Loosening and revision rates after total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review of cemented all-polyethylene glenoid and three modern designs of metal-backed glenoid.

BACKGROUND: Several modern designs of metal-backed glenoids (MBG) have been devised to overcome flaws such as loosening and a high failure rate. This review aimed to compare rates of complications and revision surgeries between cemented polyethylene glenoid (PEG) and three examples of modern MBG designs. METHODS: Literature search was carried out using PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar using MeSH terms and natural keywords. A total of 1186 articles were screened. We descriptively analyzed numerical data between the groups and statistically analyzed the categorical data, such as the presence of radiolucent line, loosening, and revision surgery (failure). Articles were divided into three groups based on follow-up duration: < 36-month, 36-72-month, and > 72-month subgroups. RESULTS: This study included 35 articles (3769 shoulders); 25 on cemented PEG and ten on the modern MBG. Mean age was 66.4 (21-93) and 66.5 years (31-88). The mean duration of follow-up was 73.1 (12-211) and 56.1 months (24-100). Overall, the rate of the radiolucent line was 354/1302 (27%) and 47/282 (17%), the loosening rate was 465/3185 (15%) and 22/449 (5%), and the failure rate was 189/3316 (6%) and 11/457 (2%), for PEG and MBG, respectively. The results of < 36-month and 36-72-month subgroups showed lower rates of radiolucency and loosening in the cemented PEG group, but there was no significant difference in failure rate (P = 0.754 and 0.829, respectively). In the > 72-month subgroup, MBG was better in terms of loosening (P < 0.001) and failure rates (P = 0.006). CONCLUSIONS: The modern MBG component, especially TM glenoid, seems to be a promising alternative to cemented PEGs, based on subgroup revision rates according to the follow-up duration and overall results of ROM and clinical scores. All polyethylene glenoids tend to increase loosening and failure over time. Three modern MBG designs seem to have no difference in failure, at least in the < 36-month and 36-72-month subgroups compared to the cemented PEG. More long-term follow-up studies on modern MBG should be ultimately conducted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review.

Pearls and Tips in Shoulder Arthroplasty.

There has been rapid evolution in new techniques and technology in shoulder arthroplasty. This has improved the efficiency of the procedures as well as expanded our ability to manage some of the most challenging cases. This article will review key aspects of patient evaluation, discuss key technical steps in primary anatomic and reverse arthroplasty, and lastly provide tips to facilitate revision surgery.

Is arthroscopic repair superior to biceps tenotomy and tenodesis for type II SLAP lesions? A meta-analysis of RCTs and observational studies.

OBJECTIVE: Labral repair and biceps tenotomy and tenodesis are routine operations for type II superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) lesion of the shoulder, but evidence of their superiority is lacking. We conducted this systematic review and meta-analysis to compare the clinical outcomes of arthroscopic repair versus biceps tenotomy and tenodesis intervention. METHODS: The eight studies were acquired from PubMed, Medline, Embase, CNKI, and Cochrane Library. The data were extracted by two of the coauthors independently and were analyzed by RevMan 5.3. Mean differences (MDs), odds ratios (ORs), and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to assess risk of bias. RESULTS: Eight studies including two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and six observational studies were assessed. The methodological quality of the trials ranged from low to moderate. The pooled results of UCLA score, SST score, and complications showed that the differences were not statistically significant between the two interventions. The difference of ASES score and satisfaction rate was statistically significant between arthroscopic repair and biceps tenotomy and tenodesis intervention, and arthroscopic biceps tenotomy and tenodesis treatment was more effective. Sensitivity analysis proved the stability of the pooled results, and there were too less included articles to verify the publication bias. CONCLUSIONS: Both arthroscopic repair and biceps tenotomy and tenodesis interventions had benefits in type II SLAP lesions. Arthroscopic biceps tenotomy and tenodesis treatment provides better clinical outcome in ASES score and satisfaction rate and comparable complications compared with arthroscopic repair treatment. In view of the heterogeneity and confounding factors, whether these conclusions are applicable should be further determined in future studies.

Negative Patient-Experience Comments After Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in enhancing the patient experience after discretionary orthopaedic surgery. Patient narratives are a potentially valuable but largely unscrutinized source of information. Using machine learning to understand sentiment within patient-experience comments, we explored the content of negative comments after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), their associated factors, and their relationship with traditional measures of patient satisfaction and with perioperative outcomes. METHODS: An institutional registry was used to link the records of 186 patients who had undergone elective primary TSA between 2016 and 2017 with vendor-supplied patient satisfaction data, which included patient comments and the Hospital Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (HCAHPS) survey. Using a machine-learning-based natural language processing approach, all patient comments were mined for sentiment and classified as positive, negative, mixed, or neutral. Negative comments were further classified into themes. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to determine characteristics associated with providing a negative comment. RESULTS: Most patients (71%) provided at least 1 comment; 32% of the comments were negative, 62% were positive, 5% were mixed, and 1% were neutral. The themes of the negative comments were room condition (27%), time management (17%), inefficient communication (13%), lack of compassion (12%), difficult intravenous (IV) insertion (10%), food (10%), medication side effects (6%), discharge instructions (4%), and pain management (2%). Women and sicker patients were more likely to provide negative comments. Patients who made negative comments were more likely to be dissatisfied with overall hospital care and with pain management (2 HCAHPS core items), but there were no differences in any of the studied outcomes (peak pain intensity, opioid intake, operative time, hospital length of stay, discharge disposition, or 1-year American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES] score) between those who provided negative comments and those who did not. CONCLUSIONS: Patient-narrative analysis can shed light on the aspects of the process of care that are most critiqued by patients. While patient satisfaction may not be a surrogate for effectiveness of care or functional outcomes, efforts to improve the hospital environment, enhance nontechnical skills, and reduce unnecessary delays are important in providing high-quality, patient-centered care after TSA.

The effect of an orthopedic specialty hospital on operating room efficiency in shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Operating room (OR) time is a major cost to the health care system. Therefore, increasing OR efficiency to save time may be a cost-saving tool. This study analyzed OR efficiency in shoulder arthroplasty at an orthopedic specialty hospital (OSH) and a tertiary referral center (TRC). METHODS: All primary shoulder arthroplasties performed at our OSH and TRC were identified (2013-2015). Manually matched cohorts from the OSH and TRC were compared for OR times. Three times (minutes) were recorded: anesthesia preparation time (APT; patient in room to skin incision), surgical time (ST; skin incision to skin closed), conclusion time (CT; skin closed to patient out of room). RESULTS: There were 136 primary shoulder arthroplasties performed at the OSH and matched with 136 at the TRC. OSH and TRC patients were similar in age (P = .95), body mass index (P = .97), Charlson Comorbidity Index (P = 1.000), sex (P = 1.000), procedure (P = 1.000), insurance status (P = .714), discharge destination (P = .287), and diagnoses (P = .354). These matched populations had similar ST (OSH: 110.0 ± 26.6 minutes, TRC: 113.4 ± 28.7 minutes; P = .307). APT (39.2 ± 8.0 minutes) and CT (7.6 ± 3.8 minutes) were shorter in the OSH patients than APT (46.3 ± 8.8 minutes; P < .001) and CT (11.2 ± 4.7 minutes; P < .001) in TRC patients. Total nonoperative time (sum of APT and CT) at the OSH (46.8 ± 8.9 minutes) was shorter than at the TRC (57.5 ± 10.4 minutes; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar patient populations and case complexity, the OR efficiency at an OSH was superior to a TRC. Further analysis is needed to determine the financial implications of this superior OR efficiency.

Radiological changes do not influence clinical mid-term outcome in stemless humeral head replacements with hollow screw fixation: a prospective radiological and clinical evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Stemless shoulder arthroplasty is a fairly new concept. Clinical and radiological follow-up is essential to prove implant safety and concept. This prospective single-centre study was performed to evaluate the influence of radiological changes on clinical mid-term outcome following stemless humeral head replacement with hollow screw fixation. METHODS: Short- and mid-term radiological and clinical evaluations were performed in 73 consecutive shoulders treated mainly for idiopathic and posttraumatic osteoarthritis with stemless humeral head arthroplasty including 40 hemi- (HSA) and 33 total shoulder arthroplasties (TSA). Operating times of stemless implantations were compared to 110 stemmed anatomical shoulder prostheses. Appearances of humeral radiolucencies or radiological signs of osteolysis or stress shielding were assessed on standardized radiographs. Patients' clinical outcome was evaluated using the Constant score and patients' satisfaction was documented. RESULTS: Radiological changes, detected in 37.0%, did not affect clinical outcome. Constant scores significantly improved from baseline to short and mid-term follow-up (p < 0.001). The majority of patients (96.2%) were satisfied with the procedure. No loosening of the humeral head component was detected during a mean follow-up of 58 months. Operating times were significantly shorter with stemless compared to stemmed implants (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical mid-term outcome after stemless humeral head replacement was not affected by radiological changes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The institutional review board (St. Vincent Hospital Vienna; 201212_EK01; date of issue: 11.12.2012) approved the study. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02754024 ). Retrospective registration.

[A NEW PLAYER IN THE FIELD OF SHOULDER SURGERY - THE REVERSE SHOULDER ARTHROPLASTY].

INTRODUCTION: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) in its modern design was first introduced over 25 years ago and approved by the American FDA over ten years ago. This type of prosthesis allows treatment of glenohumeral joint disease among patients with severe rotator cuff deficiency once thought to be inoperable. Modifications to the prosthesis design, along with improved surgical technique, led to better clinical outcomes and lower complication rates, which subsequently led to an increase in the usage of this implant device. The promising results led shoulder specialists to re-assess and expand the indications for surgery, which currently also include complex fractures of the proximal humerus in the elderly population. In this review we will cover the history and evolution of the RSA prosthesis, indications and contraindications, along with up-to-date outcomes and complications.

Responsiveness and Internal Validity of Common Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Following Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

The Constant-Murley (Constant) score, Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score are commonly used to assess patient-reported function following shoulder surgery. However, psychometric properties for these tools are mostly unknown for patients with primary glenohumeral arthritis who have undergone anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The purposes of this study were to (1) compare the responsiveness and internal validity between the 4 patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and (2) identify PRO score values associated with patient satisfaction after TSA. A total of 234 primary TSAs were performed for primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis with a 2-year or greater follow-up. The Constant score, WOOS index, ASES score, SANE score, and patient satisfaction were assessed preoperatively and 2 to 5 years postoperatively. Effect sizes, standardized response means, and relative efficiency were calculated to determine responsiveness, and internal validity was determined via the presence of floor and/or ceiling effects. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed to identify the minimum outcome score that could correctly identify a satisfied patient. At final follow-up, 88% of patients were satisfied. The PROs had large effect sizes and standardized response means (≥0.83). The minimum score that most correctly identified a patient as satisfied was 78 for ASES score, 18 for WOOS index, 73 for Constant score, and 58 for SANE score. However, the ASES score, WOOS index, and SANE score had marked postoperative ceiling effects, whereas the Constant score was the most responsive and internally valid tool. These results suggest that the Constant score should serve as the primary PRO for patients with primary glenohumeral arthritis, whereas the WOOS index, ASES score, and SANE score could be supplementary assessments. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(3):e513-e519.].

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty--minimum age for surgery, postoperative rehabilitation and long term restrictions. A delphi consensus study.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to determine if agreement could be obtained on guidelines regarding the ideal minimum age for a reverse shoulder replacement, as well as on post-operative rehabilitation and restrictions imposed on patients having undergone this procedure. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A two-round Web-based Delphi consensus study was undertaken. An international group of experts in the field of reverse shoulder replacement were asked to complete the questionnaire. Consensus was considered as agreement of 60% or higher. RESULTS: There was substantial disagreement in most parameters examined amongst the 10 participants of the first round. Agreement was achieved for most parameters examined amongst three of the four respondents of the second round. CONCLUSIONS: 1. Amongst respondents of the second round a minimum age of 65 years for reverse shoulder arthroplasty was considered acceptable for most areas examined. 2. Controversial management areas in reverse shoulder arthroplasty have been highlighted and require exploration by further clinical studies.