Neuroapraxia and early complications after reverse shoulder arthroplasty with glenoid bone grafting.

BACKGROUND: Bone grafting during primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is a technique used to restore poor glenoid bone, increase lateralization, and restore abnormal inclination or version. The purpose of this article is to analyze early outcomes of bone grafting during RSA, assessing the influence of technical and patient considerations. METHODS: In a 4.5-year time period, 137 RSAs with glenoid bone grafting were performed with a minimum 3 months' follow-up. The mean follow-up was 17 months (range, 3-38). The mean age was 71 years (range, 45-89), and body mass index was 28 (range, 19-44). The source of the autografts were humeral head (n = 113) and iliac crest autograft (ICBG; n = 24). The humeral components included 84 onlay and 53 inlay designs. RESULTS: Overall, there were 16 complications (12%), of which 6 were major (5%) (3 graft nonunions and 3 infections) and 10 minor (8%) (1 carpal tunnel syndrome and 9 transient axillary neuropraxias). Of the 9 axillary neuropraxias, 8 resolved by the most recent follow-up, whereas 1 patient was lost to follow-up. There were 4 reoperations (3%): 2 for glenoid baseplate loosening, 1 for severe notching associated with severe glenoid bone loss, and 1 for deep periprosthetic infection. One additional patient had a baseplate failure and is undergoing further treatment. There was no difference in the occurrence of graft nonunions, revision surgery, or glenoid component loosening when comparing type of graft or humeral component used. There was an association of revision surgery (P = .02) with ICBG and older age at the time of surgery (P = .02) and an association of transient neuroapraxia with onlay humeral components (P = .01) and workers' compensation cases (P = .04). CONCLUSIONS: There is a high union rate and low complication rate after bone grafting of the glenoid performed with RSA. Transient neuropraxias are the most frequent complication, but the majority resolve within the first postoperative year. These early findings can serve as the basis for future long-term, comprehensive analysis of complications and outcomes after bone grafting during RSA.

Variation in the value of total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: There is growing interest in maximizing value for patients undergoing discretionary orthopedic surgery but little data to guide improvement efforts. Integrating patient-reported outcomes with time-driven activity-based costing, we explored patient-level variation in the value of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and characterized factors that contribute to this variation. METHODS: Using our institutional registry, we identified 239 patients undergoing elective primary TSA (anatomic or reverse) between 2016-2017 with minimum 2-year follow-up. We calculated value as 2-year postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) scores divided by hospitalization time-driven activity-based costs. This number was multiplied by a constant to set the minimum value of TSA to 100. Multivariable linear regression modeling was performed to characterize factors underlying variation in value. RESULTS: The value of shoulder arthroplasty ranged from 100 to 680, resulting in a variation of 580%. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty was associated with decreased value (79-point decrease vs. anatomic arthroplasty; P < .001; partial R2 = 0.089), as were prior ipsilateral shoulder surgery (38-point decrease; P = .002; partial R2 = 0.031), more self-reported allergies (4-point decrease per 1-unit increase; P = .029; partial R2 = 0.015), diabetes (33-point decrease; P = .045; partial R2 = 0.013), and lower preoperative ASES score (0.7-point increase per 1-unit increase; P = .045; partial R2 = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: We observed wide variation in the value of shoulder arthroplasty that was most strongly associated with procedure type and certain preoperative characteristics (eg, prior shoulder surgery, number of self-reported allergies, diabetes, ASES score). Awareness of these associations is important for implementation of targeted strategies to effectively reduce variation and redirect resources toward higher-value, cost-conscious care.