Editorial Commentary: Massive Rotator Cuff Tears Benefit From Arthroscopic Repair Regardless of Advanced Goutallier or Hamada Changes.

Massive rotator cuff tears are a challenge to treat, with options available from arthroscopic rotator cuff repair to reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Arthroscopic repair may still be an option even in the setting of advanced Goutallier changes and Hamada grades and regardless of healing. As the lifetime risk of revision for a 55-year-old patient having a reverse shoulder arthroplasty is approximately 1 in 3, arthroscopic surgical management of massive rotator cuff tears should not be discounted. An individualized approach should consider the patient's radiographs (severity of arthritis), function (i.e., acute vs chronic pseudoparalysis), and goals (overhead strength vs pain relief). Younger patients with less arthritis, acute pseudoparalysis, and a focus on pain relief could benefit from arthroscopic treatment.

Greater Socioeconomic Disadvantage as Measured by the Area Deprivation Index Is Associated With Failure of Healing Following Arthroscopic Repair of Massive Rotator Cuff Tears but Not With Clinical Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To analyze the relationship between Area Deprivation Index (ADI) and preoperative status and short-term postoperative clinical outcomes among patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) of massive rotator cuff tears (MRCTs). METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on prospectively maintained data on patients who underwent ARCR of MRCTs defined as tear size ≥5 cm or complete tear of at least 2 tendons, with a minimum 2-year follow-up and a valid home address between January 2015 and December 2018. Each patient's home address was mapped to the ADI to determine neighborhood disadvantage. This composite index is composed of 17 census-based indicators, including income, education, employment, and housing quality to quantify the level of socioeconomic deprivation. Ratings were recorded and categorized based on the sample's percentile. Patients were then divided into 2 groups: upper quartile (ie, most disadvantaged [≥75th percentile]) and lower 3 quartiles (ie, least disadvantaged [<75th percentile]). Bivariate analysis was performed to associate ADI with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and range of motion pre- and postoperatively, as well as complications, healing rate, satisfaction, and return to work. Patients reaching or exceeding the minimal clinically important difference for visual analog scale (VAS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Veterans Rand 12-Item questionnaire, and subjective shoulder value were recorded for both cohorts. RESULTS: Ninety-nine patients were eligible for study analysis. Preoperative PROs and range of motion were similar, except for a greater VAS for pain (6.3 vs 4.3; P < .01) and lower American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (32.2 vs 45.1; P = .01) in the most disadvantaged group. Both groups showed similar postoperative PROs scores, but greater VAS improvement was seen in the upper quartile group (Δ 4.2 vs Δ 3.0; P = .04). In contrast, only the least-disadvantaged group significantly improved in internal rotation (P = .01) and forward flexion (18°; P < .01) from baseline. Although satisfaction, complications, and return to work were comparable (P > .05), failure of healing occurred more frequently in the most disadvantaged group (21% vs 6%; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MRCTs residing in the most disadvantaged neighborhoods as measured by the ADI have more pain and functional limitations before undergoing ARCR but demonstrate similar postoperative functional improvements to patients from other socioeconomic backgrounds. Failure of healing of MRCTs may be more common in disadvantaged groups. Furthermore, both groups reported similar rates of clinically important functional improvement. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort comparison.

Quantifying Threshold Scores for Patient Satisfaction After Massive Rotator Cuff Repair for the Interpretation of Mid-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes.

PURPOSE: To establish minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) values for 4 patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients undergoing arthroscopic massive rotator cuff repair (aMRCR): American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Veterans Rand-12 (VR-12) score, and the visual analog scale (VAS) pain. In addition, our study seeks to determine preoperative factors associated with achieving clinically significant improvement as defined by the MCID and PASS. METHODS: A retrospective review at 2 institutions was performed to identify patients undergoing aMRCR with minimum 4-year follow-up. Data collected at the 1-year, 2-year, and 4-year time points included patient characteristics (age, sex, length of follow-up, tobacco use, and workers' compensation status), radiologic parameters (Goutallier fatty infiltration and modified Collin tear pattern), and 4 PRO measures (collected preoperatively and postoperatively): ASES score, SSV, VR-12 score, and VAS pain. The MCID and PASS for each outcome measure were calculated using the distribution-based method and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis, respectively. Pearson and Spearman coefficient analyses were used to determine correlations between preoperative variables and MCID or PASS thresholds. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients with a mean follow-up of 64 months were included in the study. The MCID and PASS values at the 4-year follow-up for ASES were 14.5 and 69.4, respectively; for SSV, 13.7 and 81.5; for VR-12, 6.6 and 40.3; and for VAS pain, 1.3 and 1.2. Greater infraspinatus fatty infiltration was associated with failing to reach clinically significant values. CONCLUSIONS: This study defined MCID and PASS values for commonly used outcome measures in patients undergoing aMRCR at the 1-year, 2-year, and 4-year follow-up. At mid-term follow-up, greater preoperative rotator cuff disease severity was associated with failure to achieve clinically significant outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, case series.

Results After Arthroscopic Bankart Repair in Contact Athletes Should Not Be Reported Globally Because of the High Variability in Recurrences Among the Different Contact or Collision Sports: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To describe and compare the recurrence rates in contact or collision (CC) sports after arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR) and to compare the recurrence rates in CC versus non-collision athletes after ABR. METHODS: We followed a prespecified protocol registered with PROSPERO (registration No. CRD42022299853). In January 2022, a literature search was performed using the electronic databases MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials), as well as clinical trials records. Clinical studies (Level I-IV evidence) that evaluated recurrence after ABR in CC athletes with a minimum follow-up period of 2 years postoperatively were included. We assessed the quality of the studies using the Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool, and we described the range of effects using synthesis without meta-analysis and described the certainty of the evidence using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations). RESULTS: We identified 35 studies, which included 2,591 athletes. The studies had heterogeneous definitions of recurrence and classifications of sports. The recurrence rates after ABR varied significantly among studies between 3% and 51% (I2 = 84.9%, 35 studies and 2,591 participants). The range was at the higher end for participants younger than 20 years (range, 11%-51%; I2 = 81.7%) compared with older participants (range, 3%-30%; I2 = 54.7%). The recurrence rates also varied by recurrence definition (I2 = 83.3%) and within and across categories of CC sports (I2 = 83.8%). CC athletes had higher recurrence rates than did non-collision athletes (7%-29% vs 0%-14%; I2 = 29.2%; 12 studies with 612 participants). Overall, the risk of bias of all the included studies was determined to be moderate. The certainty of the evidence was low owing to study design (Level III-IV evidence), study limitations, and inconsistency. CONCLUSIONS: There was high variability in the recurrence rates reported after ABR according to the different types of CC sports, ranging from 3% to 51%. Moreover, variations in recurrence among CC sports were observed, with ice hockey players being in the upper range but field hockey players being in the lower range. Finally, CC athletes showed higher recurrence rates when compared with non-collision athletes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II, III, and IV studies.

Preoperative 3-dimensional computed tomography bone density measures provide objective bone quality classifications for stemless anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Reproducible methods for determining adequate bone densities for stemless anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) are currently lacking. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of preoperative computed tomography (CT) imaging for assessing the bone density of the proximal humerus for supportive differentiation in the decision making for stemless humeral component implantation. It was hypothesized that preoperative 3-dimensional (3-D) CT bone density measures provide objective classifications of the bone quality for stemless aTSA. METHODS: A 3-part study was performed that included the analysis of cadaveric humerus CT scans followed by retrospective application to a clinical cohort and classification with a machine learning model. Thirty cadaveric humeri were evaluated with clinical CT and micro-CT (µCT) imaging. Phantom-calibrated CT data were used to extract 3-D regions of interest and defined radiographic scores. The final image processing script was applied retrospectively to a clinical cohort (n = 150) that had a preoperative CT and intraoperative bone density assessment using the "thumb test," followed by placement of an anatomic stemmed or stemless humeral component. Postscan patient-specific calibration was used to improve the functionality and accuracy of the density analysis. A machine learning model (Support vector machine [SVM]) was utilized to improve the classification of bone densities for a stemless humeral component. RESULTS: The image processing of clinical CT images demonstrated good to excellent accuracy for cylindrical cancellous bone densities (metaphysis [ICC = 0.986] and epiphysis [ICC = 0.883]). Patient-specific internal calibration significantly reduced biases and unwanted variance compared with standard HU CT scans (P < .0001). The SVM showed optimized prediction accuracy compared with conventional statistics with an accuracy of 73.9% and an AUC of 0.83 based on the intraoperative decision of the surgeon. The SVM model based on density clusters increased the accuracy of the bone quality classification to 87.3% with an AUC of 0.93. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative CT imaging allows accurate evaluation of the bone densities in the proximal humerus. Three-dimensional regions of interest, rescaling using patient-specific calibration, and a machine learning model resulted in good to excellent prediction for objective bone quality classification. This approach may provide an objective tool extending preoperative selection criteria for stemless humeral component implantation.

Preoperative diagnosis and rotator cuff status impact functional internal rotation following reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate whether functional internal rotation (fIR) following reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) differs based on diagnosis of either: primary osteoarthritis (OA) with intact rotator cuff, massive irreparable rotator cuff tear (MICT) or cuff tear arthropathy (CTA). METHODS: A retrospective review was carried out on RSAs performed by a single surgeon with the same implant over a 5-year period. Minimum 2-year follow-up was available in 235 patients; 139 (59.1%) were female, and the mean patient age was 72 ± 8 years. Additional clinical evaluation included the Subjective Shoulder Value and Constant score. Postoperative internal rotation was categorized as type I: hand to the buttock or hip; type II: hand to the lower lumbar region; or type III: smooth motion to at least the upper lumbar region. Type I was considered "nonfunctional" internal rotation, and type II and III were fIR. RESULTS: Preoperatively, internal rotation was classified as type I in 60 patients (25.5%), type II in 114 (48.5%), and type III in 62 (26%). Postoperatively, internal rotation was classified as type I in 70 patients (30%), type II in 86 (36%), and type III in 79 (34%). Compared with preoperative status, fIR improved significantly in OA patients (P < .001), with 49 (52.6%) classified as type II or III postoperatively. In CTA patients, there was no significant change (P = .352). In patients with MICTs, there was a significant loss in fIR postoperatively (P = .003), with 25 patients (30.8%) deteriorating to type I after having either type II or III preoperatively, and only 5 patients (6.1%) improving to either type II or III. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo RSA for primary OA have a better chance of postoperative fIR improvement. A decrease in fIR is common after RSA for MICTs.

Functional Internal Rotation is Associated with Subscapularis Tendon Healing and Increased Scapular Tilt after Grammont style BIO RSA with 155° humeral implant.

BACKGROUND: While forward flexion consistently improves after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), restoration of internal rotation behind the back (IR1) is much less predictable. This study aims to evaluate the role of the subscapularis tendon in restoration of IR and identify other factors that may influence IR such as anterior scapular tilt and postoperative passive internal rotation at 90° of abduction (IR2). The hypothesis was that IR1 is positively associated with both subscapularis healing, postoperative passive IR2, and anterior scapular tilt. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on a consecutive series of Grammont style BIO (bony increased offset) RSAs performed by a single surgeon between January 2014 and December 2015. Inclusion criteria were: (1) primary RSA for rotator cuff arthropathy, massive irreparable rotator cuff tear, or primary osteoarthritis with B2 glenoid morphology, (2) minimum of two years clinical follow-up, and (3) complete intraoperative repair of a repairable subscapularis tendon. The primary outcomes were postoperative return of IR1 compared to postoperative IR2, healing rate of subscapularis tendon, and scapular tilt. RESULTS: The cohort included 77 patients, aged 72.6±7.0 years at index surgery and comprising 32 men (42%) and 45 women (58%). At a mean follow-up of 3.3±1.0 years, ultrasound evaluation revealed a successful repair of the subscapularis in 41 patients (53%). Healed subscapularis repair was significantly associated with greater IR1 (85% vs. 53%, p=0.031). A multivariate logistic regression revealed functional postoperative IR1 was independently associated with subscapularis healing (OR, 4.3; 95%CI [1.1-20.2]; p=0.046) as well as greater anterior tilt (OR, 1.2; 95%CI [1.1-1.5]; p=0.008) and postoperative IR2 (OR, 1.09; 95%CI [1.05-1.14]; p<0.001) but lower postoperative passive abduction (OR, 0.96; 95%CI [0.92-1.00], p=0.045). The area under receiver operating characteristic curve obtained with the Youden index was 0.88 with a sensitivity of 81.8% and specificity of 90.6%. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed that in a Grammont-type RSA, postoperative IR1 recovery is first associated with subscapularis tendon healing, followed by IR2 and finally the ability to tilt the scapula anteriorly. Better understanding of these factors preoperatively may provide greater insight on expected return of functional internal after RSA.

Posteroinferior glenosphere positioning is associated with improved range of motion following reverse shoulder arthroplasty with a 135° inlay humeral component and lateralized glenoid.

BACKGROUND: Optimal glenosphere positioning in a lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) to maximize functional outcomes has yet to be clearly defined. Center of rotation (COR) measurements have largely relied on anteroposterior radiographs, which allow assessment of lateralization and inferior position, but ignore scapular Y radiographs, which may provide an assessment of the posterior and inferior position relative to the acromion. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the COR in the sagittal plane and assess the effect of glenosphere positioning with functional outcomes using a 135° inlay stem with a lateralized glenoid. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on a prospectively maintained multicenter database on patients who underwent primary RSA from 2015 to 2021 with a 135° inlay stem. The COR was measured on minimum 2-year postoperative sagittal plain radiographs using a best-fit circle fit method. A best-fit circle was made on the glenosphere and the center was marked. From there, 4 measurements were made: (1) center to the inner cortex of the coracoid, (2) center to the inner cortex of the anterior acromion, (3) center to the inner cortex of the middle acromion, and (4) center to the inner cortex of the posterior acromion. Regression analysis was performed to evaluate any association between the position of the COR relative to bony landmarks with functional outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 136 RSAs met the study criteria. There was no relation with any of the distances with outcome scores (American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, visual analog scale). In regard to range of motion (ROM), each distance had an effect on at least 1 parameter. The COR to coracoid distance had the broadest association with ROM, with improvements in forward flexion (FF), external rotation (ER0), and internal rotation with the arm at 90° (IR90) (P < .001, P = .031, and P < .001, respectively). The COR to coracoid distance was also the only distance to affect the final FF and IR90. For every 1-mm increase in this distance, there was a 1.8° increase in FF and 1.5° increase in IR90 (ß = 1.78, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85-2.72, P < .001, and ß = 1.53, 95% CI 0.65-2.41, P < .001; respectively). CONCLUSION: Evaluation of the COR following RSA in the sagittal plane suggests that a posteroinferior glenosphere position may improve ROM when using a 135° inlay humeral component and a lateralized glenoid.

Robert H. Cofield, MD, Award for Best Oral Presentation 2023: Up to 8 mm of glenoid-sided lateralization does not increase the risk of acromial or scapular spine stress fracture following reverse shoulder arthroplasty with a 135° inlay humeral component.

BACKGROUND: Glenoid-sided lateralization in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) decreases bony impingement and improves rotational range of motion, but has been theorized to increase the risk of acromial or scapular spine fractures (ASFs). The purpose of this study was to assess if glenoid-sided lateralization even up to 8 mm increases the risk for stress fracture following RSA with a 135° inlay humeral component. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed from a multicenter prospectively collected database on patients who underwent primary RSA from 2015 to 2021. All RSAs were performed with a 135° inlay humeral component. Varying amounts of glenoid lateralization were used from 0 to 8 mm. Preoperative radiographs were reviewed for the presence of acromial thinning, acromiohumeral distance (AHD), and inclination. Postoperative implant position (distalization, lateralization, and inclination) as well as the presence of ASF was evaluated on minimum 1-year postoperative radiographs. Regression analyses were performed on component and clinical variables to assess for factors predictive of ASF. RESULTS: Acromial or scapular spine fractures were identified in 26 of 470 shoulders (5.5%). Glenoid-sided lateralization was not associated with ASF risk (P = .890). Furthermore, the incidence of fracture did not vary based on glenoid-sided lateralization (0-2 mm, 7.4%; 4 mm, 5.6%; 6 mm, 4.4%; 8 mm, 6.0%; P > .05 for all comparisons). RSA on the dominant extremity was predictive of fracture (odds ratio [OR] 2.21, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.20-5.75; P = .037), but there was no relationship between patient age, sex, preoperative acromial thinning, or diagnosis and risk of fracture. Although there was no difference in mean postoperative AHD between groups (P = .443), the pre- to postoperative delta AHD was higher in the stress fracture group (2.0 ± 0.7 cm vs. 1.7 ± 0.7 cm; P = .015). For every centimeter increase in delta AHD, there was a 121% increased risk for fracture (OR 2.21, 95% CI 1.33-3.68; P = .012). Additionally, for every 1-mm increase in inferior glenosphere overhang, there was a 19% increase in fracture risk (P = .025). CONCLUSION: Up to 8 mm of glenoid-sided metallic lateralization does not appear to increase the risk of ASF when combined with a 135° inlay humeral implant. Humeral distalization increases the risk of ASF, particularly when there is a larger change between pre- and postoperative AHD or higher inferior glenosphere overhang. In cases of pronounced preoperative superior humeral migration, it may be a consideration to avoid excessive postoperative distalization, but minimizing bony impingement via glenoid-sided lateralization appears to be safe.

An Algorithmic Approach to the Surgical Management of Massive Rotator Cuff Tears Based on Imaging, Function, and Repairability.

Massive rotator cuff tears are one the most challenging conditions to treat in the shoulder. A variety of surgical approaches have been used to manage massive rotator cuff tears, such as repair with or without augmentation, superior capsule reconstruction, tendon transfer, and reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The choice between joint preservation or reverse shoulder arthroplasty is first considered based on preoperative imaging and functional status, as well as patient factors. When joint preservation is the goal of treatment, a combination of repairability, patient function, and age can be used to provide an algorithmic approach to treatment. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V, expert opinion.

Higher Upper Subscapularis Goutallier Grade and Coracohumeral Distance Narrowing Are Predictive of Subscapularis Tears in Patients Undergoing Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the relation between subscapularis (SSC) Goutallier grade or coracohumeral distance (CHD) and SSC tears, as well as the relation between these radiographic variables and long head of the biceps tendon lesions. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted on prospectively maintained data on patients who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair of SSC tears between 2011 and 2021 with at least 6 months of follow-up. Patients with identified subscapularis tears during arthroscopy were included. A control group was established by randomly selecting patients without SSC tears from the same study period. Goutallier grading and CHD were obtained from preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. Receiver operating characteristic analysis was conducted to define optimal cutoff values for these diagnostic measures. RESULTS: The study included 735 patients with SSC tears and 249 patients in the control group. Comparing subscapularis tear and intact groups' Goutallier grades revealed significant differences in infraspinatus, upper and lower SSC, and overall SSC (P < .001). No significant difference was detected in supraspinatus Goutallier grade (P = .364). An SSC tear was observed in 58.3% (n = 265) of patients with Goutallier grade 0 of the upper SSC, 77.1% (n = 195) of patients with grade 1 changes, 98.7% (n = 155) with grade 2 changes, and 100% of grade 3 or 4 changes. Goutallier grade of the upper SSC showed a significant correlation with tear size (rs = 0.533; P < .01). CHD measurements were lower in individuals with SSC tears compared to those without tears (6.6 ± 1.7 vs 9.6 ± 1.8; P < .001). Upper SSC Goutallier grade >1 had an acceptable area under the curve (AUC) of 0.742. CHD of 7.96 mm or less had an excellent predictive AUC of 0.879. CONCLUSIONS: Higher Goutallier grade and CHD narrowing are potential associations predictive of SSC tears. Routine MRI assessment of muscle of the upper SSC and the CHD can contribute to the diagnostic accuracy of SSC tears and offer valuable information regarding the severity of such tears. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study.

Similar Clinical, Return to Sports, Recurrence, and Revision Outcomes Between Female and Male Athletes Following Arthroscopic Bankart Repair.

PURPOSE: To compare return to sports, functional outcomes, and recurrences rates between female and male athletes following arthroscopic Bankart repair (ABR). METHODS: A retrospective comparative study was performed between male and female athletes who underwent an ABR between January 2008 and December 2019. Sports practiced primarily by men in our practice (including rugby, soccer, boxing, and martial arts) were excluded. Functional outcomes included the Rowe score, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, and shoulder-dependent sports ability measured with the Athletic Shoulder Outcome Scoring System (ASOSS). Return to sport, recurrence, and revisions were evaluated. Additionally, we assessed the period (months) between surgery and recurrence events. RESULTS: A total of 58 female and 106 male patients were available for analysis at a median follow-up of 60 (interquartile range [IQR], 36-84) months. Ninety-one percent of the patients (n = 150) returned to sports and 84% (n = 126) returned to their preinjury level at a median of 6 months (IQR, 5-8) postoperatively. There were no differences in the rate of return to sports between females and males (91 vs 92% respectively, P = .997). There were no differences between the groups regarding postoperative functional outcomes, with most patients achieving the minimal clinically significant difference (Rowe: 98% female and 99% male, P = .584; ASOSS: 100% female and 99% male, P = .646). The overall recurrence rate was 9.7% (n = 16), with a rate of 10.3% (n = 6) in female and 9.4% (n = 10) in male athletes (P = .851). Time to event analysis showed that the median time to recurrence was 48 months in both groups (P = .848). The overall revision rate was 3% (n = 4), without significant differences between groups (P = .556). CONCLUSIONS: When compared within similar sports, there does not appear to be sex-related differences in functional outcomes, recurrence, or return to play following ABR. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III, retrospective comparative study.

Rip-Stop Fixation Constructs for Rotator Cuff Repair.

In arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, poor tendon quality, medially based tears, lateral tendon loss, or limited tendon mobility can all preclude the use of double-row suture constructs, presenting a challenge in achieving secure fixation and tendon-to-bone healing. Rip-stop suture configurations can be used in these settings to improve resistance to tissue cutout and provide enhanced biomechanical characteristics compared with standard single-row repairs. The load-sharing rip-stop technique uses 2 double-loaded medial suture anchors, which are placed adjacent to the articular margin, and 1 rip-stop suture tape, which is independently secured to bone with 2 lateral knotless anchors. The load-sharing rip-stop technique has been shown to improve ultimate load to failure by 1.7 times compared with a single-row repair. Clinically, this technique has been associated with a 53% healing rate of large and massive rotator cuff tears, compared with only 11% healing when using single-row repair. A completely knotless variation rip-stop configuration also has been described and shown to be biomechanically equivalent to a single-row repair with triple-loaded anchors. For surgeons desiring a single-row repair only, the knotless rip-stop therefore presents an advantage by eliminating the need for knot-tying and decreasing operative time.

Surgeon variation in glenoid bone reconstruction procedures for shoulder instability.

BACKGROUND: Advances in the understanding and management of glenoid bone loss in shoulder instability have led to the development of alternative bony reconstruction techniques to the Latarjet using free bone grafts, but little is known about surgeon adoption of these procedures. This study sought to characterize surgeon variation in the use of glenoid bone reconstruction procedures for shoulder instability and ascertain reasons underlying procedure choice. METHODS: A 9-question survey was created and distributed to 160 shoulder surgeons members of the PacWest Shoulder and Elbow Society, of whom 65 (41%) responded. The survey asked questions regarding fellowship training, years in practice, surgical volume, preferred methods of glenoid bone reconstruction, and reasons underlying treatment choice. RESULTS: All surgeons completed a fellowship, with an equal number of sports medicine fellowship-trained (46%) and shoulder and elbow fellowship-trained (46%) physicians. The majority had been in practice for at least 6 years (6-10 years: 25%; >10 years: 59%). Most (78%) performed ≤10 glenoid bony reconstructions per year, and 66% indicated that bony procedures represented <10% of their total annual shoulder instability case volume. The open Latarjet was the preferred primary reconstruction method (69%), followed by open free bone block (FBB) (22%), arthroscopic FBB (8%), and arthroscopic Latarjet (1%). Distal tibia allograft (DTA) was the preferred graft (74%) when performing an FBB procedure, followed by iliac crest autograft (18%), and distal clavicle autograft (6%). The top 5 reasons for preferring Latarjet over FBB were the sling effect (57%), the autologous nature of the graft (37%), its robust clinical evidence (22%), low cost (17%), and availability (11%). The top 5 reasons for choosing an FBB procedure were less anatomic disruption (58%), lower complication rate (21%), restoration of articular cartilage interface (16%), graft versatility (11%), and technical ease (11%). Only 20% of surgeons indicated always performing a bony glenoid reconstruction procedure in the noncontact athlete with less than 20% glenoid bone loss. However, that percentage rose to 62% when considering a contact athlete with the same amount of bone loss. CONCLUSIONS: Although open Latarjet continues to be the most popular glenoid bony primary reconstruction procedure in shoulder instability, nearly 30% of shoulder surgeons in the western United States have adopted FBB techniques as their preferred treatment modality--with DTA being the most frequently used graft. High-quality comparative clinical effectiveness research is needed to reduce decisional conflict and refine current evidence-based treatment algorithms.

Patients 75 years or older with primary glenohumeral arthritis and an intact rotator cuff show similar clinical improvement after reverse or anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The optimal management of primary glenohumeral arthritis (GHOA) in the elderly is an ongoing topic of debate. The purpose of this study was to compare functional outcomes and complications in patients aged 75 years or older treated with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for primary GHOA with an intact rotator cuff. METHODS: A retrospective study was performed on a prospectively maintained database which was queried for patients 75 years of age or older who underwent TSA or RSA for primary GHOA with an intact rotator cuff at a single institution between 2012 and 2021 with minimum 2-year follow-up. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including Visual Analog Scale for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and Subjective Shoulder Value, as well as active range of motion including forward flexion, external rotation, internal rotation, were collected preoperatively and postoperatively. Complications, reoperations, and satisfaction were also recorded. The percentage of patients achieving clinically significant improvement was evaluated with the minimally clinical important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state for each PRO. RESULTS: One-hundred and 4 patients were available for analysis, including 67 TSA patients and 37 RSAs with a mean follow-up of 39.4 months. Preoperative baseline characteristics, PROs, and range of motion were similar between groups. RSA was more commonly performed for eccentric glenoid wear (Walch B2/B3, 62% vs. 22%; P < .001). While clinical outcomes improved comparably in both groups, the TSA cohort showed significantly greater improvement in external rotation (36° vs. 26°; P = .013). Both cohorts had low revision (3% for TSA vs. 0% for RSA) and complication (7% for TSA vs. 5% for RSA; P = .677) rates. Satisfaction was similar in both groups (93% for TSA vs. 92% for RSA; P = .900). Clinically significant improvement was comparable between groups based on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (minimally clinical important difference, 93% for TSA vs. 100% for RSA; substantial clinical benefit, 82% vs. 95%; patient acceptable symptomatic state, 67% vs. 78%; P > .05). CONCLUSION: In this retrospective small sample size comparison study, TSA and RSA provide similar short-term clinical outcomes for patients 75 years and older with primary GHOA and an intact rotator cuff. Complication and revision rates are comparably low at short-term follow-up. Our data suggests that advanced age alone should not be used as a decision-making tool for TSA vs. RSA in the setting of primary GHOA with an intact rotator cuff.

Short-term functional outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty following three-dimensional planning is similar whether placed with a standard guide or patient-specific instrumentation.

BACKGROUND: Preoperative assessment of the glenoid and surgical placement of the initial guidewire are important in implant positioning during reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). Three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography and patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) have improved the placement of the glenoid component, but the impact on clinical outcomes remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to compare short-term clinical outcomes after rTSA based on an intraoperative technique for central guidewire placement in a cohort of patients who had preoperative 3D planning. METHODS: A retrospective matched analysis was performed from a multicenter prospective cohort of patients who underwent rTSA with preoperative 3D planning and a minimum of 2-year clinical follow-up. Patients were divided into 2 cohorts based on the technique used for glenoid guide pin placement: (1) standard manufacture guide (SG) that was not customized or (2) PSI. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), active range of motion, and strength measures were compared between the groups. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was used to assess the minimum clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state. RESULTS: One hundred seventy-eight patients met the study criteria: 56 underwent SGs and 122 underwent PSI. There was no difference in PROs between cohorts. There were no significant differences in the percentage of patients who achieved an American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons minimum clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, or patient acceptable symptomatic state. Improvements in internal rotation to the nearest spinal level (P < .001) and at 90° (P = .002) were higher in the SG group, but likely explained by differences in glenoid lateralization used. Improvements in abduction strength (P < .001) and external rotation strength (P = .010) were higher in the PSI group. CONCLUSION: rTSA performed after preoperative 3D planning leads to similar improvement in PROs regardless of whether an SG or PSI is used intraoperatively for central glenoid wire placement. Greater improvement in postoperative strength was observed with the use of PSI, but the clinical significance of this finding is unclear.

Perioperative risk stratification tools for shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Risk stratification tools are being increasingly utilized to guide patient selection for outpatient shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to identify the existing calculators used to predict discharge disposition, postoperative complications, hospital readmissions, and patient candidacy for outpatient shoulder arthroplasty and to compare the specific components used to generate their prediction models. METHODS: This review was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis protocol. PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and OVID Medline were searched for studies that developed calculators used to determine patient candidacy for outpatient surgery or predict discharge disposition, the risk of postoperative complications, and hospital readmissions after anatomic or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Reviews, case reports, letters to the editor, and studies including hemiarthroplasty cases were excluded. Data extracted included authors, year of publication, study design, patient population, sample size, input variables, comorbidities, method of validation, and intended purpose. The pros and cons of each calculator as reported by the respective authors were evaluated. RESULTS: Eleven publications met inclusion criteria. Three tools assessed patient candidacy for outpatient TSA, 3 tools evaluated the risk of 30- or 90-day hospital readmission and postoperative complications, and 5 tools predicted discharge destination. Four calculators validated previously constructed comorbidity indices used as risk predictors after shoulder arthroplasty, including the Charlson Comorbidity Index, Elixhauser Comorbidity Index, modified Frailty Index, and the Outpatient Arthroplasty Risk Assessment, while 7 developed newcalculators. Nine studies utilized multiple logistic regression to develop their calculators, while 1 study developed their algorithm based on previous literature and 1 used univariate analysis. Five tools were built using data from a single institution, 2 using data pooled from 2 institutions, and 4 from large national databases. All studies used preoperative data points in their algorithms with one tool additionally using intraoperative data points. The number of inputs ranged from 5 to 57 items. Four calculators assessed psychological comorbidities, 3 included inputs for substance use, and 1 calculator accounted for race. CONCLUSION: The variation in perioperative risk calculators after TSA highlights the need for standardization and external validation of the existing tools. As the use of outpatient shoulder arthroplasty increases, these calculators may become outdated or require revision. Incorporation of socioeconomic and psychological measures into these calculators should be investigated.

Stemless components lead to improved radiographic restoration of humeral head anatomy compared with short-stemmed components in total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Restoring the native center of rotation (COR) in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has been shown to improve postsurgical function, subjective outcomes, and implant longevity. The primary purpose of this study was to compare postoperative radiographic restoration of the humeral COR between short-stem and stemless humeral implants by evaluating the mean COR shift between the 2 techniques. Secondary outcomes evaluated were comparisons of COR shift outliers, humeral head implant thickness and diameter, direction of COR shift, and neck-shaft angle (NSA). METHODS: This study was a multicenter retrospective comparative study using a consecutive series of primary anatomic TSA patients who received either a short-stem or stemless humeral implant. Radiographically, COR and NSA were measured by 2 fellowship-trained surgeons using the best-fit circle technique on immediate postoperative Grashey radiographs. RESULTS: A total of 229 patients formed the final cohort for analysis that included 89 short stems and 140 stemless components. The mean COR shift for short stems was 2.7 mm (±1.4 mm) compared with 2.1 mm (±0.9 mm) for stemless implants (P < .001). The percentage of short-stem implant patients with a >2 mm COR difference from native was 66.0% (n = 62) compared with 47.4% (n = 64) for stemless (P = .006). The percentage of short-stem patients with a >4 mm COR difference from native was 17.0% (n = 16) compared with 3.0% (n = 4) for stemless (P < .001). The mean humeral implant head thickness for short stems was 18.7 ± 2.2 mm compared with 17.2 ± 1.3 mm for stemless implants (P < .001). The mean humeral head diameter for short stems was 48.7 ± 4.4 mm compared with 45.5 ± 3.5 mm for stemless implants (P < .001). The NSA for the short-stem cohort was 136.7° (±3.6°) compared with 133.5° (±6.0°) for stemless (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Stemless prostheses placed during TSA achieved improved restoration of humeral head COR and were less likely to have significant COR outliers compared with short-stem implants.

Remplissage reduces recurrent instability in high-risk patients with on-track Hill-Sachs lesions.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare recurrent instability rates between patients with on-track Hill-Sachs lesions who underwent arthroscopic labral repair (ALR) alone and those who underwent ALR with remplissage (ALR-R). Our hypothesis was that ALR-R would decrease the rate of recurrent instability, especially among patients at high risk of recurrent instability after ALR, such as contact athletes with near-track Hill-Sachs lesions. METHODS: We performed a multicenter, retrospective analysis of patients aged 14-50 years with on-track Hill-Sachs lesions who underwent ALR-R or ALR without remplissage between January 2014 and December 2019 with minimum 2-year follow-up. The exclusion criteria included prior ipsilateral shoulder surgery, >15% glenoid bone loss (GBL), off-track Hill-Sachs lesion, concomitant shoulder procedure, and connective tissue disorder. Age, sex, follow-up, and contact sports participation were recorded. GBL, Hills-Sachs interval (HSI), glenoid track, and distance to dislocation (DTD) were determined from preoperative magnetic resonance imaging scans. Affected-shoulder range of motion, Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index scores, Subjective Shoulder Value scores, and recurrent dislocation and/or revision surgery status were also collected. A subgroup analysis was performed on "high-risk" patients (defined as participants in contact sports with DTD <10 mm) from each cohort. RESULTS: The ALR-R cohort included 56 patients, and the ALR cohort included 127. ALR-R patients had greater GBL (P = .004) and a greater HSI (P < .001). In the ALR-R cohort, only 1 patient (1.8%) had a recurrent dislocation and there were no revision operations. In comparison, in the ALR cohort, 14 patients (11.0%) had recurrent dislocations (P = .040) and 8 (6.3%) underwent revision operations (P = .11). Univariate analysis showed that remplissage protected against recurrent dislocation (P = .040) whereas younger age (P = .004), contact sports participation (P = .001), and increased GBL (P = .048) were associated with recurrent dislocation. Multivariate analysis showed that HSI (P = .001) and contact sports participation (P = .002) predicted recurrent dislocation. Among high-risk patients, only 1 patient (4.2%) in the ALR-R group had a recurrent instability event vs. 6 (66.7%) in the ALR group (P < .001). The high-risk ALR-R subgroup also had significantly better final Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (P = .008) and Subjective Shoulder Value (P = .001) scores than the high-risk ALR subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Anterior shoulder instability patients with on-track Hill-Sachs lesions have lower recurrent dislocation rates after ALR plus remplissage when compared with ALR alone. This is especially true for high-risk patients, such as contact athletes with a DTD <10 mm.

Costs of shoulder and elbow procedures are significantly reduced in ambulatory surgery centers compared to hospital outpatient departments.

BACKGROUND: Recent literature has shown the advantages of outpatient surgery for many shoulder and elbow procedures, including cost savings with equivalent safety in appropriately selected patients. Two common settings for outpatient surgeries are ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs), which function as independent financial and administrative entities, or hospital outpatient departments (HOPDs), which are owned and operated by hospital systems. The purpose of this study was to compare shoulder and elbow surgery costs between ASCs and HOPDs. METHODS: Publicly available data from 2022 provided by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) was accessed via the Medicare Procedure Price Lookup Tool. Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes were used to identify shoulder and elbow procedures approved for the outpatient setting by CMS. Procedures were grouped into arthroscopy, fracture, or miscellaneous. Total costs, facility fees, Medicare payments, patient payment (costs not covered by Medicare), and surgeon's fees were extracted. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate means and standard deviations. Cost differences were analyzed using Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: Fifty-seven CPT codes were identified. Arthroscopy procedures (n = 16) at ASCs had significantly lower total costs ($2667 ± $989 vs. $4899 ± $1917; P = .009), facility fees ($1974 ± $819 vs. $4206 ± $1753; P = .008), Medicare payments ($2133 ± $791 vs. $3919 ± $1534; P = .009), and patient payments ($533 ± $198 vs. $979 ± $383; P = .009) compared with HOPDs. Fracture procedures (n = 10) at ASCs had lower total costs ($7680 ± $3123 vs. $11,335 ± $3830; P = .049), facility fees ($6851 ± $3033 vs. $10,507 ± $3733; P = .047), and Medicare payments ($6143 ± $2499 vs. $9724 ± $3676; P = .049) compared with HOPDs, although patient payments were not significantly different ($1535 ± $625 vs. $1610 ± $160; P = .449). Miscellaneous procedures (n = 31) at ASCs had lower total costs ($4202 ± $2234 vs. $6985 ± $2917; P < .001), facility fees ($3348 ± $2059 vs. $6132 ± $2736; P < .001), Medicare payments ($3361 ± $1787 vs. $5675 ± $2635; P < .001), and patient payments ($840 ± $447 vs. $1309 ± $350; P < .001) compared with HOPDs. The combined cohort (n = 57) at ASCs had lower total costs ($4381 ± $2703 vs. $7163 ± $3534; P < .001), facility fees ($3577 ± $2570 vs. $6539.1 ± $3391; P < .001), Medicare payments ($3504 ± $2162 vs. $5892 ± $3206; P < .001), and patient payments ($875 ± $540 vs. $1269 ± $393; P < .001) compared with HOPDs. CONCLUSION: Shoulder and elbow procedures performed at HOPDs for Medicare recipients were found to have average total cost increase of 164% compared with those performed at ASCs (184% savings for arthroscopy, 148% for fracture, and 166% for miscellaneous). ASC use conferred lower facility fees, patient payments, and Medicare payments. Policy efforts to incentivize migration of surgeries to ASCs may translate into substantial health care cost savings.