Primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty in patients older than 80 years of age: survival and outcomes.

AIMS: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) reliably improves shoulder pain and function for a variety of indications. However, the safety and efficacy of RSA in elderly patients is largely unknown. The purpose of this study was to report the mortality, morbidity, complications, reoperations, and outcomes of primary RSA in patients aged > 80 years. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 2004 and 2013, 242 consecutive primary RSAs were performed in patients aged > 80 years (mean 83.3 years (sd 3.1)). Of these, 53 were lost to follow-up before two years and ten had died within two years of surgery, leaving 179 for analysis of survivorship, pain, motion, and strength at a minimum of two years or until revision surgery. All 242 patients were considered for the analysis of 90-day, one-year, and overall mortality, medical complications (90-day and overall), surgical complications, and reoperations. The indications for surgery included rotator cuff arthropathy, osteoarthritis, fracture, the sequela of trauma, avascular necrosis, and rheumatoid arthritis. A retrospective review of the medical records was performed to collect all variables. Survivorship free of revision surgery was calculated at two and five years. RESULTS: One patient (0.4%) died within the first 90 days. A total of 45 patients (19%) were known to have died at the time of the final follow-up, with a median time to death of 67.7 months (interquartile range 40.4 to 94.7) postoperatively. Medical complications occurred in six patients (3%) and surgical complications occurred in 21/179 patients (12%). Survivorship free from revision was 98.9% at two years and 98.3% at five years; survivorship free from loosening was 99.5% at final follow-up. The presence of peripheral vascular disease correlated with a higher complication rate. CONCLUSION: Primary RSA was safe and effective in patients aged > 80 years, with a relatively low rate of medical and surgical complications. Thus, age alone should not be a contraindication to primary RSA in patients aged > 80 years. However, a careful evaluation of comorbidities is required in this age group when considering primary RSA. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1520-1525.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis secondary to glenoid dysplasia.

The purpose is to report the clinical and radiographic outcomes, complications and reoperations of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for glenoid dysplasia. All patients who had undergone RSA for osteoarthritis secondary to underlying glenoid dysplasia were retrospectively identified. The study included twelve shoulders (11 patients), with a mean (SD) patient age of 62.2 (13.2) years and median (range) clinical follow-up of 28 (24-34) months. RSA resulted in substantial improvements in pain and function. At most recent follow-up, there was a significant improvement in forward flexion range of motion (ROM), a non-significant improvement in internal rotation ROM, and no changes in external rotation ROM. The mean (SD) SST and ASES scores were 7.8 (3.7) and 73.5 (20.4), respectively. There were no reoperations or radiographic loosening. The results were excellent in 1 case, satisfactory in 8, and unsatisfactory in 3. RSA provides acceptable function and good pain relief, though patients should be advised that shoulder rotation may be somewhat limited.

Patient-reported activities after bilateral reverse total shoulder arthoplasties.

PURPOSE: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) improves pain and function with very good satisfaction. Concerns exist about some activities of daily living (ADLs) involving internal rotation. The purpose of this study was to report how patients with bilateral RSA perform various ADLs. METHODS: Thirty-one primary bilateral RSA patients (average age 76 years; 21 women and 10 men) completed a survey to assess various outcomes. The average time between the second arthroplasty and the survey was 2.7 years (range 1.0-7.8 years). RESULTS: All clinical parameters were favorable. All patients reported being able to easily manage toileting and 87% reaching their back pocket. However, 29% found difficulty and 39% were unable to wash their back or put on bra. In comparison with various unilateral arthroplasty types, there was no statistical difference in overall activities ( p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Bilateral RSA can provide good functional outcome and high satisfaction. Patients manage most ADLs easily with some limitations in activities requiring extreme internal rotation.

Revision anatomic shoulder arthroplasty with posterior capsular plication for correction of posterior instability.

BACKGROUND: Revision of failed anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty or hemiarthroplasty is a challenging procedure. Restoring adequate soft tissue balance in the revision setting can be particularly problematic. When persistent posterior instability is encountered in the revision setting, options include changing component position or size, posterior capsular plication (PCP), or conversion to a reverse arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to report the clinical and radiographic outcomes, complications, and reoperations of PCP performed in the setting of revision anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1975 and 2013, 15 patients (16 shoulders) had PCP during revision anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. Indications for revision arthroplasty included posterior instability in 15, glenoid loosening in 3, polyethylene wear in 2, and glenoid erosion in 1 shoulder. The mean (standard deviation (SD)) age was 60.1 (12.6) years, and the median (range) follow-up was 68 (2-228) months. A retrospective chart review was conducted to obtain all data. RESULTS: At the last follow-up, nine shoulders (56%) had absence of posterior radiographic subluxation. Five (31%) cases underwent reoperation due to persistent posterior instability. Complications were observed in seven (44%) cases. Complete pain relief was achieved in four (25%) shoulders. The mean (SD) postoperative forward flexion, external rotation, and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score were 110° (41°), 40° (29°), and 62.1 (21.9), respectively. Results were excellent in two (13%), satisfactory in seven (44%), and unsatisfactory in seven (44%) shoulders. CONCLUSIONS: PCP to correct posterior instability during revision anatomic shoulder arthroplasty had an unacceptably high failure rate. In these circumstances, consideration should instead be given to conversion to a reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with posterior capsular plication versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty in patients with biconcave glenoids: A matched cohort study.

PURPOSE: To compare the outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with posterior capsule plication (PCP) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in patients with primary osteoarthritis, posterior subluxation, and bone loss (Walch B2). PATIENTS AND METHODS: All shoulders undergoing anatomic TSA with PCP were retrospectively identified (group 1, G1) and compared to shoulders undergoing RSA (group 2, G2) for Walch B2 osteoarthritis. There were 15 patients in G1 (mean (SD) age and follow-up of 70.5 (7.5) years and 42.8 (18.4) months, respectively) and 16 patients in G2 (mean (SD) age and follow-up of 72.6 (5.4) years and 35.1 (14.2) months, respectively). RESULTS: Both groups had substantial improvements in pain and function. In G1, results were excellent in 80% and satisfactory in 20%, compared to 81% and 6% in G2, respectively ( p = 0.2). The mean (SD) American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score was 91.2 (6.7) and 80.3 (14.3) in G1 and G2, respectively ( p = 0.08). The mean Simple Shoulder Test score was 10.6 in G1 and 8.5 in G2 ( p = 0.01). There were no reoperations in either group, but G1 had seven postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: The outcomes of TSA with PCP are comparable to RSA in patients with osteoarthritis and biconcave glenoids. However, TSA leads to more complications while RSA leads to lower functional outcomes.

Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in Weight-Bearing Shoulders of Wheelchair-Dependent Patients: Outcomes and Complications at 2 to 5 years.

BACKGROUND: Wheelchair-dependent patients rely on their upper extremities for mobility and transfers. This entails the heavy use of upper extremities as weight-bearing joints, leading to shoulder overuse with increased prevalence of rotator cuff-related disorders and ultimately to challenging cases for shoulder surgeons when a joint replacement is needed. OBJECTIVE: To report the outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in wheelchair-dependent patients with arthritis and rotator cuff tears. DESIGN: Retrospective case series/cross-sectional study. SETTING: Tertiary university hospital. PATIENT (PARTICIPANTS): All wheelchair-dependent patients undergoing RSA between 2004 and 2013. METHODS/INTERVENTIONS: Of the 22 wheelchair-dependent patients undergoing RSA, 18 of them had a minimum follow-up of 2 years. There were 9 men and 9 women, with a mean (standard deviation) age and length of follow-up of 68 (8.5) years and 36 (24-63) months. A retrospective chart review and cross-sectional phone calls were conducted to obtain all data. OUTCOMES: Pain, range of motion, functional scores (Neer scale, simple shoulder test, and American Shoulder and Elbow Society), satisfaction, complications/reoperations, radiographic loosening, and 90-day mortality/morbidity. RESULTS: RSA resulted in a significant improvement in pain (P = .02) and nonsignificant improvements in forward flexion (P = .3) and external rotation (P = .07). There were 3 (16%) excellent, 12 (63%) satisfactory, and 4 (21%) unsatisfactory results. The mean (standard deviation) postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Society score was 56.5 (16.5). All patients stated that they would undergo RSA again. There were no surgically related complications or reoperations. The 90-day mortality and morbidity rates were 0% and 26%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: RSA is a safe and effective procedure in wheelchair-dependent patients who use their shoulders for weight-bearing purposes. Although functional scores are not optimal and medical complications are not uncommon, 79% of patients had an excellent or satisfactory result. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Two-stage reimplantation for the treatment of deep infection after shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Two-stage reimplantation is the most common treatment modality considered for periprosthetic shoulder infection (PSI). Most studies to date have reported on a relatively small number of shoulders. The purpose of this study was to determine the outcome of 2-stage reimplantation for PSI in terms of both eradication of infection and restoration of function. METHODS: Between 1980 and 2010, 40 shoulders (39 patients) underwent a 2-stage reimplantation for PSI; 35 shoulders (34 patients) met inclusion criteria (10 hemiarthroplasties, 24 anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties, 1 reverse total shoulder arthroplasty). Outcome data included pain, motion, Neer rating, and complications. RESULTS: At most recent follow-up (4.1 years), 2-stage reimplantation had resulted in significant improvements in pain (from 4.4 to 2 on a 5-point scale; P < .0001), mean forward elevation (64°-118°; P < .0001), and mean external rotation (14°-41°; P < .0001). Preoperative testing showed leukocytosis in 1 patient, elevated C-reactive protein concentration in 67%, elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate in 61%, and positive preoperative aspiration in 69%. Persistent infection, defined as positive cultures in samples obtained at the time of reimplantation, was identified in 5 shoulders (15%); 50% of persistent infections grew Propionibacterium acnes. Reoperations for infection included irrigation and débridement (1), a second 2-stage reimplantation (2), and resection arthroplasty (1); 2 additional patients were treated with chronic suppression. Reoperation for aseptic glenoid loosening was performed in 2 additional shoulders. Results were graded excellent in 10 (28%), satisfactory in 12 (33%), and unsatisfactory in 13 (39%) shoulders. CONCLUSION: Two-stage reimplantation eradicated PSI in 85% of the shoulders. Pain relief and good arcs of motion were achieved in many patients, but there was an overall rate of unsatisfactory results approaching 40%. Preoperative testing was not always reliable for the diagnosis of PSI.

What Are the Complications, Survival, and Outcomes After Revision to Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients Older Than 80 Years?

BACKGROUND: By the time patients with a failed shoulder arthroplasty require revision surgery, a substantial number are older than 80 years. The risk of complications of revision arthroplasty in this elderly population is largely unknown and needs to be considered when contemplating whether these patients are too frail for revision surgery. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What are the 90-day medical and surgical complications after revision to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in patients older than 80 years? (2) What are the 2- and 5-year survival rates after revision? (3) Was there an improvement in pain at rest or with activity, range of motion (ROM), and strength after revision surgery? METHODS: Between 2004 and 2013, 38 patients who were older than 80 years (84 ± 3 years) underwent revision surgery to a RSA. Of those, five were lost to followup before 2 years, and two had died within 2 years of revision surgery, leaving 31 for analysis of our survivorship, pain, ROM, and strength endpoints at a minimum of 2 years or until revision surgery had occurred (mean, 28 months; range, 1-77 months); all 38 patients were included for purposes of evaluating medical and surgical complications at 90 days. During the period in question, our general indication for using RSA included failure of previous shoulder arthroplasty because of instability, glenoid loosening with bone loss, or rotator cuff insufficiency. The indication for revision to RSA did not change during the study period. The index procedure (revision to RSA at the age of 80 years or older) was the first revision arthroplasty in 33 (87%) patients and the second in five (13%) patients. We tallied 90-day medical and surgical complications by performing a retrospective chart and institutional joint registry review. The cumulative incidence of implant loosening (implant migration or tilting, or complete radiolucent lines present) and revision surgery was calculated at 2 and 5 years using competing risk of death method. Pain levels at rest or with activity (rated in a 1 to 5 Likert-type scale) were collected through a retrospective chart review and values before and after surgery were compared. RESULTS: Medical complications occurred in three of 38 (8%) patients and surgical complications occurred in five of 38 (13%) patients. The 90-day mortality was 3% (one of 38 patients), and the total mortality was 26% (10 of 38 patients). The cumulative incidence of revision was 11% (95% CI, 0%-20%) at 2 years and 16% (95% CI, 1%-30%) at 5 years; the cumulative incidence of loosening was 8% (95% CI, 0%-20%) at 2 years and 16% (95% CI, 1%-30%) at 5 years. Pain at rest or with activity improved from pre- to postoperation (preoperative: median, 4 [range, 2-5]; postoperative: median, 1 [range, 1-4]; median difference: -2, 95% CI -3 to 0; p < 0.000). The active ROM improved during the preoperative compared with postoperative periods: mean ± SD forward flexion of 52° ± 40° to 109° ± 44°, respectively (mean difference: 56; 95% CI, 40-72; p < 0.000), and mean ± SD external rotation of 15° ± 22° to 31° ± 21°, respectively (mean difference: 16; 95% CI, 8-25; p < 0.000). CONCLUSIONS: Age should not be used as a reason to not consider revision surgery to RSA in patients older than 80 years. Further studies with a prospective design, larger sample size, investigating risk factors for complications or poor outcome, and incorporation of functional scores are required. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in Patients With Amputation or Paralysis of the Contralateral Upper Extremity (One-Arm Patients).

BACKGROUND: Theoretically, patients with only one functional arm secondary to contralateral amputation or paralysis will subject their only functional upper extremity to increased loads. This could become an issue after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). However, there are no reported data on the implant survival or function for patients with a nonfunctional contralateral upper extremity. OBJECTIVE: To report the outcomes of RSA in patients with contralateral upper extremity amputation or paralysis. DESIGN: Retrospective case series. SETTING: Tertiary university hospital. PATIENTS: All patients who underwent RSA between January 2004 and December 2013. METHODS: Of 1335 RSA procedures performed, 5 patients had a minimum 2-year follow-up and nonfunctional contralateral upper extremity. There were 3 men and 2 women, with a mean (standard deviation) age and length of follow-up of 72.4 (7.5) years and 56.4 (24-132) months. Two of the patients had a contralateral upper extremity amputation, and the other 3 had contralateral upper extremity paralysis as a result of stroke, traumatic brain injury, and traumatic brachial plexus injury at birth. MAIN OUTCOMES: Pain, range of motion, functional scores (Simple Shoulder Test, American Shoulder and Elbow Society and Quick-Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand), satisfaction, complications/reoperations, and radiographic loosening. RESULTS: RSA resulted in substantial improvement in pain (P = .008), forward flexion (P = .02), and external range of motion (P = .01). The mean (standard deviation) Simple Shoulder Test, American Shoulder and Elbow Society, and Quick-Disability of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand scores were 9.8 (1.3), 82 (13), and 17.8 (13.4), respectively. The results were excellent in 3, satisfactory in 1, and unsatisfactory in 1 patient (due only to external rotation limited to 10°). Subjectively, all 5 patients felt greatly improved and stated they would undergo RSA again. There were no complications or reoperations. There were no shoulders with component loosening. CONCLUSIONS: RSA seems to be a safe, effective, and successful surgical procedure for patients with a nonfunctional contralateral upper extremity. Studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up will hopefully validate the present findings. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Plication of the posterior capsule for intraoperative posterior instability during anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Restoration of soft tissue balance for intraoperative posterior instability during anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is particularly difficult. The effectiveness of posterior capsular plication (PCP) in restoring soft tissue balance is largely unknown. The purpose of this study was to report the outcomes, complications, and reoperations of primary TSA in which a PCP was performed to correct excessive intraoperative posterior subluxation. METHODS: Thirty-eight shoulders (37 patients) underwent PCP for intraoperative posterior instability during anatomic TSA. The mean (standard deviation) age was 68 (10) years, and the median (range) clinical and radiographic follow-up periods were 60 (10-154) and 48 (1.5-154) months, respectively. A retrospective chart review was conducted to obtain clinical and radiographic data. RESULTS: TSA resulted in significant improvements in pain and range of motion. The mean (standard deviation) Simple Shoulder Test and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores were 9.4 (2.7) and 81.1 (19.8), respectively. PCP resulted in restoration of soft tissue balance in 27 shoulders (71%). The remaining 11 shoulders had evidence of posterior subluxation, including posterior dislocation in 2 shoulders. Revision surgery was performed in only 3 shoulders (7.9%), all for instability. However, there was a high rate of radiographic glenoid component loosening (12 shoulders, 32%). Overall results were excellent in 24 (63.2%), satisfactory in 10 (26.3%), and unsatisfactory in 4 (10.5%) shoulders. Recurrence of posterior subluxation was associated with worse motion and strength as well as with a higher rate of glenoid loosening. CONCLUSIONS: PCP seems to correct excessive intraoperative posterior subluxation in approximately two-thirds of the shoulders undergoing anatomic TSA. However, posterior subluxation does recur in the remaining third, and the overall rate of radiographic glenoid loosening is of concern.

Management of acute or late hematogenous infection after shoulder arthroplasty with irrigation, débridement, and component retention.

BACKGROUND: Irrigation and débridement (I&D) with component retention is an appealing alternative to both patients and surgeons for the management of acute or late hematogenous deep periprosthetic shoulder infection (PSI). However, the success rate and results of I&D are poorly documented. This study reports the outcomes and complications of this treatment strategy for acute and delayed-onset acute hematogenous PSI. METHODS: Between 1980 and 2010, 10 shoulders (9 patients) underwent I&D with component retention for the management on an acute or delayed-onset acute hematogenous PSI at a single institution. Outcome data, including pain, range of motion, need for chronic oral antibiotic suppression therapy, eradication of infection, and need for further surgery were retrospectively collected. RESULTS: Deep infection recurred in 3 shoulders, which were eventually treated with resection arthroplasty. Of the remaining 6 patients (7 shoulders), 5 were prescribed chronic antibiotic suppression. At the most recent follow-up, pain was graded as none in 3 shoulders, mild in 1, moderate with activity in 3, moderate in 2, and severe in 1. Among shoulders with retained components, forward elevation was greater than 110° in 6 (median, 140°; range, 30°-160°), and external rotation was greater than 40° in all shoulders (median, 50°; range, 40°-90°). CONCLUSION: I&D allowed component retention in 70% of shoulders presenting with an acute or delayed-onset acute hematogenous infection. Most patients were prescribed chronic antibiotic suppression, and reasonable motion was maintained.

Arthroscopic-Assisted Lower Trapezius Tendon Transfer for Massive Irreparable Posterior-Superior Rotator Cuff Tears: Surgical Technique.

Tendon transfer options to reconstruct a massive irreparable posterior-superior rotator cuff tear include latissimus dorsi, teres major, or lower trapezius transfer. We previously described the lower trapezius transfer using a 2-incision approach, which includes a medial incision to harvest the lower trapezius and lateral transacromial incision to expose the rotator cuff and then perform the transfer through a deep tunnel connecting these 2 sites. In this report, we describe an arthroscopic-assisted technique of lower trapezius transfer augmented with an Achilles tendon allograft to reconstruct an irreparable posterior-superior rotator cuff tear.

Long-term Outcomes After Osteochondral Allograft: A Systematic Review at Long-term Follow-up of 12.3 Years.

PURPOSE: To (1) evaluate long-term outcomes of osteochondral allograft (OCA) with regard to clinical outcome scores, reoperation and failure rates, and (2) examine if certain factors predispose patients to worse outcomes. METHODS: A comprehensive review was performed with specific inclusion criteria for studies with long-term outcomes after OCA. Studies reported on patient clinical scores such as Hospital for Special Surgery score, Knee Society Score (knee and function score), and Lysholm score. Reoperation and failure rates were recorded for each study. Modified Coleman Methodology Scores assessed study methodological quality. RESULTS: Five studies with a total of 291 patients (55% male, 45% female) and average age of 34.8 years (range, 15 to 69 years) were included. Of all lesions, 67% were on the femoral condyles, 29% on the tibial plateau, and 4% were patellofemoral. All scores (Knee Society Function Score, Knee Society Knee Score, and Lysholm score) have significant mean improvement from preoperative to final follow-up. The mean postoperative Hospital for Special Surgery score was 84.1. The mean failure rate was 25% at 12.3 years with a reoperation rate of 36%. A total of 72% of the failures were conversion to total (68%) or unicompartmental (4%) knee arthroplasty and 28% involved graft removal, graft fixation, and graft revision. Patellofemoral lesions (83%) had a significantly higher reoperation rate than lesions involving the tibial plateau or the femoral condyles (34%, P = .01). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, OCA demonstrated significant improvements in clinical outcome scores and good durability with successful outcomes in 75% of the patients at 12.3 years after surgery. Patellofemoral lesions are associated with decreased clinical improvement and more frequent reoperations. The orthopaedic literature is limited by heterogeneity in surgical technique, lesion and patient characteristics, and reporting of nonstandardized outcome measures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level II and IV studies.

Distal biceps tendon injuries: A clinically relevant current concepts review.

Distal biceps tendon (DBT) conditions comprise a spectrum of disorders including bicipitoradial bursitis, partial tears, acute and chronic complete tears.In low-demand patients with complete DBT tears, non-operative treatment may be entertained provided the patient understands the potential for residual weakness, particularly in forearm supination.Most acute tears are best treated by primary repair using either single-incision or double-incision techniques with good clinical outcomes.Single-incision techniques may carry a higher risk of nerve-related complications, whereas double-incision techniques have historically been considered to carry a higher risk of heterotopic ossification, particularly if the ulna is exposed.Various fixation techniques, including bone tunnels, cortical buttons, suture anchors, interference screws or a combination seem to provide different fixation strength but similar clinical outcomes.Some chronic tears may be repaired primarily, provided tendon tissue can be identified; alternatively, autograft or allograft reconstruction can be considered, and good outcomes have been reported with both techniques. Cite this article: Alentorn-Geli E, Assenmacher AT, Sanchez-Sotelo J. Distal biceps tendon injuries: a clinically relevant current concepts review. EFORT Open Rev 2016;1:316-324. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.1.000053.