Does fluoroscopy improve baseplate position compared to conventional technique in reverse shoulder arthroplasty? A preliminary study.

Background: Accurate placement of glenoid component in reverse shoulder arthroplasty remains a challenge for surgeons of all levels of expertise; however, no studies have evaluated the utility of fluoroscopy as a surgical assistance method. Methods: Prospective comparative study of 33 patients undergoing primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty during a 12-month period. Fifteen patients had a baseplate placed using the conventional "free hand" technique (control group), and 18 patients using intraoperative fluoroscopy assistance group, in a case-control design. Postoperative glenoid position was evaluated on postoperative Computed Tomography (CT) scan. Results: The mean deviation of version and inclination for fluoroscopy assistance vs. control group was 1.75° (0.675-3.125) vs. 4.2° (1.975-10.45) (p = .015), and 3.85° (0-7.225) vs. 10.35° (4.35-18.75) (p = .009). The distance from the central peg midpoint to the inferior glenoid rim (fluoroscopy assistance 14.61 mm/control 4.75 mm, p = .581) and the surgical time (fluoroscopy assistance 1.93 ± 0.57/control 2.18 ± 0.44 h, p = .400) showed no differences, with an average radiation dose of 0.45 mGy and fluoroscopy time of 14 s. Conclusions: Accurate axial and coronal scapular plane positioning of glenoid component is improved with intraoperative fluoroscopy at the cost of a greater radiation dose and without differences in surgical time. Comparative studies are needed to determine whether their use in relation to more expensive surgical assistance systems result in similar effectiveness.L evel of evidence : Level III, therapeutic study.

Dislocation after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using contemporary medialized modular systems. Can we still consider it such a frequent complication?

INTRODUCTION: Improvement in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) prosthesis and technique has reduced the initially high complication and revision rates associated with this implant. However, instability continues to be a leading cause of reoperation after RTSA, being related in previous studies with medialized designs. The aim of this study was to determine the dislocation rate with the employment of two medialized modular systems of RTSA in our institution. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of two different modular systems of RTSA (SMR Modular Shoulder System and Delta XTEND Reverse Shoulder) was performed between 2009 and 2017 with a minimum 3-year follow-up. Baseline demographic, clinical (Constant, ASES and ROM), and radiographic data were collected. Characteristics of postoperative instability cases were also evaluated. RESULTS: 237 primary RTSA (41% SMR/59% Delta) and 34 revision RTSA (44% SMR/56% Delta) with a mean follow-up of 75.6 ± 5.2 months (79.2 SMR/86.3 Delta, p = .586) were included in the present study. Indications for primary RTSA were osteoarthritis, rotator cuff tear arthropathy and massive irreparable rotator cuff tear (64%), acute fracture (32%), and fracture sequelae (4%). Subscapularis tendon was always repaired in degenerative pathology and tuberosities reattached in traumatic cases. The mean age of the global series was 76.5 ± 5.3 years (75.8 SMR/78.6 Delta, p = .104) with a mean Constant/ASES score at final follow-up of 68.5 ± 4.3/72.9 ± 20.3 (71/68 SMR and 69/74 Delta, p = .653 and .642). Only 2 patients (one acute fracture and one fracture sequelae) suffered an early postoperative anterior dislocation (before 3 months) which represents a rate of .84% in primary cases and .73% including revision surgery. Closed reduction manoeuvres were not successful, and both patients required revision surgery. At the end follow-up, both were stable and had no further dislocations. CONCLUSION: The dislocation rate after RTSA with the employment of two contemporary modular systems with a medialized centre of rotation is extremely low, especially when compared with the previously published series with the original Grammont design. Acute fracture and fracture sequelae were the main diagnoses associated with this instability. The reasons for the low dislocation rate are multifactorial, but the improvement in the baseplate position according to the more recent standards of "ideal position" and technical aspects such as subscapularis repair or tuberosity reattachment in fractures probably play an important role in this aspect.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus nonoperative treatment for 3- or 4-part proximal humeral fractures in elderly patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Proximal humeral fractures (PHFs) are among the most common fractures in elderly patients, but there is insufficient evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine which interventions are the most appropriate for their management. To date, no RCT has directly compared reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with nonoperative treatment for 3- or 4-part PHFs in elderly patients. METHODS: This was a prospective RCT. The primary objective was to compare pain and function 12 months after fracture using the Constant score in patients aged 80 years or older with 3- and 4-part PHFs, treated by either RSA or nonoperative treatment. Secondary outcome measures included Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand, visual analog scale (VAS), Short Form 12 (SF-12), EuroQol 5 Dimensions, and EQ-VAS scores. RESULTS: We analyzed 30 nonoperative and 29 RSA patients with mean ages of 85 years and 82 years, respectively. No differences between the nonoperative and RSA groups were noted for any patient-reported outcomes at 12 months' follow-up except the VAS pain score. The Constant scores were 55.7 in the nonoperative group and 61.7 in the RSA group (P = .071); the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand scores were 29 and 21, respectively (P = .075); the VAS scores were 1.6 and 0.9, respectively (P = .011); the physical SF-12 scores were 36 and 37, respectively (P = .709); the mental SF-12 scores were 43 and 42, respectively (P = .625); the EuroQol 5 Dimensions scores were 0.89 and 0.92, respectively (P = .319); and the EQ-VAS scores were 65 and 67, respectively (P = .604). CONCLUSIONS: This study yields important evidence for the treatment of complex PHFs in elderly patients suggesting minimal benefits of RSA over nonoperative treatment for displaced 3- and 4-part PHFs. At short-term follow-up, the main advantage of RSA appeared to be less pain perception.

Reverse total shoulder arhroplasty for the treatment of failed fixation in proximal humeral fractures.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the clinical outcomes in patients with proximal humerus fractures (PHF) treated with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) as a revision procedure for failed fixation that have more than 5 years of follow-up. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective study of 270 RTSA. The inclusion criteria for this study consisted of patients initially treated with either open reduction and plate fixation (ORIF) or fixation using an intramedullary nail (IMN), who were managed with a single-stage revision to a RTSA, and had a minimum of 24 months clinical and radiological follow-up. Six patients with failed fixation of displaced PHF were revised with RTSA. One patient was excluded from the study because she died. Five shoulders were reviewed for the purpose of this study. The patients were evaluated using Constant score, relative Constant score and visual analogue scale for pain. RESULTS: The mean follow-up was 89 months (65-108). The mean absolute Constant score improved from 31, 81 to 44, 2 and the relative Constant score improved from 31,81% to 67,2%. Mean VAS improved from 6, 8 to 2. One patient rated their outcome excellent, 1good, 1 satisfied and 2 poor. CONCLUSION: RTSA is an appropriate treatment as a revision surgery for failed fixation of PHF. Patients should be adequately warned that they will improve their function but may have complications following this salvage procedure.