Total Shoulder Arthroplasty for Glenohumeral Arthritis Associated with Posterior Glenoid Bone Loss: Midterm Results of an All-Polyethylene, Posteriorly Augmented, Stepped Glenoid Component.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to report the minimum 5-year clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients undergoing anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) with a posteriorly augmented glenoid component. METHODS: Thirty-five shoulders with minimum 5-year follow-up underwent aTSA using a posteriorly augmented glenoid component for the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis with posterior glenoid bone loss. Clinical outcomes included range of motion (ROM), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain, and patient reported outcomes scores (PROS). Radiographs (XR) and computed tomography (CT) scans were obtained to assess glenoid morphology, retroversion, central peg osseous integration (CPOI) via Wirth score, Lazarus scores, and Yian scores. Postoperative outcomes were measured at minimum 2- and 5-year follow-up. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was calculated. RESULTS: Two patients experienced prosthetic instability requiring revision, leaving 33 shoulders with an average follow-up of 6.6 years. Average preoperative glenoid retroversion was 21.6˚. A significant improvement in pain, ROM, and PROS was noted at minimum 2-year and 5-year follow-up. Additionally, VAS pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH) scores improved between minimum 2-year and 5-year follow-up. The average Lazarus and Yian scores at final follow-up were 0.73 and 2.6, respectively. There was an increase in Lazarus score and decrease in Wirth score between 2- and 5-year follow-up. A significant correlation was identified between VAS pain scores and both Lazarus and Wirth scores. Survivorship free from revision was 92% at 8.8 years postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Midterm results of aTSA with a posteriorly augmented, stepped glenoid component demonstrate sustained improvements in clinical outcomes with low rates of radiographic loosening. Continued improvement in pain and function, as well as a minor progression of radiographic osteolysis, may be expected between 2- and 5-year follow-up. Additionally, the severity of radiographic loosening correlates with subjective pain levels.

Total shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged 80 years and older: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients and their surgeons may eschew shoulder arthroplasty due to concerns over patient safety and longevity. The purpose of this study was to review the current literature evaluating the clinical and radiographic outcomes of shoulder arthroplasty performed in patients 80 years and older. METHODS: A literature search of the Embase, PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane databases was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies evaluating the outcomes of primary and revision anatomic (aTSA) and reverse (RSA) total shoulder arthroplasty in patients 80 years and older were included for analysis. RESULTS: A total of 15 studies evaluating 1685 primary aTSAs, 1170 primary RSAs, 69 RSAs performed for fracture, and 45 revision RSAs were included for review. The postoperative active forward flexion and external rotation ranged from 138° to 150° and 45° to 48° after aTSA and from 83° to 139° and 16° to 47° after RSA, respectively. Postoperative visual analog scale pain scores ranged from 0 to 1.8 after aTSA and from 0 to 1.4 after RSA. Ninety-day mortality ranged from 0% to 3%, and perioperative complications ranged from 0% to 32%. Late complications ranged from 5.6% to 24% for aTSA patients and 3.5% to 29% for patients undergoing RSA for all indications. Common complications included glenoid loosening (0%-18%) and rotator cuff tear (5.6%-10%) after aTSA and scapular notching (0%-40%) and scapular fracture (4%-9.4%) after RSA. Reoperation rates ranged from 0% to 6% after aTSA and from 0% to 13% after RSA. CONCLUSIONS: aTSA and RSA in this population are safe and effective, demonstrating low rates of perioperative mortality and reoperation, durability that exceeds patient longevity, satisfactory postoperative range of motion, and excellent pain relief. Late complication rates appear to be similar for aTSA and RSA.

The Incidence of Symptomatic Mediastinal Compromise Following Medial Clavicle Fractures.

Medial clavicle fractures pose a concern for mediastinal compromise because of their proximity to the sternoclavicular joint. However, the true incidence of this complication is unknown. The purpose of this study was to evaluate fracture configuration and determine the incidence of mediastinal compromise following medial clavicle fractures. A retrospective analysis of all patients treated for isolated medial one-third clavicle fractures at a single institution was performed. Patient demographics, the mechanism of injury, complications, and treatment were recorded. The fracture pattern and orientation were determined from a review of injury radiographs and computed tomography scans. The incidence of subsequent mediastinal compromise was then identified via a chart review. One hundred five patients were included for analysis. Twenty-two patients (20.8%) had computed tomography scans for review. The average age was 56 years, with 53% of patients being male. Sixty-eight percent of patients reported a high-energy mechanism of injury. No patients demonstrated evidence of mediastinal compression on physical examination. No patients required hospitalization for complications secondary to mediastinal compromise. Ninety percent (n=94) of patients were treated nonoperatively. Forty-three percent of fractures were nondisplaced. The remaining fractures demonstrated anterior or superior displacement of the lateral fragment, with a 0% incidence of posterior displacement. The most common indication for surgery was fracture displacement (n=10). A classification of medial clavicle fractures was developed using data from our cohort and a literature review. Medial clavicle fractures rarely demonstrate posterior displacement. Despite fracture proximity, mediastinal injury is exceedingly uncommon. [Orthopedics. 2023;46(3):e161-e166.].

Return to driving following anatomic and reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a comparative analysis.

BACKGROUND: The currently recommended time to return to driving following shoulder arthroplasty is controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine patient-specific factors associated with early return to driving after anatomic (aTSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). METHODS: All patients aged >18 years undergoing primary aTSA or RTSA at a single institution over a 3-year period were retrospectively identified. Patients were emailed a questionnaire to determine time to postoperative return to driving and frequency of driving prior to and following surgery. Patients who did not drive prior to surgery or did not complete the questionnaire were excluded from analysis. Multivariate analysis was used to determine patient-specific factors associated with early return to driving (within 2 weeks following surgery) and delayed return (>6 weeks following surgery). RESULTS: Four hundred six patients were included for analysis (aTSA = 214, RTSA = 192). Patients undergoing aTSA were significantly younger (68 vs. 74 years) and drove more frequently both pre- and postoperatively than the RTSA cohort. One hundred percent of patients returned to driving postoperatively. Patients undergoing aTSA more commonly demonstrated earlier return to driving than RTSA patients (34% vs. 20%). Factors associated with increased odds of early return to driving included male sex (aTSA) and compliance with surgeon instruction (aTSA). Decreased odds of early return was associated with waiting to drive until cessation of sling use (RTSA), older age (RTSA), and increased body mass index (RTSA). The presence of surgical complications (aTSA) and prolonged use of narcotics (RTSA) were associated with return to driving >6 weeks following surgery. No difference in the rate of motor vehicle accidents was found between patients returning to driving <2 vs. >2 weeks postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing aTSA return to driving sooner than those undergoing RTSA. Early return to driving appears to be influenced by patient sex, age, BMI, narcotic and sling use, and compliance with surgeon instruction, but does not appear to result in a high incidence of postoperative MVA.

Effect of Preoperative MRI Coracoid Dimensions on Postoperative Outcomes of Latarjet Treatment for Anterior Shoulder Instability.

Background: Preoperative coracoid dimensions may affect the size of the bone graft transferred to the glenoid rim and thus the postoperative outcomes of Latarjet coracoid transfer. Purpose: To determine the effect of coracoid length and width as measured on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on outcomes after Latarjet treatment of anterior shoulder instability. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: Included were patients who underwent primary Latarjet surgery between 2009 and 2019 and had preoperative MRI scans and minimum 2-year postoperative outcomes. Longitudinal coracoid length was measured on axial MRI sequences as the distance from the coracoclavicular ligament insertion to the distal tip. Comparisons were made between shorter and longer coracoids and between narrower and wider coracoids. The outcomes of interest were recurrent instability, reoperation, complications, return to sport (RTS), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. Independent-samples t test, Mann-Whitney test, chi-square test, and Fisher exact test were used to compare outcomes between groups, and univariate correlation coefficients were calculated to evaluate the relationships between demographics and coracoid dimensions. Results: Overall, 56 patients were included (mean age, 28.4 years). The mean ± SD coracoid length was 21.6 ± 2.4 mm and width 10.0 ± 1.0 mm. Relative to patients with a longer coracoid (≥22 mm; n = 26), patients with a shorter coracoid (<22 mm; n = 30) had similar rates of recurrent instability (shorter vs longer; 6.7% vs 3.8%), complications (10.0% vs 15.4%), reoperation (3.3% vs 7.7%), and RTS (76.5% vs 58.8%) and similar postoperative ASES scores (85.0 vs 81.6) (P ≥ .05 for all). Likewise, relative to patients with a wider coracoid (≥10 mm; n = 27), patients with a narrower coracoid (<10 mm; n = 29) had similar prevalences of recurrent instability (narrower vs wider; 6.9% vs 3.7%), complications (17.2% vs 7.4%), reoperation (3.5% vs 7.4%), and RTS (66.7% vs 68.4%) and similar postoperative ASES scores (87.1 vs 80.0) (P ≥ .05 for all). Conclusion: Patients undergoing Latarjet coracoid transfer had similar postoperative outcomes regardless of preoperative coracoid dimensions. These findings should be confirmed in a larger cohort before further clinical recommendations are made.

Effectiveness of Corticosteroid Injections in Diabetic Patients With De Quervain Tenosynovitis.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine the effectiveness of corticosteroid injections (CSIs) for de Quervain tenosynovitis in patients with diabetes mellitus. METHODS: We retrospectively identified all patients with diabetes receiving a CSI for de Quervain tenosynovitis by 16 surgeons over a 2-year period. Data collected included demographic information, medical comorbidities, number and timing of CSIs, and first dorsal compartment release. Success was defined as not undergoing an additional CSI or surgical intervention. The mixture of a corticosteroid and local anesthetic provided in each injection was at the discretion of each individual surgeon. RESULTS: Corticosteroid injections were given to 169 wrists in 169 patients with diabetes. Out of 169 patients, 83 (49%) had success following the initial CSI, 44 (66%) following a second CSI, and 6 (67%) following a third CSI. A statistically significant difference was identified in the success rates between the first and second CSIs. Ultimately, 36 of 169 wrists (21%) underwent a first dorsal compartment release. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with diabetes mellitus have a decreased probability of success following a single CSI for de Quervain tenosynovitis in comparison to nondiabetic patients, as described in the literature. However, the effectiveness of each additional CSI does not appear to diminish. TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.

Biomechanical comparison of elbow stability constructs.

BACKGROUND: Despite surgical stabilization of complex elbow trauma, additional fixation to maintain joint congruity and stability may be required. Multiple biomechanical constructs include a static external fixator (SEF), a hinged external fixator (HEF), an internal joint stabilizer (IJS), and a hinged elbow orthosis (HEO). The optimal adjunct fixation to surgical reduction is yet to be determined. METHODS: Eight matched cadaveric upper extremities were tested in a biomechanical model. Anteroposterior stress radiographs were obtained of the elbow in full supination at 0° and 45° of elbow flexion with the weight of the hand serving as a varus load as the baseline. A 360° capsuloligamentous soft-tissue release was performed around the elbow. The biomechanical constructs were applied in the same sequential order: SEF, HEF, IJS, and HEO. For each construct, 0 kg (0-lb) and 2.3 kg (5-lb) of weight were applied to the distal arm. At both weights, radiographs were obtained with the elbow at 0° and 45° of flexion, with subsequent measurement of displacement, congruence at the ulnohumeral joint, and the ulnohumeral opening angle. Statistical analysis was performed to quantify the strength and stability of each construct. RESULTS: Compared with the control group at 0° with and without 2.3 kg (5-lb) of varus force and at 45° with and without 2.3 kg (5-lb) of varus force, no difference was noted in the medial ulnohumeral joint space, lateral ulnohumeral joint space, or ulnohumeral opening angle between the SEF, HEF, and IJS. The gap change after exertion of a 2.3-kg (5-lb) force between the control condition and application of each construct demonstrated no difference between the SEF, HEF, and IJS. Comparison among destabilized elbows showed no significant difference between the SEF, HEF, and IJS. The HEO catastrophically failed in each position at 0 kg (0-lb) of weight. CONCLUSION: The SEF, HEF, and IJS are neither superior nor inferior at maintaining elbow congruity with the weight of the arm and 2.3 kg (5-lb) of varus stress. The HEO did not provide additional stability to the unstable elbow.

The Opioid Risk Tool: Can This Validated Tool Predict Post-Operative Opioid Dependence Following Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair?

Background: Numerous attempts have been made to decrease the incidence of opioid dependence after orthopedic surgeries. However, no effective means of preoperative risk stratification currently exists. The purpose of this study was to determine the ability of the Opioid Risk Tool (ORT) to predict the rate of opioid dependence 2 years after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). Methods: We prospectively evaluated all patients undergoing primary ARCR at a single institution over a 1.5 year period with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. All patients completed the ORT prior to surgery and were stratified into Low, Moderate, and High risk categories. The primary outcome was postoperative opioid dependence, defined as receiving a minimum of 6 opioid prescriptions within 2 years following surgery. Secondary outcomes included the total number of morphine milligram equivalents prescribed, total number of opioid prescriptions filled, and total number of opioid pills prescribed during this time interval. All outcome variables were compared amongst Low, Moderate, and High risk groups. Assessment of a statistical correlation between each outcome variable and individual numerical ORT scores (1-9) was performed. Results: A total of 137 patients were included for analysis. No statistically significant difference was noted in any primary or secondary outcome variable when compared between Low, Moderate, and High risk groups. The total cohort demonstrated a 19% rate of post-operative opioid dependence. No correlation was identified between any outcome variable and individual numerical ORT scores. A greater rate of dependence and quantity of opioids prescribed was noted amongst patients with a history of prior opioid use. Conclusion: The ORT was not predictive of the risk of opioid dependence or quantity of opioids prescribed after ARCR. Attention should be focused on alternative means of identification and management of patients at risk for opioid dependence after orthopedic procedures, including those with a history of prior opioid use.

Midterm outcomes and survivorship of arthroscopic elbow debridement: a comparison of posttraumatic versus primary degenerative osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Arthroscopic debridement is an effective means of surgical management of both degenerative osteoarthritis (DOA) and posttraumatic arthritis (PTA) of the elbow. However, the difference in the efficacy and longevity of this procedure when performed for these two distinct pathologies remains in question. The purpose of this study was to identify and compare the midterm outcomes and survivorship of arthroscopic debridement of elbow PTA and DOA. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing arthroscopic debridement of DOA and PTA of the elbow was performed. A questionnaire containing the Oxford Elbow Score, as well as questions regarding the incidence of reoperation, additional nonoperative intervention, complications, pain, and satisfaction, was given at 5 years, minimum, after surgery. The midterm survivorship of arthroscopic debridement free of reoperation for any reason, as well as the remaining outcome measurements obtained via the questionnaire and in-office evaluation, was compared between PTA and DOA cohorts. RESULTS: Eighty patients (DOA = 36, PTA = 44) were included in this study for analysis. All 36 patients with DOA were noted to be male. Follow-up time at the date of questionnaire response was 7.9 years (range, 5.6-11.8) in the DOA cohort and 8.6 years (range, 5.7-12.7) in the PTA cohort. Reoperation rates of 5.6% and 11.4% were identified in the DOA and PTA cohorts, respectively. No statistical difference was noted in reoperation rate, survivorship, or any measured patient-reported outcomes between cohorts at the final follow-up visit. Both cohorts demonstrated a significant improvement in Visual Analog Scale pain scores (P < .001) and ROM. Postoperative ROM was obtained at the final clinic visit at an average follow-up duration of 151 days and 255 days in the DOA and PTA cohorts, respectively. However, no difference in the degree of improvement in either outcome variable was identified after a comparison between cohorts. CONCLUSION: Arthroscopic debridement is an equally efficacious treatment option for DOA and PTA of the elbow. Patients with either pathology can expect satisfactory elbow function and an improvement in pain with little chance of reoperation at the midterm of the follow-up duration.

Revision total elbow arthroplasty failure rates: the impact of primary arthroplasty failure etiology on subsequent revisions.

BACKGROUND: The number of primary total elbow arthroplasties (TEAs) performed is increasing annually, necessitating a rise in the number of revision procedures. No studies exist to illustrate reliable indications for revision arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of the etiology of primary TEA failure on the failure rate of revision surgery. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the patient charts of all revision TEAs performed at a single institution between 2006 and 2016. The primary outcome was revision failure, defined as the need for a second revision surgical procedure. Patients were organized into cohorts by etiology of primary implant failure. Failure rates, time to second revision, and average number of additional revisions were compared among cohorts. RESULTS: A total of 46 patients with a mean age of 62.7 years and minimum 2-year follow-up were included. The etiologies of failure identified were infection (n = 20), aseptic loosening (n = 17), periprosthetic fracture (n = 6), and bushing wear (n = 3). All noninfectious etiologies were grouped into an additional cohort. Patients who underwent revision for infection demonstrated a significantly greater failure rate and greater number of additional revisions per patient than those with aseptic loosening, those with periprosthetic fracture, and the noninfectious group, as well as a shorter time to failure than the noninfectious group. CONCLUSION: Patients in whom primary TEA fails because of infection are more likely to experience revision failure and require a greater number of subsequent operations than patients with other etiologies of primary TEA failure. These data question the efficacy of revision surgery in the treatment of infected TEAs.