Variable Return to Play and Sport Performance After Elbow Ulnar Collateral Ligament Reconstruction in Baseball Players: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To evaluate return to play (RTP) and return to same level of play (RTSP) rates as well as preoperative and postoperative in-game performance metrics in baseball pitchers who underwent ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction (UCLR). Secondarily, this review sought to assess outcomes based on primary versus revision UCLR as well as level of competition. METHODS: This review was performed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were queried to identify articles evaluating UCLR in baseball players between January 2002 and October 2022. Data included RTP, RTSP, and performance metrics including earned run average, innings pitched, walks and hits per inning pitched, batting average against, strikeouts per 9 innings, walks per 9 innings, percentage of fastballs thrown, and average fastball velocity. The Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies criteria were used for quality assessment. RESULTS: Analysis included 25 articles reporting on 2,100 elbows. After primary UCLR, RTP ranged from 336 to 615 days (57% to 100% achieved) and RTSP ranged from 330 to 513 days (61% to 95%). After revision UCLR, RTP ranged from 381 to 631 days (67% to 98%) and RTSP ranged from 518 to 575 days (42% to 78%). When stratifying primary UCLR outcomes by competitive level, RTP and RTSP ranged respectively from 417 to 615 days (75% to 100%) and 513 days (73% to 87%) for Major League Baseball only, 409 to 615 days (57% to 100%) and 470 to 513 days (61% to 95%) for Major League Baseball plus Minor League Baseball, and 336 to 516 days (73% to 85%) and 330 days (55% to 74%) for college plus high school. Heterogeneity was seen in postoperative sports performance metrics. CONCLUSIONS: Although more than half of baseball players appear able to RTP after primary and revision UCLR, RTSP rates after revision UCLR were as low as 42% in the literature. Preoperative and postoperative performance metrics varied. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II-IV studies.

Clinical outcomes of anatomic vs. reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in primary osteoarthritis with preoperative external rotation weakness and an intact rotator cuff: a case-control study.

BACKGROUND: Anatomic (aTSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) are well-established treatments for patients with primary osteoarthritis and an intact cuff. However, it is unclear whether aTSA or rTSA provides superior outcomes in patients with preoperative external rotation (ER) weakness. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty database was performed between 2007 and 2020. Patients were excluded for preoperative diagnoses of nerve injury, infection, tumor, or fracture. The analysis included 333 aTSAs and 155 rTSAs performed for primary cuff-intact osteoarthritis with 2-year minimum follow-up. Defining preoperative ER weakness as strength <3.3 kilograms (7.2 pounds), 3 cohorts were created and matched: (1) weak aTSAs (n = 74) vs. normal aTSAs (n = 74), (2) weak rTSAs (n = 38) vs. normal rTSAs (n = 38), and (3) weak rTSAs (n = 60) vs. weak aTSAs (n = 60). We compared range of motion, outcome scores, strength, complications, and revision rates at the latest follow-up. RESULTS: Despite weak aTSAs having poorer preoperative strength in forward elevation and ER (P < .001), neither of these deficits persisted postoperatively compared with the normal cohort. Likewise, weak rTSAs had poorer preoperative strength in forward elevation and ER, overhead motion, and Constant, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index, and University of California, Los Angeles scores (P < .029). However, no statistically significant differences were found between preoperatively weak and normal rTSAs. When comparing weak aTSA vs. weak rTSA, no differences were found in preoperative and postoperative outcomes, proportion of patients achieving the minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit, and complication and rate of revision surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In preoperatively weak patients with cuff-intact primary osteoarthritis, aTSA leads to similar postoperative strength, range of motion, and outcome scores compared with patients with normal preoperative strength, indicating that preoperative weakness does not preclude aTSA use. Furthermore, patients who were preoperatively weak in ER demonstrated improved postoperative rotational motion after undergoing aTSA and rTSA, with both groups achieving the minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit at similar rates.

Graft choice and techniques used in elbow ulnar collateral ligament reconstruction over the last 20 years: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Elbow medial ulnar collateral ligament (mUCL) injuries have become increasingly common, leading to a higher number of mUCL reconstructions (UCLR). Various techniques and graft choices have been reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the prevalence of each available graft choice, the surgical techniques most utilized, and the reported complications associated with each surgical method. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysesguidelines. We queried PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify all articles that included UCLR between January 2002 and October 2022. We included all studies that referenced UCLR graft choice, surgical technique, and/or ulnar nerve transposition. Studies were evaluated in a narrative fashion to assess demographics and report current trends in utilization and complications of UCLR as they pertain to graft choice and surgical techniques over the past 20 years. Where possible, we stratified based on graft and technique. RESULTS: Forty-seven articles were included, reporting on 6671 elbows. The cohort was 98% male, had a weighted mean age of 21 years and follow-up of 53 months. There were 6146 UCLRs (92%) performed with an autograft and 152 (2.3%) that utilized an allograft, while 373 (5.6%) were from mixed cohorts of autograft and allograft. Palmaris longus autograft was the most utilized mUCL graft choice (64%). The most utilized surgical configuration was the figure-of-8 (68%). Specifically, the most common techniques were the modified Jobe technique (37%), followed by American Sports Medicine Institute (ASMI) (22%), and the docking (22%) technique. A concomitant ulnar nerve transposition was performed in 44% of all patients, with 1.9% of these patients experiencing persistent ulnar nerve symptoms after ulnar nerve transposition. Of the total cohort, 14% experienced postoperative ulnar neuritis with no prior preoperative ulnar nerve symptoms. Further, meta-analysis revealed a significantly greater revision rate with the use of allografts compared to autograft and mixed cohorts (2.6% vs. 1.8% and 1.9%, P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Most surgeons performed UCLR with palmaris autograft utilizing a figure-of-8 graft configuration, specifically with the modified Jobe technique. The overall rate of allograft use was 2.3%, much lower than expected. The revision rate for UCLR with allograft appears to be greater compared to UCLR with autograft, although this may be secondary to limited allograft literature.

Does hydrogen peroxide application to the dermis following surgical incision affect Cutibacterium acnes cultures in total shoulder arthroplasty in male patients? A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infections occur in 1%-4% of primary total shoulder arthroplasties (TSAs). Cutibacterium acnes is the most commonly implicated organism and has been shown to persist in the dermis despite use of preoperative antibiotics and standard skin preparations. Studies have shown decreased rates of cultures positive for C acnes with use of preoperative benzoyl peroxide or hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), but even with this positive deep cultures remain common. We sought to determine whether an additional application of H2O2 directly to the dermis following skin incision would further decrease deep culture positivity rates. METHODS: We performed a randomized controlled trial comparing tissue culture results in primary TSA in patients who received a standard skin preparation with H2O2, ethanol, and ChloraPrep (CareFusion, Leawood, KS, USA) vs. an additional application of H2O2 to the dermis immediately after skin incision. Given the sexual dimorphism seen in the shoulder microbiome regarding C acnes colonization rates, only male patients were included. Bivariable and multivariable analyses were performed to compare rates of positive cultures based on demographic and surgical factors. RESULTS: Dermal cultures were found to be positive for C acnes at similar rates between the experimental and control cohorts for the initial (22% vs. 28%, P = .600) and final (61% vs. 50%, P > .999) dermal swabs. On bivariable analysis, the rate of positive deep cultures for C acnes was lower in the experimental group, but this difference was not statistically significant (28% vs. 44%, P = .130). However, patients who underwent anatomic TSA were found to have a significantly greater rate of deep cultures positive for C acnes (57% vs. 28%, P = .048); when controlling for this on multivariable analysis, the experimental cohort was found to be associated with significantly lower odds of having positive deep cultures (odds ratio, 0.37 [95% confidence interval, 0.16-0.90], P = .023). There were no wound complications in either cohort. CONCLUSIONS: An additional H2O2 application directly to the dermis following skin incision resulted in a small but statistically significant decrease in the odds of having deep cultures positive for C acnes without any obvious adverse effects on wound healing. Given its cost-effectiveness, use of a post-incisional dermal decontamination protocol may be considered as an adjuvant to preoperative use of benzoyl peroxide or H2O2 to decrease C acnes contamination.

Does achieving clinically important thresholds after first shoulder arthroplasty predict similar outcomes of the contralateral shoulder?

BACKGROUND: Patients are increasingly undergoing bilateral total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). At present, it is unknown whether success after the first TSA is predictive of success after contralateral TSA. We aimed to determine whether exceeding clinically important thresholds of success after primary TSA predicts similar outcomes for subsequent contralateral TSA. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty database for patients undergoing bilateral primary anatomic (aTSA) or reverse (rTSA) total shoulder arthroplasty since January 2000 with preoperative and 2- or 3-year clinical follow-up. Our primary outcome was whether exceeding clinically important thresholds in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score for the first TSA was predictive of similar success of the contralateral TSA; thresholds for the ASES score were adopted from prior literature and included the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), the substantial clinical benefit (SCB), 30% of maximal possible improvement (MPI), and the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS). The PASS is defined as the highest level of symptom beyond which patients consider themselves well, which may be a better indicator of a patient's quality of life. To determine whether exceeding clinically important thresholds was independently predictive of similar success after second contralateral TSA, we performed multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age at second surgery, sex, BMI, and type of first and second TSA. RESULTS: Of the 134 patients identified that underwent bilateral shoulder arthroplasty, 65 (49%) had bilateral rTSAs, 45 (34%) had bilateral aTSAs, 21 (16%) underwent aTSA/rTSA, and 3 (2%) underwent rTSA/aTSA. On multivariable logistic regression, exceeding clinically important thresholds after first TSA was not associated with greater odds of achieving thresholds after second TSA when success was evaluated by the MCID, SCB, and 30% MPI. In contrast, exceeding the PASS after first TSA was associated with 5.9 times greater odds (95% confidence interval 2.5-14.4, P < .001) of exceeding the PASS after second TSA. Overall, patients who exceeded the PASS after first TSA exceeded the PASS after second TSA at a higher rate (71% vs. 29%, P < .001); this difference persisted when stratified by type of prosthesis for first and second TSA. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who achieve the ASES score PASS after first TSA have greater odds of achieving the PASS for the contralateral shoulder regardless of prostheses type.

Quantifying success after first revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: the minimal and substantial clinically important percentage of maximal possible improvement.

BACKGROUND: When patients require reoperation after primary shoulder arthroplasty, revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is most commonly performed. However, defining clinically important improvement in these patients is challenging because benchmarks have not been previously defined. Furthermore, although the minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit are commonly used to assess clinically relevant success, these metrics are limited by ceiling effects that may cause inaccurate estimates of patient success. Our purpose was to define the minimal and substantial clinically important percentage of maximal possible improvement (MCI-%MPI and SCI-%MPI) for commonly used pain and functional outcome scores after revision rTSA and to quantify the proportion of patients achieving clinically relevant success. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used a prospectively collected single-institution database of patients who underwent first revision rTSA between August 2015 and December 2019. Patients with a diagnosis of periprosthetic fracture or infection were excluded. Outcome scores included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), raw and normalized Constant, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) scores. We used an anchor-based method to calculate the MCI-%MPI and SCI-%MPI. In addition, we calculated the MCI-%MPI using a distribution-based method for historical comparison. The proportions of patients achieving each threshold were assessed. The influence of sex, type of primary shoulder arthroplasty, and reason for revision rTSA were also assessed by calculating cohort-specific thresholds. RESULTS: Ninety-three revision rTSAs with minimum 2-year follow-up were evaluated. The mean age of the patients was 67 years; 56% were female, and the average follow-up was 54 months. Revision rTSA was performed most commonly for failed anatomic TSA (n = 47), followed by hemiarthroplasty (n = 21), rTSA (n = 15), and humeral head resurfacing (n = 10). The indication for revision rTSA was most commonly glenoid loosening (n = 24), followed by rotator cuff failure (n = 23) and subluxation and unexplained pain (n = 11 for both). The anchor-based MCI-%MPI thresholds (% of patients achieving) were ASES = 33% (49%), raw Constant = 23% (64%), normalized Constant = 30% (61%), UCLA = 51% (53%), SST = 26% (68%), and SPADI = 29% (58%). The anchor-based SCI-%MPI thresholds (% of patients achieving) were ASES = 55% (31%), raw Constant = 41% (27%), normalized Constant = 52% (22%), UCLA = 66% (37%), SST = 74% (25%), and SPADI = 49% (34%). CONCLUSIONS: This study is the first to establish thresholds for the MCI-%MPI and SCI-%MPI at minimum 2 years after revision rTSA, providing physicians an evidence-based method to assess patient outcomes postoperatively.

Toxic effects of local anesthetics on rat fibroblasts: An in-vitro study.

BACKGROUND: Infusion catheters facilitate a controlled infusion of local anesthetic (LA) for pain control after surgery. However, their potential effects on healing fibroblasts are unspecified. METHODS: Rat synovial fibroblasts were cultured in 12-well plates. Dilutions were prepared in a solution containing reduced-serum media and 0.9% sodium chloride in 1:1 concentration. Each well was treated with 500 µl of the appropriate LA dilution or normal saline for 15- or 30-min. LA dilutions included: 0.5% ropivacaine HCl, 0.2% ropivacaine HCl, 1% lidocaine HCl and epinephrine 1:100,000, 1% lidocaine HCl, 0.5% bupivacaine HCl and epinephrine 1:200,000, and 0.5% bupivacaine HCl. This was replicated three times. Dilution of each LA whereby 50% of the cells were unviable (Lethal dose 50 [LD50]) was analyzed. RESULTS: LD50 was reached for lidocaine and bupivacaine, but not ropivacaine. Lidocaine 1% with epinephrine is toxic at 30-min at 1/4 and 1/2 sample dilutions. Bupivacaine 0.5% was found to be toxic at 30-min at 1/2 sample dilution. Bupivacaine 0.5% with epinephrine was found to be toxic at 15- and 30-min at 1/4 sample dilution. Lidocaine 1% was found to be toxic at 15- and 30-min at 1/2 sample dilution. Ropivacaine 0.2% and 0.5% remained below LD50 at all time-points and concentrations, with 0.2% demonstrating the least cell death. CONCLUSIONS: Though pain pumps are generally efficacious, LAs may inhibit fibroblasts, including perineural fibroblast and endoneurial fibroblast-like cells, which may contribute to persistent nerve deficits, delayed neurogenic pain, and negatively impact healing. Should a continuous infusion be used, our data supports ropivacaine 0.2%. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Basic Science Study; Animal model.

Anatomic versus reverse total shoulder arthroplasty outcomes after prior contralateral anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with bilateral primary osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff.

PURPOSE: We aimed to compare outcomes in patients that underwent bilateral anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) vs. aTSA/ reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) for rotator cuff-intact glenohumeral osteoarthritis (RCI-GHOA) to further elucidate the role of rTSA in this patient population. METHODS: A single-institution prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty database was reviewed for patients undergoing bilateral total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for RCI-GHOA with a primary aTSA and subsequent contralateral aTSA or rTSA. Outcome scores (SPADI, SST, ASES, UCLA, Constant) and active range of motion (abduction, forward elevation [FE], external and internal rotation [ER and IR]) were evaluated. Clinically relevant benchmarks (minimal clinically important difference [MCID], substantial clinical benefit [SCB], and patient acceptable symptomatic state [PASS]) were evaluated against values in prior literature. Incidence of surgical complications and revision rates were examined in qualifying patients as well as those without .05). The 2nd TSAs between groups were similar preoperatively, but aTSA/rTSA had superior outcome scores, overhead motion, and active abduction compared to patients that underwent aTSA/aTSA. There were no differences in active ER and IR scores or complication rates between groups. CONCLUSION: Patients with RCI-GHOA have excellent clinical outcomes after either aTSA/aTSA or aTSA/rTSA.

Early clinical outcomes following navigation-assisted baseplate fixation in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a matched cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate placement of the glenoid baseplate is an important technical goal of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The use of computer navigated instrumentation has been shown to improve the accuracy and precision of intraoperative execution of preoperative planning. The purpose of this study was to compare early clinical outcomes of patients undergoing navigated RSA vs. a non-navigated matched cohort. METHODS: A retrospective review of a prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty database was used to identify 113 patients from a single institution who underwent navigated primary RSA with a minimum 2-year follow-up. A matched cohort of 113 non-navigated RSAs was created based on sex, age, follow-up, and preoperative diagnosis. Preoperative and postoperative range of motion, functional outcome scores, and complications were reported. RESULTS: A total of 226 shoulders with a mean age of 71 years were evaluated after navigated (113) or non-navigated (113) RSAs. The mean follow-up was 32.8 months (range: 21-54 months). At the final postoperative follow-up, the navigated group had better active forward elevation (135° vs. 129°, P = .023), active external rotation (39° vs. 32°, P = .003), and Constant scores (71.1 vs. 65.5, P = .003). However, when comparing improvements from the preoperative state, there was no statistically significant difference in range of motion or functional outcome scores between the groups. Complications occurred in 1.8% (2) of patients undergoing navigated RSA compared with 5.3% (6) in the non-navigated group (P = .28). Scapular notching (3.1% vs. 8.0%, P = .21) and revision surgery (0.9% vs. 3.5%, P = .37) were more common in non-navigated shoulders. CONCLUSION: At early follow-up, navigated and non-navigated RSAs yielded similar rates of improvement in range of motion and functional outcome scores. Notching and reoperation was more common in non-navigated shoulders, but did not reach statistical significance. Longer follow-up and larger cohort size are needed to determine if intraoperative navigation lengthens the durability of RSA results and reduces the incidence of postoperative complications.

Clinical outcomes of anatomic vs. reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in primary osteoarthritis with preoperative rotational stiffness and an intact rotator cuff: a case control study.

BACKGROUND: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) has begun to challenge the place of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) as a primary procedure for certain indications. One purported benefit of aTSA is improved postoperative range of motion (ROM) compared to rTSA especially in internal rotation; however, it is unclear whether aTSA can provide patients with significant preoperative stiffness superior ROM compared to rTSA. Our purpose was to compare clinical outcomes of aTSA and rTSA performed in stiff vs. non-stiff shoulders for rotator cuff intact (RCI) glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA). METHODS: A retrospective review of an international shoulder arthroplasty database identified 1608 aTSAs and 600 rTSAs performed for RCI GHOA with minimum 2-year follow-up. Defining preoperative stiffness as ≤ 0° of passive external rotation (ER), we matched: (1) stiff aTSAs (n = 257) 1:3 to non-stiff aTSAs, (2) stiff rTSAs (n = 87) 1:3 to non-stiff rTSAs, and (3) stiff rTSAs (n = 87) 1:1 to stiff aTSAs. We compared ROM, outcome scores, and the rate of complications and revision surgery at latest follow-up. RESULTS: Despite stiff aTSAs having poorer preoperative ROM and functional outcome scores for all measures assessed (P < .001 for all), only poorer postoperative active abduction (113 ± 27° vs. 128 ± 35°; P < .001), active ER (39 ± 18° vs. 50 ± 20°; P < .001), and passive ER (45 ± 17° vs. 56 ± 18°; P < .001) persisted postoperatively compared to the non-stiff cohort. Similarly, stiff rTSAs had poorer preoperative ROM and functional outcome scores for all measures assessed compared to non-stiff rTSAs (P ≤ .044), but only poorer active abduction (108 ± 24° vs. 128 ± 29°, P < .001), active ER (28 ± 17° vs. 42 ± 17°, P < .001), and passive ER (36 ± 15° vs. 48 ± 17°, P < .001) persisted. When comparing stiff rTSAs to matched stiff aTSAs, no significant differences in preoperative ROM or functional outcome scores were found. However, stiff aTSAs had greater postoperative active internal rotation score (4.8 ± 1.5 vs. 4.2 ± 1.7, P = .022), active ER (40 ± 19° vs. 28 ± 17°, P < .001), and passive ER (46 ± 18° vs. 36 ± 15°, P = .001). Postoperative outcome scores were similar across all matched cohort comparisons despite motion differences. The rate of complications and need for revision surgery did not differ between any group comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with RCI GHOA who have preoperative rotational stiffness have poorer postoperative ROM compared with non-stiff patients following both aTSA and rTSA, but similar functional outcome scores. Notably, preoperative limitations in passive ER do not appear to be a limitation to utilizing aTSA. Indeed, patients with limited preoperative ER treated with aTSA had greater postoperative internal rotation and ER compared to those treated with rTSA.

Do patients with poor early clinical outcomes after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty ultimately improve?

BACKGROUND: Although most patients undergoing reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) have substantial improvement in pain and function at early follow-up, improvements in pain and range of motion progress more slowly during postoperative rehabilitation in a subset of patients. The purpose of this study was to define a patient's risk of persistent shoulder dysfunction beyond the early postoperative period and identify risk factors for persistent poor performance. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 292 primary rTSAs with early poor performance and a preoperative diagnosis of osteoarthritis, cuff tear arthropathy, or rotator cuff tear from a multicenter database. Early poor performance was defined as a postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score below the 20th percentile at 3 months (58 points) or 6 months (65 points) postoperatively. Persistent poor performance at 2 years was defined as failure to achieve the patient acceptable symptomatic state for rTSA (77.3 points for the ASES score). The primary outcome was the rate of persistent poor performance. Secondarily, we compared the clinical outcomes of persistent poor performers vs. shoulders that improved at 2-year follow-up and assessed risk factors for persistent poor performance. RESULTS: At 2-year follow-up, 61% of patients (n = 178) with poor performance at either 3- or 6-month follow-up had persistent poor performance. The rate increased to 85% if poor performance occurred at both 3- and 6-month follow-up. The minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit for range of motion and outcome scores were exceeded by early poor performers at rates of 83%-92% and 60%-77%, respectively, at 2-year follow-up. On multivariate logistic regression analysis, independent predictors of persistent poor performance after rTSA were lack of hypertension (odds ratio [OR], 0.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13-0.57; P < .001), heart disease (OR, 2.89; 95% CI, 1.24-6.77; P = .011), uncemented humeral fixation (OR, 0.11; 95% CI, 0.01-1.18; P = .037), previous shoulder surgery (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.06-4.30; P = .031), lower preoperative ASES score (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.87-0.97; P = .002), and lower preoperative subjective rating of pain at its worst (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54-0.99; P = .038). DISCUSSION: Despite the fact that 85% of rTSA patients with an ASES score below the 20th percentile at early follow-up exceeded the minimal clinically important difference for improvement in the ASES score at 2-year clinical follow-up, 61% still had persistent poor performance, with failure to achieve the patient acceptable symptomatic state for the ASES score. Persistent poor performance after rTSA was best predicted by a history of shoulder surgery and a poorer preoperative ASES score. These findings can aid surgeons when counseling patients both preoperatively and postoperatively. In the setting of early poor performance, the risk of persistent poor performance must be balanced against the potential outcomes of revision surgery when considering early surgical intervention.

Larger-diameter trunnions and bolt-reinforced taper junctions are associated with less tribocorrosion in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Morse taper junction tribocorrosion is recognized as an important failure mode in total hip arthroplasty. Although taper junctions are used in almost all shoulder arthroplasty systems currently available in the United States, with large variation in design, limited literature has described comparable analyses of taper damage in these implants. In this study, taper junction damage in retrieved reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) implants was assessed and analyzed. METHODS: Fifty-seven retrieved RTSAs with paired baseplate and glenosphere components with Morse taper junctions were identified via database query; 19 of these also included paired humeral stems and trays or spacers with taper junctions. Components were graded for standard damage modes and for fretting and corrosion with a modified Goldberg-Cusick classification system. Medical records and preoperative radiographs were reviewed. Comparative analyses were performed assessing the impact of various implant, radiographic, and patient factors on taper damage. RESULTS: Standard damage modes were commonly found at the evaluated trunnion junctions, with scratching and edge deformation damage on 76% and 46% of all components, respectively. Fretting and corrosion damage was also common, observed on 86% and 72% of baseplates, respectively, and 23% and 40% of glenospheres, respectively. Baseplates showed greater moderate to severe (grade ≥ 3) fretting (43%) and corrosion (27%) damage than matched glenospheres (fretting, 9%; corrosion, 13%). Humeral stems showed moderate to severe fretting and corrosion on 28% and 30% of implants, respectively; matched humeral trays or spacers showed both less fretting (14%) and less corrosion (17%). On subgroup analysis, large-tapered implants had significantly lower summed fretting and corrosion grades than small-tapered implants (P < .001 for both) on glenospheres; paired baseplate corrosion grades were also significantly lower (P = .031) on large-tapered implants. Factorial analysis showed that bolt reinforcement of the taper junction was also associated with less fretting and corrosion damage on both baseplates and glenospheres. Summed fretting and corrosion grades on glenospheres with trunnions (male) were significantly greater than on glenospheres with bores (female) (P < .001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Damage to the taper junction is commonly found in retrieved RTSAs and can occur after only months of being implanted. In this study, tribocorrosion predominantly occurred on the taper surface of the baseplate (vs. glenosphere) and on the humeral stem (vs. tray or spacer), which may relate to the flexural rigidity difference between the titanium and cobalt-chrome components. Bolt reinforcement and the use of large-diameter trunnions led to less tribocorrosion of the taper junction. The findings of this study provide evidence for the improved design of RTSA prostheses to decrease tribocorrosion.

Survivorship after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty and predictors of 1-year and overall mortality.

BACKGROUND: Patient survivorship and risk factors of mortality after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) are seldom and inadequately studied. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the mortality rates and predictors of 1-year and overall mortality after RTSA. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 1518 consecutive adult patients who underwent RTSA at our institution. The Social Security Death Index and institutional electronic medical records were queried to verify patient living status. Patients were censored at date of death if deceased, the date that living status was verified if alive, or latest follow-up if living status could not be verified. Mortality rates and risk factors of 1-year and overall mortality after RTSA were identified on univariate and multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 5.1 ± 3.8 years. Thirty-day (0.1%), 90-day (0.7%), and 1-year (1.8%) mortality rates were low but increased to 11% at 5 years. Increased odds of 1-year mortality were independently associated with heart disease (odds ratio [OR] 2.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.07-6.50, P = .035) and use of a cemented stem (OR 2.64, 95% CI 1.04-6.69, P = .041). Independent risk factors of overall mortality included older age at surgery (hazard ratio [HR] 1.05, 95% CI 1.03-1.07, P < .001), minority ethnicity (protective risk factor, HR 0.37, 95% CI 0.15-0.91, P = .031), heart disease (HR 1.42, 95% CI 1.00-2.02, P = .048), diabetes mellitus (HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.04-2.08, P = .028), tobacco use (HR 1.79, 95% CI 1.08-2.98, P = .025), post renal transplant (HR 12.69, 95% CI 3.92-41.05, P < .001), chronic liver failure (HR 4.40, 95% CI 1.38-14.09, P = .013), and receiving a cemented stem (HR 1.60, 95% CI 1.13-2.26, P = .008). CONCLUSIONS: RTSA carries a low risk of short-term mortality postoperatively. When counseling patients preoperatively, surgeons should consider the predictors of mortality after RTSA reported herein to ensure appropriate patient selection and counseling.

The association between humeral lengthening and clinical outcomes after reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between humeral lengthening and clinical outcomes after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with stratification based on measurement method and implant design. METHODS: This systematic review was performed using PRISMA-P guidelines. PubMed/Medline, Cochrane Trials, and Embase were queried for articles evaluating the relationship between humeral lengthening and clinical outcomes inclusive of range of motion (ROM), strength, outcome scores, and pertinent complications (acromial and scapular spine fractures, nerve injury) after RSA. The relationship between humeral lengthening and clinical outcomes was reported descriptively overall and stratified by measurement method and implant design (globally medialized vs. lateralized). A positive association was defined as increased humeral lengthening being associated with greater ROM, outcome scores, or a greater incidence of complications, whereas a negative association denoted that increased humeral lengthening was associated with poorer ROM, outcome scores, or a lower incidence of complications. Meta-analysis was performed to compare humeral lengthening between patients with and without fractures of the acromion or scapular spine. RESULTS: Twenty-two studies were included. Humeral lengthening was assessed as the acromiohumeral distance (AHD), the distance from the acromion to the greater tuberosity (AGT), the acromion to the deltoid tuberosity (ADT), and the acromion to the distal humerus (ADH). Of 11 studies that assessed forward elevation, a positive association with humeral lengthening was found in 6, a negative association was found in 1, and 4 studies reported no association. Of studies assessing internal rotation (n = 9), external rotation (n = 7), and abduction (n = 4), all either identified a positive or lack of association with humeral lengthening. Studies assessing outcome scores (n = 11) found either a positive (n = 5) or no (n = 6) association with humeral lengthening. Of the studies that assessed fractures of the acromion and/or scapular spine (n = 6), 2 identified a positive association with humeral lengthening, 1 identified a negative association, and 3 identified no association. The single study that assessed the incidence of nerve injury identified a positive association with humeral lengthening. Meta-analysis was possible for AGT (n = 2) and AHD (n = 2); greater humeral lengthening was found in patients with fractures for studies using the AGT (mean difference 4.5 mm, 95% CI 0.7-8.3) but not the AHD. Limited study inclusion and heterogeneity prohibited identification of trends based on method of measuring humeral lengthening and implant design. CONCLUSION: The relationship between humeral lengthening and clinical outcomes after RSA remains unclear and requires future investigation using a standardized assessment method.

Survivorship analysis of revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The expansion of indications for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has resulted in a rapid increase in the incidence of subsequent revision procedures. The purpose of this study was to identify the incidence and risk factors for re-revision shoulder arthroplasty after first revision RTSA. METHODS: We retrospectively queried our institutional shoulder arthroplasty database of prospectively collected data from 2003 to 2019. To assess revision implant survival, patients were censored on the date of re-revision surgery or, if the revision arthroplasty was not revised, at the most recent follow-up or their date of death. Patients with a prior infection, concern for infection at the time of revision, antibiotic spacer, or oncologic indication for primary arthroplasty were excluded. A total of 186 revision RTSAs were included, with 32 undergoing re-revision shoulder arthroplasty. The Kaplan-Meier method and bivariate Cox regression were used to assess the relationship of patient and surgical characteristics on implant survivorship. Multivariate Cox regression was performed to identify independent predictors of re-revision. RESULTS: Re-revision shoulder arthroplasty was most commonly performed for instability (34%), infection (28%), and glenoid loosening (19%). Overall re-revision rates at 6 months (7%), 1 year (9%), and 2 years (13%) were relatively low; however, the rate of re-revision increased at 5 years (35%). Men underwent re-revision more often than women within the first 6 months after revision RTSA (12% vs. 2%; P = .025), but not thereafter. On multivariate analysis, increased estimated blood loss was associated with a greater risk of undergoing re-revision shoulder arthroplasty (hazard ratio: 41.16 [3.34-506.50]; P = .004). CONCLUSION: The rate of re-revision after revision RTSA is low in the first 2 years postoperatively (13%) but increases to 35% at 5 years. Increased estimated blood loss, which may reflect greater operative complexity, was identified as a risk factor that may confer an increased chance of re-revision after revision RTSA. Knowledge of risk factors for re-revision after revision RTSA can aid surgeons and patients in preoperative counseling.

Discordance between patient-reported and objectively measured internal rotation after reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) partly relies on restoring functional internal rotation (IR). Although postoperative assessment of IR includes objective appraisal by the surgeon and subjective report from the patient, these evaluations may not vary together uniformly. We assessed the relationship between objective, surgeon-reported assessments of IR and subjective, patient-reported ability to perform IR-related activities of daily living (IRADLs). METHODS: Our institutional shoulder arthroplasty database was queried for patients undergoing primary RSA with a medialized-glenoid lateralized-humerus design between 2007-2019 and minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients who were wheelchair bound or had a preoperative diagnosis of infection, fracture, and tumor were excluded. Objective IR was measured to the highest vertebral level reached with the thumb. Subjective IR was reported based on patients' rating (normal, slightly difficult, very difficult, or unable) of their ability to perform 4 IRADLs (tuck in shirt with hand behind back, wash back or fasten bra, personal hygiene, and remove object from back pocket). Objective IR was assessed preoperatively and at latest follow-up and reported as median and interquartile ranges. RESULTS: A total of 443 patients were included (52% female) at a mean follow-up of 4.4 ± 2.3 years. Objective IR improved pre- to postoperatively from L4-L5 (buttocks to L1-L3) to L1-L3 (L4-L5 to T8-T12) (P < .001). Preoperatively reported IRADLs of "very difficult" or "unable" significantly decreased postoperatively for all IRADLs (P ≤ .004) except those unable to perform personal hygiene (3.2% vs. 1.8%, P > .99). The proportions of patients who improved, maintained, and lost objective and subjective IR was similar between IRADLs; 14%-20% improved objective IR but lost or maintained subjective IR and 19%-21% lost or maintained the same objective IR but improved subjective IR depending on the specific IRADL assessed. When ability to perform IRADLs improved postoperatively, objective IR also increased (P < .001). In contrast, when subjective IRADLs worsened postoperatively, objective IR did not significantly worsen for 2 of 4 IRADLs assessed. When examining patients who reported no change in ability to perform IRADLs pre- vs. postoperatively, statistically significant increases in objective IR were found for 3 of 4 IRADLs assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Objective improvement in IR parallels improvements in subjective functional gains uniformly. However, in patients with worse or equivalent IR, the ability to perform IRADLs postoperatively does not uniformly correlate with objective IR. When attempting to elucidate how surgeons can ensure patients will have sufficient IR after RSA, future investigations may need to use patient-reported ability to perform IRADLs as the primary outcome measure rather than objective measures of IR.

Early outcomes after first reverse total shoulder arthroplasty better prognosticate contralateral success compared with early outcomes after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The ideal timing between bilateral total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is unclear. The purpose of this study is to determine whether early outcomes after first TSA can be used to predict clinical outcomes after TSA of the contralateral shoulder and to evaluate the ideal time after TSA to perform the contralateral shoulder. METHODS: A single-institution prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty database was reviewed. Patients who underwent bilateral primary anatomic or reverse TSA (aTSA + rTSA) without an indication of fracture, tumor, or infection were identified. Included patients had minimum 2-year follow-up on their second TSA and postoperative follow-up after their first TSA at 3 months, 6 months, 1 year, or 2 years. Our primary outcome was whether outcome scores and motion at 3-month, 6-month, 1-year, and 2-year follow-up after first TSA predicted clinical success after second TSA at final follow-up, defined as achieving the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS = the highest level of symptoms beyond which patients consider themselves well). Outcomes included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Constant scores, abduction, forward elevation, and external/internal-rotation. Multivariable logistic regression determined whether postoperative outcomes after first TSA were predictive of achieving the PASS after second TSA independent of age, sex, and body mass index. Receiver operating characteristic analysis determined cutoffs of postoperative outcomes after first TSA at each time point that best predicted achieving the prosthesis-specific PASS after second TSA. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-four patients were included in the final analysis (110 aTSA and 158 rTSA). Range of motion and outcome scores at late (1- or 2-year) follow-up after first aTSA were more predictive of achieving the second TSA PASS compared with early (3- or 6-month) outcomes. In contrast, outcomes after early and late follow-up after first rTSA were similarly predictive of achieving the second TSA PASS. Specifically, the Constant score threshold at 2 years after first aTSA (79.4; area under the curve [AUC] = 0.804) better differentiated achieving the second TSA PASS vs. the 6-month threshold (72.0; AUC = 0.600). In contrast, the Constant score threshold at 2 years after first rTSA (76.4; AUC = 0.703) was similarly discriminant of achieving the second TSA PASS compared with the 6-month threshold (65.8; AUC = 0.711). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with good outcomes after first rTSA can be counseled on contralateral TSA as early as 3 months postoperatively with confidence of a similar result on the contralateral side. In contrast, success after first aTSA does not reliably predict contralateral success until ≥1 year.

Two-year outcomes of the reverse humeral reconstruction prosthesis.

BACKGROUND: Extensive proximal humeral bone loss in the setting of shoulder arthroplasty represents a difficult challenge for the treating surgeon. Achieving adequate fixation with standard humeral prostheses can be problematic. Allograft-prosthetic composites are a viable solution for this problem; however, high rates of complications have been reported. Modular proximal humeral replacement systems are another potential solution, but there is a paucity of outcome data on these implants. This study reports the 2-year minimum follow-up outcomes and complications of a single system reverse proximal humeral reconstruction prosthesis (RHRP) for patients with extensive proximal humeral bone loss. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all patients with minimum 2-year follow-up who underwent implantation of an RHRP for either (1) failed shoulder arthroplasty or (2) proximal humerus fracture with severe bone loss (Pharos 2 and 3) and/or sequelae thereof. Forty-four patients met inclusion criteria (average age 68.3 ± 13.1 years). The average follow-up was 36.2 ± 12.4 months. Demographic information, operative data, and complications were recorded. Pre- and postoperative range of motion (ROM), pain, and outcome scores were assessed and compared to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) for primary rTSA where available. RESULTS: Of the 44 RHRPs evaluated, 93% (n = 39) had undergone prior surgery and 70% (n = 30) were performed for failed arthroplasty. ROM improved significantly in abduction by 22° (P = .006) and forward elevation by 28° (P = .003). Average pain on a daily basis and pain at worst improved significantly, by 2.0 points (P < .001) and 2.7 points (P < .001), respectively. Mean Simple Shoulder Test score improved by 3.2 (P < .001), Constant score by 10.9 (P = .030), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score by 29.7 (P < .001), University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), score by 10.6 (P < .001), and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index score by 37.4 (P < .001). A majority of patients achieved the MCID for all outcome measures assessed (56%-81%). The SCB was exceeded by half of patients for forward elevation and the Constant score (50%), and exceeded by the majority of patients for the ASES score (58%) and UCLA score (58%). The complication rate was 28%; the most common complication was dislocation requiring closed reduction. Notably, there were no occurrences of humeral loosening requiring revision surgery. DISCUSSION: These data demonstrate that the RHRP resulted in significant improvements in ROM, pain, and patient-reported outcome measures, without the risk of early humeral component loosening. RHRP represents another potential solution for shoulder arthroplasty surgeons when addressing extensive proximal humerus bone loss.

Quantifying success after first revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state.

BACKGROUND: When patients require revision of primary shoulder arthroplasty, revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is most commonly performed. However, defining clinically important improvement in these patients is challenging because benchmarks have not been previously defined. Our purpose was to define the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for outcome scores and range of motion (ROM) after revision rTSA and to quantify the proportion of patients achieving clinically relevant success. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used a prospectively collected single-institution database of patients undergoing first revision rTSA between August 2015 and December 2019. Patients with a diagnosis of periprosthetic fracture or infection were excluded. Outcomes scores included the ASES, raw and normalized Constant, SPADI, SST, and University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) scores. ROM measures included abduction, forward elevation (FE), external rotation (ER), and internal rotation (IR) score. Anchor-based and distribution-based methods were used to calculate the MCID, SCB, and PASS. The proportions of patients achieving each threshold were assessed. RESULTS: Ninety-three revision rTSAs with minimum 2-year follow-up were evaluated. Mean age was 67 years, 56% were female, and average follow-up was 54 months. Revision rTSA was performed most commonly for failed anatomic TSA (n = 47), followed by hemiarthroplasty (n = 21), rTSA (n = 15), and resurfacing (n = 10). The indication for revision rTSA was most commonly glenoid loosening (n = 24), followed by rotator cuff failure (n = 23), subluxation and unexplained pain (n = 11 for both). The anchor-based MCID thresholds (% of patients achieving) were as follows: ASES, 20.1 (42%); normalized Constant, 12.6 (80%); UCLA, 10.2 (54%); SST, 0.9 (78%); SPADI, -18.4 (58%); abduction, 13° (83%); FE, 18° (82%); ER, 4° (49%); and IR, 0.8 (34%). The SCB thresholds (% of patients achieving) were as follows: ASES, 34.1 (25%); normalized Constant, 26.6 (43%); UCLA, 14.1 (28%); SST, 3.9 (48%); SPADI, -36.4 (33%); abduction, 20° (77%); FE, 28° (71%); ER, 15° (15%); and IR, 1.0 (29%). The PASS thresholds (% of patients achieving) were as follows: ASES, 63.5 (53%); normalized Constant, 59.1 (61%); UCLA, 25.4 (48%); SST, 7.0 (55%); SPADI, 42.4 (59%); abduction, 98° (61%); FE, 110° (56%); ER, 19° (73%); and IR, 3.3 (59%). CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes thresholds for the MCID, SCB, and PASS at minimum 2-years after revision rTSA, providing physicians an evidence-based method to counsel patients and assess patient outcomes postoperatively.

Patients with poor early clinical outcomes after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty have sustained poor performance at 2 years from surgery.

PURPOSE: We sought to define the risk of persistent shoulder dysfunction after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) beyond the early postoperative period and identify risk factors for persistent poor performance. METHODS: We retrospectively identified 144 primary aTSAs performed for primary osteoarthritis with early poor performance and 2-year minimum follow-up. Early poor performance was defined as a postoperative ASES score below the 20th percentile at 3- or 6-months (62 and 72 points, respectively). Persistent poor performance at 2 years was defined as failing to achieve the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) [ASES = 81.7 points]. RESULTS: At 2-year follow-up, 51% (n = 74) of patients with early poor performance at either 3- or 6-month follow-up had persistent poor performance. There was no difference in the rate of persistent poor performance if patients were poor performers at the 3-, 6-month follow-up, or both (50% vs. 49% vs. 56%, P = .795). Of aTSAs achieving the PASS at 2-year follow-up, a greater proportion exceeded the minimal clinically important differences (MCID) [Forward elevation, external rotation, and all outcome scores] and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) [external rotation and all outcome scores] compared to persistent poor performers. However, over half of persistent poor performers still exceeded the MCID for all outcome measures (56-85%). Independent predictors of persistent poor performance were hypertension (2.61 [1.01-6.72], P = .044) and diabetes (5.14 [1.00-26.4], P = .039). CONCLUSION: Over half of aTSAs with an ASES score < 20th percentile at early follow-up had continued poor shoulder function at 2-years postoperatively. Persistent poor performance was best projected by preoperative hypertension and diabetes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III; Retrospective Cohort Comparison using Large Database; Treatment Study.