplasty (33 vs. 14%). CONCLUSION: Indications for initial shoulder replacement have an influence on the clinical outcome after conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Patients initially treated for a fracture of the humeral head have a lower subjective outcome and a higher complication rate in comparison with patients initially treated for osteoarthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV (Retrospective study).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Revision shoulder arthroplasty can be complicated by osseous and soft tissue deficiencies. Proximal humeral bone loss can result in diminished implant stability and reduced functional outcomes, and some studies have advocated the use of humeral allograft in this setting. This study compares the outcomes of revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) in patients both with and without proximal humeral bone loss. METHODS: During a 6-year period, 32 patients were revised to RTSA for failed shoulder hemiarthroplasty. Proximal humeral bone loss was found in 16 patients, with an average loss of 36.3 mm (range, 17.2-66 mm). Patients were followed up an average of 51.2 months with the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test score, visual analog scale score for pain, subjective outcome ratings, and radiographs. RESULTS: Significant improvement was found for average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (30.7 to 66.8), Simple Shoulder Test score (1.6 to 5.3), visual analog scale score (6.0 to 2.6), and forward flexion (51° to 100°) but not for external rotation (15° to 19.1°). No difference was demonstrated for functional or subjective outcomes compared with patients with intact humeral bone, except for active motion. On radiographic examination, 3 patients demonstrated humeral-sided loosening. Five complications were noted in patients with humeral bone loss. CONCLUSION: Revision RTSA can provide successful outcomes in the presence of proximal humeral bone loss without the use of allograft. Implant stability may be improved by the use of a cemented long-stem monoblock humeral prosthesis in revision settings.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: This study examined outcomes and complications in young patients undergoing revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) for failed prior total shoulder arthroplasty or hemiarthroplasty and compared them with those of an age-matched cohort undergoing primary RTSA. METHODS: RTSA as a revision for failed shoulder arthroplasty was performed on 36 patients younger than 65 years. Follow-up was available for 32 patients at an average of 55.3 months. Results were compared with those of an age-matched cohort of 37 patients (33 available for follow-up; average, 54.7 months) undergoing primary RTSA. Average age for both groups was 59.3 years. Outcomes were compared before and after revision surgery and between cohorts. RESULTS: Preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) for pain and subjective shoulder value (SSV) scores were similar in both groups, 7.3 of 10 and 24%, respectively, before revision, and 7.0 of 10 and 19% before primary RTSA (P = .3). Postrevision VAS and SSV scores improved to 1.4 of 10 and 60% (P < .0001). Average American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Simple Shoulder Test scores after revision were 69.7 and 58.8, with 9 complications (28.1%; 6 major and 3 minor). VAS and SSV scores improved to 2.1 of 10 and 76% after primary RTSA (P < .0001). American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Simple Shoulder Test scores after primary RTSA were 74 and 67.3, with 6 complications (18.2%; 5 major and 1 minor). Only the postoperative SSV score was statistically different in comparing primary and revision RTSA (P < .05). CONCLUSION: RTSA is effective in reducing pain and improving function after failed arthroplasty in young patients, but complication rates are high and expectations should be managed appropriately. Subjective outcome scores are worse than those for age-matched patients undergoing primary RTSA, but pain, functional scores, and complication rates are similar.

Asunto(s)