Judicious use of corticosteroid injections prior to shoulder arthroplasty does not compromise outcomes at a minimum of 2 years following surgery.

BACKGROUND: The use of total shoulder arthroplasty is continuing to rise with its expanding indications. For patients with chronic conditions, such as glenohumeral arthritis and rotator cuff arthropathy, nonoperative treatment is typically done prior to arthroplasty and often includes corticosteroid injections (CSIs). Recent studies in the shoulder arthroplasty literature as well as applied from the hip and knee literature have focused on the risk of periprosthetic infection. Literature is lacking as to whether the judicious use of corticosteroids in the year prior to arthroplasty influences patient-reported outcomes (PROs). The purpose of this study was to determine if preoperative CSIs prior to shoulder arthroplasty affected 2-year PROs. METHODS: Retrospective review of anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) patients (n = 230) was performed at a single institution including multiple surgeons. Patients were included if they had preoperative and a minimum of 2-year postoperative PROs, including: American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), visual analog scale, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Veteran's RAND 12 Physical Component Score, and Veteran's RAND 12 Mental Component Score. Patients were included in the injection group if they had received an injection, either glenohumeral or subacromial, within 12 months prior to arthroplasty (inject = 134). Subgroup analysis included anatomic (total shoulder arthroplasty [TSA] = 92) and RSA (RSA = 138) as well as those with no injection within 12 months prior to surgery. An analysis of variance was used to compare outcomes between patients who received an injection and those who did not prior to TSA and RSA. RESULTS: There were 230 patients included with 134 patients in the injection group and 96 in the no injection group. Patients who received an injection in the year prior to arthroplasty displayed a significantly higher ASES (82 [16.23 standard deviation] vs. 76 [19.43 standard deviation], P < .01) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (70 [24.49 standard deviation] vs. 63 [29.22 standard deviation], P < .01) scores vs. those who had not received injection. There was no difference when comparing preoperative injection vs. no injection in patients undergoing TSA. Those patients undergoing RSA displayed significantly higher ASES scores (P < .01). There were no significant differences in visual analog scale, Veteran's RAND 12 Physical Component Score, and Veteran's RAND 12 Mental Component Score among any analysis (P > .05), and the minimal clinically important difference in ASES was not different between groups (P.09). CONCLUSION: CSIs within 12 months prior to anatomic and RSA do not compromise PROs during a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Although more complications occurred in the injection group, it did not reach statistical significance and warrants further study in a larger population.

No clinical difference in outcomes between inlay and onlay arthroscopic biceps tenodesis techniques during rotator cuff repair.

BACKGROUND: Both inlay and onlay arthroscopic biceps tenodesis (ABT) are common procedures performed during rotator cuff repair. The inlay method involves creating a bone socket in the bicipital groove to secure the long head of the biceps tendon using an interference screw. The onlay method utilizes a suture anchor to secure the long head of the biceps tendon on the surface of the bicipital groove. Little is known on the long-term differences in patient-reported outcomes between these 2 techniques. The primary purpose of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes of inlay vs. onlay ABT with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Secondary aims were to evaluate the impact of rotator cuff tear size on outcomes and compare rates of complications between the 2 techniques. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was performed to identify patients who had an ABT during a full-thickness rotator cuff repair. Any symptom specific to the biceps were noted, including pain and cramping, Popeye deformity, or revision surgery. Complication rates were compared between groups. The visual analog scale pain score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and Veteran's RAND-12 score (VR-12) scores were compared at 2 years. The impact of rotator cuff tear size was analyzed by categorizing into small/medium or large/massive based on operative reports and arthroscopic images. RESULTS: There were 165 patients identified (106 in the inlay group and 59 in the onlay group). No revision surgeries were performed secondary to the biceps tendon in either group. Eleven patients (10%) in the inlay group complained of biceps pain or cramping compared to 2 patients (3%) in the onlay group (P = .11). One Popeye deformity was noted in each group (P = .67). No significant differences were found between groups for visual analog scale (P = .41), ASES functional (P = .61), ASES index (P = .91), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (P = .09), VR-12 Physical Component Score (P = .77), or VR-12 Mental Component Score (P = .09). Rotator cuff tear size within the groups also did not demonstrate statistical significance. CONCLUSION: No clinical differences or complications were found at minimum 2-year follow-up between inlay and onlay ABT in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair when controlling for tear size. The clinical relevance suggests either technique is effective and can be based on surgeon preference.

Corticosteroid injection prior to surgery had no effect on 2-year outcomes following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair.

Background: Corticosteroid injections (CSIs) can be an effective nonsurgical treatment for patients with rotator cuff tears. Recent large database studies have raised concern that CSI may result in a higher reoperation rate, increased infection risk, and worse outcome after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reoperation rate, incidence of postoperative infection, and two-year outcomes of patients undergoing ARCR with and without the use of preoperative CSI. Methods: An institutional database generated from fellowship-trained orthopedic sports surgeons was retrospectively queried for patients who underwent ARCR with a minimum of two-year follow-up. Inclusion criteria consisted of 1) primary full-thickness rotator cuff tear and 2) preoperative and minimum two-year patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). Of the 219 patients identified, 134 patients had preoperative subacromial CSI administered within one year of ARCR. Reoperation rate, number of injections, Visual Analog Scale, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, and Veterans Rand 12-Item Health Survey Physical Component Score/Mental Component Score were compared between groups at six months, one year, and two years. Chi-square and t-tests were used to compare baseline differences, postoperative infections, and reoperations. A repeated measures Analyses of Covariance was used to measure differences between PROMs at each time point. Simple Analyses of Covariance were used for the two-year sub-analyses for patients receiving CSI within 90 days of surgery and if multiple preoperative CSI had been given (α ≤ 0.05). Results: There were no significant demographic differences between groups (P > .05). Preoperative use of subacromial CSI within one year prior to ARCR did not increase reoperation rate (P = .85) or impact PROMs at any timepoint. There were two reoperations during the study period in the CSI group (2 lysis of adhesions). No infections occurred in either cohort. No differences were found if injections were performed within 90 days of surgery or if more than one CSI was administered within the year prior to surgery (P > .05). Conclusion: Our results show that preoperative CSI prior to primary ARCR did not increase risk of reoperation, infection, or influence PROMs with a minimum follow-up of 2 years.

Assessment of glenoid baseplate initial micromotion and fixation strength in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty designs using a direct shear force methodology.

Background: In a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, the altered glenohumeral joint center of rotation subjects the glenoid baseplate to increased shear forces and potential loosening. Methods: This study examined glenoid baseplate micromotion and initial fixation strength with the application of direct shear force in a Sawbone model. The reverse total shoulder arthroplasty systems examined were the DJO Reverse® Shoulder Prosthesis, the Exactech Equinoxe® Reverse System, and the Tornier AequalisTM Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis. Specimens were cyclically tested with increasing shear loads until 150 µm of displacement between the implant and glenoid was achieved, and subsequently until failure, classified as either 1 cm of implant/glenoid displacement or fracture. Results: The average load withstood for the 150 µm threshold for DJO, Tornier, and Exactech was 460 ± 88 N, 525 ± 100 N, and 585 ± 160 N, respectively. The average total load at device failure for DJO, Tornier, and Exactech was 980 ± 260 N, 1260 ± 120 N, and 1350 ± 230 N, respectively. Discussion: The Exactech implant design trended toward requiring more load to induce micromotion at each threshold and to induce device failure, most commonly seen as inferior screw pull out. This study proposes design features that may enhance fixation and suggests little risk of initial micromotion or failure during initial post-operative recovery.

Preoperative screening in patients having elective shoulder surgery reveals a high rate of fall risk.

INTRODUCTION: Fall risk is an acknowledged but relatively understudied concern for older patients undergoing shoulder surgery. The cause is multifactorial, and it includes advanced age, impaired upper extremity function, use of shoulder abduction braces, and postoperative use of opioid medications. No previous study has examined preoperative fall risk in patients undergoing elective shoulder surgery. Previous literature looking at fall risk in elective orthopedic procedures has predominantly focused on falls occurring in the hospital setting, although falls have also been shown to occur in the outpatient setting. Gait speed and Timed Up and Go (TUG) are well-researched functional measures in the aging population with established cutoff scores indicating increased fall risk. The purpose of this study was to quantify gait speed and TUG scores in a series of patients who were scheduled to undergo either rotator cuff repair (RCR) or total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in order to assess overall risk of fall in these populations. METHODS: A total of 198 patients scheduled for TSA or RCR surgery were evaluated preoperatively from multiple outpatient physical therapy clinics within Greenville, South Carolina. The TUG score (>14 seconds considered high fall risk) and 10 Meter Walk test (<0.7 m/s considered high risk for falls) were recorded for each patient. Patient-reported outcomes were also collected, including Veteran's Rand 12 Physical Component and Mental Component Scores, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form score, and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation. RESULTS: Patients undergoing TSA (n = 80; 65.4 ± 11.4 years) were older than those undergoing RCR (n = 118; 59.0 ± 14.2 years). Fifty-nine percent of all patients were classified as being a high risk for falls based on gait speed <0.7 m/s. Patients in the TSA group were more likely to display preoperative fall risk compared to patients in the RCR group (62% vs. 38%; χ2 = 8.9, P = .03). There were no significant differences in ambulatory status, Veteran's Rand 12 Physical Component and Mental Component Scores, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form, or Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores between groups (P = .11). DISCUSSION: Both patient groups demonstrated a high rate of fall risk in preoperative evaluation. Patients undergoing TSA more often displayed fall risk compared with patients undergoing RCR. Although patients in the TSA group were older, there was no association between age or ambulatory status and fall risk. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that fall risk screening may be important for patients undergoing TSA and RCR surgeries. The higher fall risk in the TSA group may be an important consideration as this procedure shifts toward outpatient status.

Regenesorb and polylactic acid hydroxyapatite anchors are associated with similar osseous integration and rotator cuff healing at 2 years.

BACKGROUND: Commercially available suture anchors for rotator cuff repairs can differ significantly in architecture and material. Clinical data on their osseous integration and its effect on patient-reported outcomes is scarce. Preclinical investigations indicated a higher rate of osseous integration for the open-architecture design of the Healicoil Regenesorb anchor than the closed-threaded design of the Twinfix (Smith & Nephew). The purpose of this study was to investigate these 2 anchors with different architecture and material to determine their effect on osseous integration and clinical outcomes after rotator cuff repair. METHODS: A prospective randomized controlled trial was performed from 2014 to 2019. Sixty-four patients (39 females, 25 males) with an average age of 58.7 years who underwent arthroscopic rotator cuff repair by one of 4 board-certified, fellowship-trained surgeons were randomized to receive Healicoil Regenesorb (PLGA/ß-TCP/Calcium Sulfate) or Twinfix Ultra HA (PLLA/HA) anchors. Thirty-two patients had Healicoil anchors implanted, and 32 patients had Twinfix anchors implanted. Of the 64 patients, 51 returned at 24 months for computed tomographic (CT) examination (25 Twinfix and 26 Healicoil) to determine osteointegration of the anchors. Patient-reported outcomes, including Penn Shoulder Score (PENN), Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index, visual analog scale, EQ-5D, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, Global Rating of Change, were collected at baseline, 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months. Ultrasonography was used to assess rotator cuff integrity after 6 months. Two board-certified, fellowship-trained orthopedic surgeons, blinded to the type of anchors, analyzed the CT scans to assess the anchor osteointegration at 24 months using a previously published grading scale. RESULTS: There were no differences in demographics, preoperative outcomes, or baseline characteristics such as tear size, number of anchors, Goutallier classification, or smoking status between groups. There was no difference in osseous integration between the 2 anchors at 24 months (P = .117). Eight patients had rotator cuff retears, of which 2 patients had Twinfix anchors and 6 patients had Healicoil anchors (P = .18). There were no statistically significant differences in patient-reported outcomes or complications between groups. The 2-year PENN scores were 89 with the Twinfix and 88 with Healicoil anchors (P = .55). CONCLUSION: Despite differences in material and anchor architecture, the rate of healing and patient-reported outcomes were similar between the Twinfix and Healicoil anchor groups. The rate of osteointegration was the same at 2 years.

Does Functional Bracing of the Unstable Shoulder Improve Return to Play in Scholastic Athletes? Returning the Unstable Shoulder to Play.

BACKGROUND: Functional bracing is often used as an adjunct to nonoperative treatment of anterior shoulder instability, but no study has evaluated the effectiveness of in-season bracing. The purpose of this study was to examine successful return to play in a nonoperative cohort of adolescent athletes with in-season shoulder instability and compare those athletes treated with bracing to those who were not. HYPOTHESIS: The use of functional bracing will improve success rates in a cohort of athletes treated nonoperatively for in-season shoulder instability. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 3. METHODS: A total of 97 athletes with anterior shoulder instability were followed for a minimum of 1 year. The mean age was 15.8 ± 1.4 years (range, 12.0-18.0 years). All athletes were treated with initial nonoperative management. Twenty athletes (21%) were also treated with bracing while 77 (79%) were not. The athlete completing the current season and 1 subsequent season without surgery or time lost from shoulder injury was defined as a successful outcome. RESULTS: There was no statistical difference in nonoperative success rates between the braced and nonbraced athletes (P = 0.33). Braced athletes (n = 20) returned to play 80% of the time, while nonbraced athletes (n = 77) returned at a rate of 88%. Of the braced athletes, 85% were football players (n = 17). A football-only comparison demonstrated no difference between braced failures (26%) and nonbraced failures (16%) (P = 0.47). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to evaluate the utility of functional bracing in returning an athlete to sport and completing a full subsequent season without surgery or time loss due to injury of the shoulder. In adolescent athletes with shoulder instability treated nonoperatively, functional bracing did not result in increased success rates when compared with no bracing. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The data from this study indicate that functional bracing may not improve success rates for athletes with shoulder instability.

The Nonoperative Instability Severity Index Score (NISIS): A Simple Tool to Guide Operative Versus Nonoperative Treatment of the Unstable Shoulder.

BACKGROUND: The management of the adolescent athlete after initial shoulder instability remains controversial. HYPOTHESIS: Individual risk factors in athletes with shoulder instability who are managed nonoperatively can be integrated into a scoring system that can predict successful return to sport. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4. METHODS: A total of 57 scholastic athletes with primary anterior shoulder instability who were managed nonoperatively were reviewed. Success was defined as a return to index sport at the same level and playing at least 1 subsequent season without missed time as a result of the shoulder. Patient-specific risk factors were individually evaluated, and odds ratios were calculated. A 10-point Nonoperative Injury Severity Index Score (NISIS) incorporated the risk factors for failure. This score was then retrospectively applied with regression analysis and a chi-square analysis to determine the overall optimal score that predicted failure of nonoperative management. RESULTS: In total, 6 risk factors for failure were included in the NISIS: age (>15 years), bone loss, type of instability, type of sport (contact vs noncontact), male sex, and arm dominance. Overall, 79% of patients treated nonoperatively were able to successfully return to sport. Nearly all (97%) low-risk patients (NISIS <7) successfully returned to sport, while only 59% of high-risk patients returned to sport, a relative risk of 12.2 (P = 0.001). High-risk patients with unipolar bone loss successfully returned (100%), but 67% of high-risk patients with bipolar bone loss failed. CONCLUSION: The NISIS is a simple and effective clinical tool to determine successful nonoperative management following anterior shoulder instability and may be helpful in guiding decision making when presented with the unstable shoulder in the scholastic athlete.

The influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in regard to variability in the center of rotation (COR), which modifies the superior-inferior position of the humerus to affect the acromiohumeral interval (AHI), and its effect on the deltoid lever arm (DLA), acromial index (AI), and critical shoulder angle (CSA). The purpose of this study was to investigate the variation in biomechanics and the association with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and range of motion (ROM) measurements. METHODS: Radiographs, ROM, and 2-year PRO scores were retrospectively reviewed for 108 patients. RESULTS: There was large variability in preoperative and postoperative biomechanics. The COR was medialized 12.01 ± 4.8 mm. The CSA increased 2.64° ± 12.45°. The AHI increased 20.6 ± 9.80 mm. The DLA lengthened 21.21 ± 10.15 mm. The AI increased 0.009 ± 0.3. Postoperative AI positively correlated with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and Penn Shoulder Score (P = .03). Specifically, a postoperative AI of 0.62 corresponded to American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (72.5 ± 18.3 vs. 62.3 ± 24.7; P = .02) and Penn Shoulder Score (71.2 ± 21.4 vs. 61.8 ± 25.6; P = .05), an average 10 points higher than AI of <0.6. Also, a smaller postoperative CSA (<25°) correlated with improved forward elevation (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that evaluates the variability of biomechanical factors and their impact on postoperative ROM and PROs. An increased AI and decreased CSA are associated with improved PROs in this study, and a smaller CSA is associated with better forward elevation. Change in the COR, AHI, or DLA, however, did not affect patient outcomes or ROM. Further study is warranted to determine the optimal position.

Subscapularis Repair Is Unnecessary After Lateralized Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Controversy exists as to whether the subscapularis should be repaired after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of the present study was to evaluate the utility of repairing the subscapularis after reverse shoulder arthroplasty with regard to complications, objective findings, and patient-reported outcome measures. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the records for 99 patients who had undergone a lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty with (n = 58) or without (n = 41) subscapularis repair. Outcomes were compared with the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), Penn shoulder score (PSS), Veterans RAND (VR)-12, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score at a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Demographics, range of motion, and complications were also compared. A 1-way analysis of variance was performed to determine differences in performance and outcome scores, and a chi-square analysis was performed to compare the frequency of complications between groups. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the repair and no-repair groups in terms of SANE, PSS, ASES, or VR-12 scores. There also were no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of postoperative ranges of forward elevation (128° versus 123°; p = 0.44) and external rotation (33° versus 29°; p = 0.29), the dislocation rate (5% versus 2%; p = 0.49), or the overall complication rate (9% versus 5%; p = 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: The results of the present study suggest that repair of the subscapularis tendon after lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty may not be necessary. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Validity and Responsiveness of the Single Alpha-numeric Evaluation for Shoulder Patients.

BACKGROUND: There is an ever-increasing demand for widespread implementation of patient-reported outcomes. However, adoption is slow owing to limitations in clinical infrastructure and resources within busy orthopaedic practices. Prior studies showed the single alpha-numeric evaluation (SANE) score to correlate at a single point in time with the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score. However, no study has validated the SANE in terms of test-retest reliability, responsiveness, or clinical utility. PURPOSE: To validate SANE with the ASES across a sample of patients with common orthopaedic shoulder diagnoses. STUDY DESIGN: Cohort study (diagnosis); Level of evidence, 2. METHODS: Patients undergoing rotator cuff repair (n = 77), total shoulder replacement (n = 55), or physical therapy (n = 80) for signs and symptoms of subacromial impingement syndrome (n = 61) or adhesive capsulitis (n = 19) were administered the SANE and ASES at baseline and again at their 3-month follow-up from initial care or surgery (N = 212, mean ± SD age = 52.6 ± 1.2 years, n = 145 women). Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC2,1) and standard error of the measurement (SEm) were used to evaluate the test-retest reliability of the SANE and the validity between the SANE and ASES scores. Analysis of variance (treatment group × time) was used to evaluate the responsiveness to treatment, and a receiver operating characteristic curve was used to establish the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the SANE as compared with the ASES (α = .05). Floor and ceiling effects were evaluated as the percentage of patients who scored the highest or lowest score on each tool. RESULTS: The SANE demonstrated good pretreatment reliability (ICC2,1 = 0.84, SEM = 3.8), similar to the ASES (ICC2,1 = 0.82, SEM = 3.4). The SANE also showed good agreement with the ASES before and after treatment across all treatment groups (rotator cuff repair, ICC2,1 = 0.85, SEM = 3.4; total shoulder replacement, ICC2,1 = 0.72, SEM = 5.2; physical therapy: ICC2,1 = 0.82, SEM = 2.9). The SANE and ASES displayed similar responsiveness after treatment, with similar mean change and SD within each treatment group. The receiver operating characteristic curve revealed an area under the curve of 0.79 (SE, 0.62; P < .001) and a cutoff of 15% on the SANE, with a sensitivity of 85% to establish the MCID. Acceptable and similar floor and ceiling effects were observed for the ASES (4%) and SANE (9%). CONCLUSION: The study demonstrates that the SANE is valid for a range of common shoulder diagnoses to assess patient outcomes across operative and nonoperative treatment for shoulder complaints. The MCID of 15% is similar to that of the ASES (11%), suggesting that the SANE is a simple and efficient tool to assess treatment effects for shoulder disorders. Future studies are warranted to confirm these results and compare across other body parts and diagnoses.

Outcomes of Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty with B2 Glenoids: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Total shoulder arthroplasty remains an effective procedure for shoulder pain relief. Despite the negative effect of abnormal glenoid morphology and specifically retroverted and posteriorly subluxated glenoids, there is no consensus for management of B2 glenoids in total shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes and complication rates for B2 glenoid techniques so as to provide a baseline understanding of the current state of treatment of this pathology. METHODS: A systematic review evaluating outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty with biconcave glenoids using PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) methodology included searches up to December 31, 2015, of PubMed, Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Reviews, and Google Scholar. Nine articles met inclusion and exclusion criteria. RESULTS: In this study, 239 total shoulder arthroplasties with B2 glenoids with a mean follow-up of 55.5 months (range, 24 to 91 months) were included. The mean patient age was 63.3 years (range, 55.8 to 68.7 years). Asymmetric reaming was performed in 127 glenoids, posterior bone-grafting was included in 53 glenoids, and 34 received an augmented glenoid component to correct glenoid retroversion and bone loss. Overall, the mean Constant and Neer scores improved from preoperative measures. Fifty-eight percent of patients had no loosening, and 42% had some loosening, although not all of these patients were symptomatic. Despite variation in outcome measures hindering treatment approach comparison, the posteriorly augmented glenoid was generally reported to provide better outcomes with few complications. Although posterior glenoid bone-grafting results in acceptable outcomes, it also represents the highest rate of complications. The revision rate was 15.6% for asymmetric reaming, 9.5% for posterior glenoid bone-grafting, and 0% for posteriorly augmented glenoids. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment of the B2 glenoid remains a challenge to the shoulder surgeon, with worse outcomes and higher complication rates. Longer follow-up, consistent outcome measures, and result stratification based on glenoid type may allow for direct comparison in the future. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Outcomes of Trabecular Metal-backed glenoid components in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: As glenoid failure is one of the primary causes of failure of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), Trabecular Metal-backed glenoid components have become popular. This study reports implant survival and clinical outcomes of patients who received a Trabecular Metal-backed glenoid component during primary anatomic TSA. METHODS: Patients who underwent TSA with a Trabecular Metal-backed glenoid component by a single surgeon were identified and reviewed for clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcome measures with a minimum of 2 years' follow-up. RESULTS: Of 47 patients identified, radiographic and clinical follow-up was available on 36 patients (77%). Average age was 66.36 years (range, 50-85 years), and the average follow-up 41 months (range, 24-66 months). Three patients showed signs of osteolysis, 4 had radiographic evidence of metal debris, and 1 patient had a catastrophic failure after a fall. Of the 47 TSAs, 5 (11%) were revised to a reverse TSA for subscapularis failure and pain. Visual analog scale for pain scores improved by an average of 4.4. At final follow-up, the average Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score was 72.4; Penn satisfaction score, 7.5; Penn score, 70.35; and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, 69.23. Outcome scores were similar in the 7 patients with osteolysis or metal debris compared to those without. CONCLUSION: Trabecular Metal-backed glenoids had a 25% rate of radiographic metal debris and osteolysis at a minimum 2-year follow-up in this series with one catastrophic failure. This implant should be used with caution, and patients followed closely.

Clinical outcomes of suprascapular nerve decompression: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Suprascapular neuropathy is an uncommon clinical diagnosis. Although there have been a number of case series reporting on this pathologic process, to date there has been no systematic review of these studies. This study aimed to synthesize the literature on suprascapular neuropathy with regard to clinical outcomes. The secondary objective was to detail the diagnosis and treatment of suprascapular neuropathy and any associated complications. METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify studies that reported the results or clinical outcomes of suprascapular nerve decompression. The searches were performed using MEDLINE through PubMed and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies comprising 275 patients and 276 shoulders met inclusion criteria. The mean age was 41.9 years, and mean follow-up was 32.5 months. The most common symptom was deep, posterior shoulder pain (97.8%), with a mean duration of symptoms before decompression of 19.0 months; 94% of patients underwent electrodiagnostic testing before decompression, and 85% of patients had results consistent with suprascapular neuropathy. The most common outcome reported was the visual analog scale score, followed by the Constant-Murley score. The mean postoperative Constant-Murley score obtained was 89% of ideal maximum. Ninety-two percent of athletes were able to return to sport. Only 2 (0.74%) complications were reported in the included studies. CONCLUSIONS: Surgical decompression in the setting of suprascapular neuropathy leads to satisfactory outcomes as evidenced by the patient-reported outcomes and return to sport rate. Furthermore, the rate of complications appears to be low.

The incidence and effect of fatty atrophy, positive tangent sign, and rotator cuff tears on outcomes after total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Treatment choices for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in the absence of full-thickness rotator cuff tears (RCTs) are not clearly defined in current literature. This study investigated the prevalence and effect of preoperative partial-thickness RCTs and muscular degenerative changes on postoperative outcomes after TSA. METHODS: Medical records and magnetic resonance imaging studies were reviewed for patients who underwent TSA for primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis with minimum 2-year follow-up to determine preoperative tear classification, Goutallier grade, and supraspinatus tangent sign. Postoperative pain on the visual analog scale, range of motion, and patient outcomes scores were obtained to correlate preoperative RCT status, Goutallier grading, tangent sign, and postoperative outcomes. Patients with full-thickness RCT on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging were excluded. RESULTS: Forty-five patients met all inclusion criteria (average age, 65 ± 10 years; average follow-up, 43 months). Of the patients undergoing TSA, 40% had a significant (>50% thickness) partial RCT. Grade 3 to 4 Goutallier changes were noted in 22% of all patients, and 13% demonstrated grade 3 to 4 changes in the context of no tear. Positive tangent sign was present in 7% of all patients. The preoperative Goutallier grade of the infraspinatus was significantly negatively correlated with postoperative forward elevation (P = .02) and external rotation (P = .05), but rotator cuff pathology, including tear status, Goutallier grade, and the presence of a tangent sign, did not correlate with postoperative functional outcome scores. CONCLUSIONS: Even in the absence of a full-thickness RCT, rotator cuff atrophy, fatty infiltration, and partial thickness tearing are common findings. Although postoperative range of motion is correlated to Goutallier changes of the infraspinatus, rotator cuff pathology is not correlated to outcomes after TSA; therefore, one may proceed with TSA without concern of their effect on postoperative outcomes.

Arthroscopic Repair of Posterior Bony Bankart Lesion and Subscapularis Remplissage.

Posterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss has only a fraction of the prevalence of anterior instability. Unlike the latter, there is a paucity of literature regarding the treatment of posterior bony Bankart lesions and even less with concomitant reverse Hill-Sachs lesions. This combination of pathology leads to a difficult situation regarding treatment options. We present our technique for arthroscopic repair of a posterior bony Bankart lesion and reverse Hill-Sachs lesion. The importance of proper portal placement cannot be overstated. By use of the lateral position and strategically placed portals, the posterior bony Bankart lesion and attached labral complex were appropriately mobilized. We reduced the glenoid bone, with the attached capsulolabral complex, to the glenoid rim and performed fixation using a knotless suture anchor. We then placed 2 double-loaded suture anchors into the reverse Hill-Sachs lesion. The sutures were passed creating horizontal mattress configurations that were tied at the end of the procedure, effectively externalizing the humeral head defect. Our technique results in satisfactory fragment reduction, as well as appropriate capsular tension, and effectively prevents the reverse Hill-Sachs lesion from engaging.

Liposomal bupivacaine versus indwelling interscalene nerve block for postoperative pain control in shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pain management strategies following shoulder arthroplasty vary significantly. Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) is an extended-release delivery of a phospholipid bilayer encapsulating bupivacaine that can result in drug delivery up to 72 hours. Prior studies in lower extremity surgery demonstrated efficacy of LB in comparison to a single-shot peripheral nerve block; however, no study has investigated LB in a total shoulder arthroplasty population. Therefore, this study compared LB vs. an indwelling interscalene nerve block (IINB). METHODS: This is a prospective, randomized study of 83 consecutive shoulder arthroplasty patients; 36 patients received LB and a "bridge" of 30 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine, and 47 patients received an IINB. Postoperative visual analog scale pain levels, opiate consumption measured with oral morphine equivalents, length of hospital stay, and postoperative complications were recorded. Continuous variables were compared using an analysis of variance with significance set at P < .05. RESULTS: Visual analog scale pain scores were statistically higher in the LB cohort immediately postoperatively in the postanesthesia care unit (7.25 vs. 1.91; P = .000) as well as for the remainder of postoperative day 0 (4.99 vs. 3.20; P = .005) but not for the remainder of admission. Opiate consumption was significantly higher among the LB cohort in the postanesthesia care unit (31.79 vs. 7.47; P = .000), on postoperative day 0 (32.64 vs. 15.04; P = .000), and for the total hospital admission (189.50 vs. 91.70, P = .000). Complication numbers and length of stay were not statistically different. CONCLUSION: Use of an IINB provides superior pain management in the immediate postoperative setting as demonstrated by decreased narcotic medication consumption and lower subjective pain scores.

Nonoperative management versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty for treatment of 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures in older adults.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures in the older adult is controversial. No study has directly compared reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with nonoperative treatment for these fractures. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical and patient-reported outcomes between RSA and nonoperative treatment groups. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on all 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures treated with either RSA or nonoperative treatment with minimum 1-year follow-up. All patients in the nonoperative cohort were offered RSA but declined. Objective patient data were obtained from medical records. Patient-reported outcomes including visual analog scale score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, Penn Shoulder Score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, resiliency score, and Veterans Rand-12 scores were obtained at follow-up. Statistical analysis was performed by use of the Student t test for continuous variables and χ2 analysis for nonparametric data. RESULTS: We analyzed 19 nonoperative and 20 RSA patients with a mean follow-up period greater than 2 years (29 months in nonoperative group and 53 months in RSA group). There were no differences in range of motion between groups (forward elevation, 120° vs 119° [P = .87]; external rotation, 23° vs 31° [P = .06]). No differences between the nonoperative and RSA groups were noted for any patient-reported outcomes. Among patients receiving RSA, there was no difference in outcomes in those undergoing surgery less than 30 days after injury versus those receiving delayed RSA. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that there are minimal benefits of RSA over nonoperative treatment for 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures in older adults.

Resilience correlates with outcomes after total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Resilience, characterized by an ability to bounce back or recover from stress, is increasingly recognized as a psychometric property affecting many outcomes' domains including quality of life, suicide risk in active-duty military personnel, and recovery in cancer patients. This study examines the correlation between resilience, as measured by the Brief Resilience Scale (BRS), and traditional outcome scores including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and Penn scores in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). METHODS: Seventy patients undergoing primary anatomic TSA were followed up for a minimum of 2 years (mean, 30 ± 3 months). Patients were stratified into groups a priori, based on deviation from the mean of the BRS score, into low-resilience (LR), normal-resilience (NR), and high-resilience (HR) patients, and outcome scores were calculated for each group. RESULTS: Postoperative BRS scores significantly correlated with ASES, Penn, and SANE scores (r = 0.41-0.44, P < .004 for all scores). When we evaluated patients based on resilience group, the LR group had a Penn score that was 34 points lower than that in the HR group. Likewise, the LR group had a SANE score that averaged 40 points lower than that in the HR group (SANE score of 53 points in LR group and 92 points in HR group, P = .05). When we evaluated ASES subscores, it appeared that the pain subscale was responsible for most of the difference between the LR and HR groups (29 points and 48 points [out of 50 points], respectively; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS: Resilience is a major predictor of postoperative outcomes after TSA. Patients who are classified as having LR have outcome scores that are 30 to 40 points lower on traditional outcome scales than patients with HR.

Outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty in patients younger than 65 years: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Despite concerns about the longevity of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in young patients, it remains an attractive option because of the absence of superior options. METHODS: A systematic review was performed using searches of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. English-language studies were identified with search terms "total shoulder arthroplasty" (title/abstract) or "shoulder replacement" (title/abstract) and "young" (title/abstract) or "under 65 years of age" (title/abstract). Duplicate studies, studies not reporting outcomes, and those using a humeral resurfacing technique were excluded. Outcomes of interest included pain, range of motion, patient-reported outcome scores, patient satisfaction, radiographic changes, complication and revision rates, and implant survival. RESULTS: Six studies met inclusion criteria. Significant improvements in pain, range of motion, and patient-reported outcomes were found across all studies that reported these measures. At an average of 9.4 years, 17.4% underwent revision and 54% had glenoid lucency. Whereas glenoid loosening is the most common reason for revision (52%), overall implant survivorship was reported at 60% to 80% at 10- to 20-year follow-up. Outcome measures including the Constant, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and Simple Shoulder Test scores were reported, with generally satisfactory but not excellent results between 3 and 10 years from surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Although there is concern with periprosthetic radiolucency and glenoid loosening in the young patient (<65 years) undergoing TSA, overall low revision rates and high implant survivorship are reported in the current literature. Whereas the patient-reported outcomes are inferior to those of the overall TSA population, there is significant improvement from baseline levels in young patients with glenohumeral arthritis.