Does retained cement or hardware during 2-stage revision shoulder arthroplasty for infection increase the risk of recurrent infection?

INTRODUCTION: When treating chronic prosthetic joint infection (PJI) after shoulder arthroplasty, removal of the implants and cement is typically pursued because they represent a potential nidus for infection. However, complete removal can increase morbidity and compromise bone stock that is important for achieving stable revision implants. The purpose of this study is to compare the rates of repeat infection after 2-stage revision for PJI in patients who have retained cement or hardware compared to those who had complete removal. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed all two-stage revision total shoulder arthroplasties (TSAs) performed for infection at two institutions between 2011 and 2020 with minimum two-year follow-up from completion of the two-stage revision. Patients were included if they met the International Consensus Meeting (ICM) criteria for probable or definite infection2. Postoperative radiographs after the first-stage of the revision consisting of prosthesis and cement removal and placement of an antibiotic spacer were reviewed to evaluate for retained cement or hardware. Repeat infection was defined as either ≥2 positive cultures at the time of second-stage revision with the same organism cultured during the first-stage revision or repeat surgery for infection after the two-stage revision in patients that again met the ICM criteria for probable or definite infection. The rate of repeat infection among patients with retained cement or hardware was compared to the rate of infection among patients without retained cement or hardware. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients met inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Six (16%) patients had retained cement and one patient (3%) had two retained broken glenoid baseplate screws after first-stage revision. Of the ten cases of recurrent infection, one case (10%) involved retained cement/hardware. Age at revision (60.9±10.6 vs. 65.0±9.6, p=0.264), BMI (33.4±7.2 vs. 29.7±7.3, p=0.184), Charlson Comorbidity Index (2 (0-8) vs. 3 (0-6), p=0.289), male sex (7 vs. 16, p=0.420) and presence of diabetes (1 vs. 3, p=0.709) were not associated with repeat infection. Retained cement or hardware was also not associated with a repeat risk of infection (1 vs. 6, OR=0.389, p=0.374). DISCUSSION: We did not find an increased risk of repeat infection in patients with retained cement or hardware compared to those without. Therefore, we believe that surgeons should consider leaving cement or hardware that is difficult to remove and may lead to increased morbidity and future complications.

Does Adding Hydrogen Peroxide to Chlorhexidine Gluconate Increase the Effectiveness of Skin Preparation in Reducing Cutaneous Cutibacterium Levels? A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Shoulder periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is most commonly caused by Cutibacterium. Effective removal of these bacteria from the skin is difficult because Cutibacterium live protected in the dermal sebaceous glands beneath the skin surface to which surgical preparation solutions, such as chlorhexidine gluconate (CHG), are applied. There is conflicting evidence on the additional benefit of using hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) as an adjunct to CHG in eliminating Cutibacterium from the skin. A previous study demonstrated that after CHG skin preparation, repopulation of Cutibacterium from sebaceous glands onto the skin surface occurs in 90% of shoulders by 60 minutes after application. The objective of this randomized controlled study was to determine the effectiveness of adding H2O2 to CHG in reducing skin Cutibacterium. METHODS: Eighteen male volunteers (36 shoulders) were recruited for this study. The two shoulders of each volunteer were randomized to receive the control preparation ("CHG-only" - 2% CHG in 70% isopropyl alcohol [ISA] alone) or the study preparation ("H2O2+CHG" - 3% H2O2 followed by 2% CHG in 70% ISA). Skin swabs were taken from each shoulder prior to skin preparation and again at 60 minutes after preparation. Swabs were cultured for Cutibacterium and observed for 14 days. Cutibacterium skin load was reported using a semi-quantitative system based on the number of quadrants growing on the culture plate. RESULTS: Prior to skin preparation, 100% of the CHG-only shoulders and 100% of the H2O2+CHG shoulders had positive skin surface cultures for Cutibacterium. Repopulation of Cutibacterium on the skin at 60 minutes occurred in 78% of CHG-only and 78% of H2O2+CHG shoulders (p=1.00). Reduction of Cutibacterium skin levels occurred in 56% of CHG-only and 61% of H2O2+CHG shoulders (p=0.735). Cutibacterium levels were significantly decreased from before skin preparation to 60 minutes after preparation in both the CHG-only (2.1 ± 0.8 to 1.3 ± 0.9, p=0.003) and the H2O2+CHG groups (2.2 ± 0.7 to 1.4 ± 0.9, p<0.001). Substantial skin surface levels of Cutibacterium were present at 60 minutes after both preparations. CONCLUSIONS: In this randomized controlled study, there was no additional benefit of using hydrogen peroxide as an adjunct to chlorhexidine gluconate skin preparation in the reduction of cutaneous Cutibacterium levels. Neither preparation was able to eliminate repopulation of Cutibacterium on the skin surface from the dermal sebaceous glands.

Posterior Shoulder Instability Part II - Glenoid Bone-Grafting, Glenoid Osteotomy, and Rehabilitation/Return to Play - An International Expert Delphi Consensus Statement.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements on glenoid bone-grafting, glenoid osteotomy, rehabilitation, return to play, and follow-up for posterior shoulder instability. METHODS: A consensus process on the treatment of posterior shoulder instability was conducted, with 71 shoulder/sports surgeons from 12 countries participating based on their level of expertise in the field. Experts were assigned to one of 6 working groups defined by specific subtopics within posterior shoulder instability. Consensus was defined as achieving 80-89% agreement, whereas strong consensus was defined as 90-99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was indicated by 100% agreement with a proposed statement. RESULTS: All of the statements relating to rehabilitation, return to play, and follow-up achieved consensus. There was unanimous consensus that the following criteria should be considered: restoration of strength, range of motion, proprioception, and sport-specific skills, with a lack of symptoms. There is no minimum time point required to return to play. Collision athletes and military athletes may take longer to return because of their higher risk for recurrent instability, and more caution should be exercised in clearing them to return to play, with elite athletes potentially having different considerations in returning to play. The relative indications for revision surgery are symptomatic apprehension, multiple recurrent instability episodes, further intra-articular pathologies, hardware failure, and pain. CONCLUSION: The study group achieved strong or unanimous consensus on 59% of statements. Unanimous consensus was reached regarding the criteria for return to play, collision/elite athletes having different considerations in return to play, indications for revision surgery, and imaging only required as routine for those with glenoid bone-grafting/osteotomies at subsequent follow-ups. There was no consensus on optimal fixation method for a glenoid bone-block, the relative indications for glenoid osteotomy, whether fluoroscopy is required or if the labrum should be concomitantly repaired. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level V Expert Opinion.

Posterior Shoulder Instability Part I - Diagnosis, Non-Operative Management, and Labral Repair for Posterior Shoulder Instability - An International Expert Delphi Consensus Statement.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to establish consensus statements on the diagnosis, non-operative management, and labral repair for posterior shoulder instability. METHODS: A consensus process on the treatment of posterior shoulder instability was conducted, with 71 shoulder/sports surgeons from 12 countries participating based on their level of expertise in the field. Experts were assigned to one of 6 working groups defined by specific subtopics within posterior shoulder instability. Consensus was defined as achieving 80-89% agreement, whereas strong consensus was defined as 90-99% agreement, and unanimous consensus was indicated by 100% agreement with a proposed statement. RESULTS: Unanimous agreement was reached on the indications for non-operative management and labral repair which include whether patients had primary or recurrent instability, with symptoms/functional limitations, and whether there was other underlying pathology, or patient's preference to avoid or delay surgery. Additionally, there was unanimous agreement that recurrence rates can be diminished by attention to detail, appropriate indication and assessment of risk factors, recognition of abnormalities in glenohumeral morphology, careful capsulolabral debridement and reattachment, small anchors with inferior placement and multiple fixation points that create a bumper with the labrum, treatment of concomitant pathologies, and a well-defined rehabilitation protocol with strict postoperative immobilization. CONCLUSION: The study group achieved strong or unanimous consensus on 63% of statements related to the diagnosis, nonoperative treatment, and labrum repair for posterior shoulder instability. The statements that achieved unanimous consensus were the relative indications for non-operative management, and the relative indications for labral repair, as well as the steps to minimize complications for labral repair. There was no consensus on whether an arthrogram is needed when performing advanced imaging, the role of corticosteroids/orthobiologics in non-operative management, whether a poster-inferior portal is required.

2023 Neer Award for Basic Science: Genetics of Cutibacterium acnes in Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Large-Scale Bacterial Whole-Genome Sequencing Study.

BACKGROUND: Cutibacterium acnes is the bacterium most commonly responsible for shoulder periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and is often cultured from samples obtained at the time of revision for failed shoulder arthroplasty. We sought to determine whether these bacteria originate from the patient or from exogenous sources. We also sought to identify which C. acnes genetic traits were associated with the development of shoulder PJI. METHODS: We performed bacterial whole-genome sequencing of C. acnes from a single-institution repository of cultures obtained before or during primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty and correlated the molecular epidemiology and genetic content of strains with clinical features of infection. RESULTS: A total of 341 isolates collected over a four-year period from 88 patients were sequenced. C. acnes cultured from surgical specimens demonstrated significant similarity to the strains colonizing the skin of the same patient (p<0.001). Infrequently, there was evidence of strains shared across unrelated patients, suggesting that exogenous sources of C. acnes culture-positivity were uncommon. Phylotypes IB and II were modestly associated with clinical features of PJI, but all phylotypes appeared inherently capable of causing disease. Chronic shoulder PJI was associated with the absence of common C. acnes genes involved in bacterial quorum-sensing (luxS, tqsA). CONCLUSION: C. acnes strains cultured from deep intraoperative sources during revision shoulder arthroplasty demonstrate strong genetic similarity to the strains colonizing a patient's skin. Some phylotypes of C. acnes commonly colonizing human skin are modestly more virulent than others, but all phylotypes have a capacity for PJI. C. acnes cultured from cases of PJI commonly demonstrated genetic hallmarks associated with adaptation from acute to chronic phases of infection. This is the strongest evidence to date supporting the role of the patient's own, cutaneous C. acnes strains in the pathogenesis of shoulder arthroplasty infection. Our findings support the importance of further research focused on perioperative decolonization and management of endogenous bacteria that are likely to be introduced into the arthroplasty wound at the time of skin incision.

Anatomic Total Shoulder: Predictors of Excellent Outcomes at Five Years after Arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: The objectives of this study were to: report minimum 5-year outcomes in patients undergoing TSA and determine characteristics predictive of patients achieving an excellent functional outcome. METHODS: Pre-operative demographic variables and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores were obtained pre-operatively and at a minimum of five years after surgery. A final SST ≥ 10 and percentage of maximal possible improvement (% MPI) of ≥ 66.7% were determined to be the thresholds for excellent outcomes. Univariate and multivariate analysis were performed to identify factors associated with excellent five year clinical outcomes. RESULTS: Of 233 eligible patients, 188 (81%) had adequate follow-up for inclusion in this study. Mean SST scores improved from 3.4 ± 2.4 to 9.7 ± 2.2 (p < 0.001). Male sex was an independent predictor of both SST ≥ 10 (OR 3.46, 95% CI 1.70-7.31; p < 0.001) and %MPI ≥ 66.7 (OR 2.27, 95% CI 1.11-4.81, p = 0.027). Workers' Compensation insurance was predictive of not obtaining SST ≥ 10 (OR 0.12, 95% 0.02-0.60; p = 0.016) or %MPI ≥ 66.7 (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.03-0.77, p = 0.025). MCID was passed by the vast majority (95%) of patients undergoing TSA and did not necessarily indicate an excellent, satisfactory outcome. CONCLUSION: Male sex and commercial insurance coverage were significantly associated with these excellent outcomes, while Workers' Compensation insurance was associated with failure to achieve this result. Thresholds for excellent outcomes, such as final SST ≥ 10 and %MPI ≥ 66.7, may be useful in identifying the characteristics of patients who benefit most from TSA.

Anatomic shoulder arthroplasty: the correlation between patient resilience, mental health, and outcome.

BACKGROUND: Recovery from anatomic shoulder arthroplasty may be enhanced in patients with good mental health and the resilience to participate in the prescribed postoperative rehabilitation program. To test this concept, we utilized validated and reliable scales in determining whether resilience and mental health are associated with the outcome of anatomic arthroplasty. METHODS: Three hundred ninety-nine patients (195 ream and run [RnR] and 204 anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty [aTSA]) were surveyed at a mean follow-up of 6.3 ± 3.3 years. Preoperative variables included age, sex, body mass index, history of prior shoulder surgery, diabetes, visual analog scale for pain, Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores, and Veteran's RAND 12 Mental Component Score (VR-12 MCS). Outcomes collected included the SST, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, revision rate, and patient satisfaction. Resilience was documented using the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale 10 (CD-RISC 10) at latest follow-up. Univariable and multivariable regression analyses were used to identify factors significantly associated with follow-up postoperative SST, ASES, and satisfaction. RESULTS: In the univariable analysis, CD-RISC 10 was positively correlated with postoperative SST, ASES, and satisfaction after both RnR and aTSA. The mean CD-RISC 10 scores were higher in the RnR cohort (34.3 ± 4.8 vs. 32.5 ± 6.2 for aTSA, P < .001). Male sex and lower preoperative visual analog scale for pain were correlated with higher ASES after RnR; VR-12 MCS was positively correlated with all outcomes except SST after RnR. In the multivariable linear regression analysis, CD-RISC 10 was independently associated with postoperative SST, ASES and satisfaction scores in aTSA patients. In the RnR cohort, CD-RISC 10 was only correlated with satisfaction. VR-12 MCS was correlated with ASES and satisfaction after RnR. DISCUSSION: In this study of anatomic arthroplasties, increased resilience and better mental health were correlated with better outcomes. RnR patients had higher resilience than aTSA patients. Greater resilience was associated with better outcomes after aTSA. Better mental health was associated with superior outcomes after the ream and run procedure.

Managing rotator cuff tear arthropathy: a role for cuff tear arthropathy hemiarthroplasty as well as reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Disabling cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) is commonly managed with reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). However, for patients with CTA having preserved active elevation, cuff tear arthropathy hemiarthroplasty (CTAH) may offer a cost-effective alternative that avoids the complications unique to RSA. We sought to determine the characteristics and outcomes of a series of patients with CTA managed with these procedures. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed 103 patients with CTA treated with shoulder arthroplasty, the type of which was determined by the patient's ability to actively elevate the arm. Outcome measures included the change in the Simple Shoulder Test (SST), the percent maximum improvement in SST (%MPI), and the percentage of patients exceeding the minimal clinically important difference for the change in SST and %MPI. Postoperative x-rays were evaluated to assess the positions of the center of rotation and the greater tuberosity for each implant. RESULTS: Forty-four percent of the 103 patients were managed with CTAH while 56% were managed with RSA. Both arthroplasties resulted in clinically significant improvement. Patients having RSA improved from a mean preoperative SST score of 1.7 (interquartile range [IQR], 0.0-3.0) to a postoperative score of 6.3 (IQR, 2.3-10.0) (P < .01). Patients having CTAH improved from a preoperative SST score of 3.1 (IQR, 1.0-4.0) to a postoperative score of 7.6 (IQR, 5.0-10.) (P < .001). These improvements exceeded the minimal clinically important difference. Instability accounted for most of the RSA complications; however, it did not account for any CTAH complications. The postoperative position of the center of rotation and greater tuberosity on anteroposterior radiographs did not correlate with the clinical outcomes for either procedure. CONCLUSION: For 103 patients with CTA, clinically significant improvement was achieved with appropriately indicated CTAH and RSA. In view of the lower cost of the CTAH implant, it may provide a cost-effective alternative to RSA for patients with retained active elevation.

How to avoid baseplate failure: the effect of compression and reverse shoulder arthroplasty baseplate design on implant stability.

BACKGROUND: Failure to achieve fixation of the glenoid baseplate will lead to clinical failure. The fixation of the baseplate to the scapula must be able to withstand sufficient shear forces to allow bony ingrowth. The importance of compression to neutralize the forces at the baseplate-bone interface has been assumed to be critical in limiting excessive micromotion. The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of compression on implant stability with different baseplate designs. METHODS: Various baseplate designs (1-piece monolithic central screw [1P], 2-piece locking central screw [2PL], and 2-piece nonlocking center screw [2PNL]) were investigated at 3 different compressive forces (high [810 N], medium [640 N], and low [530 N]). Synthetic bone cylinders were instrumented, and peripheral screws were used in all models. The combination of 1 locking and 3 nonlocking peripheral screw fixation was selected as worst-case scenario. Dynamic testing protocol followed the ASTM F2028-17 standard. The baseplate micromotion at high compression was compared to low compression. Additionally, the baseplate micromotion for each design was compared at baseline (first 50 cycles) and at 10,000 cycles for the 3 different compressive forces where motion above 150 µm was defined as failure. RESULTS: Baseplate micromotion was found to negatively correlate with compression (rpb = -0.83, P < .0001). At baseline, all baseplate designs were considered stable, regardless of compression. With high compression, average micromotion at the glenoid baseplate-bone interface remained below the 150-µm threshold for all baseplate designs at 10,000 cycles (1P: 50 ± 10 µm; 2PL: 78 ± 32 µm; 2PNL: 79 ± 8 µm; P = .060). With medium compression, average micromotion at 10,000 cycles for all 3 designs remained below the 150-µm threshold (1P: 88 ± 22 µm; 2PL: 132 ± 26 µm; 2PNL: 107 ± 39 µm). The 2PL design had the highest amount of micromotion (P = .013). With low compression, both 2-piece designs had an average micromotion above the 150-µm threshold whereas the 1-piece design did not (1P: 133 ± 35 µm; 2PL: 183 ± 21 µm; 2PNL: 166 ± 39 µm). The 2PL design had significantly higher micromotion when compared to 1P design (P = .041). DISCUSSION: The stability of a central screw baseplate correlates with the amount of compression obtained and is affected by implant design. For the same amount of compression, more micromotion is observed in a 2-piece design than a 1-piece design.

Infection in Shoulder Arthroplasty: Prevention, Diagnosis, and Treatment.

Prosthetic joint infection is a devastating complication following shoulder arthroplasty that can lead to pain, poor function, and poor quality of life. With the increasing number of shoulder arthroplasties performed annually, recognition of prosthetic infection and treatment is necessary. The skin surrounding the shoulder has a unique microbiome, and Cutibacterium acnes is the most commonly encountered bacteria causing prosthetic joint infection. C acnes is a low-virulence organism that resides in the subcutaneous layer of the skin. As a result, the clinical presentation is typically less obvious than prosthetic infections seen in other joints such as the hip and knee. Therefore, diagnosis is not always straightforward, and optimal treatment strategy is unclear. Guidance on prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of shoulder prosthetic joint infection with special emphasis on the consensus definition established at the 2018 International Consensus Meeting is provided.

Minimum 10-year follow-up of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and ream-and-run arthroplasty for primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: Reports on long term outcomes and failures of shoulder arthroplasty are uncommon. The purpose of this study is to present minimum 10-year outcomes in consecutive patients undergoing ream-and-run and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) for primary glenohumeral arthritis. METHODS: This study analyzed consecutive patients who had undergone a ream-and-run or TSA with minimum 10-year follow-up. Pain scores and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) values were obtained preoperatively and at a minimum of 10 years postoperatively via e-mail or mail-in response. Percentage of maximum possible improvement (%MPI) was also calculated. RESULTS: Of 127 eligible patients, 63 (50%) responded to a 10-year survey. This included 34 patients undergoing ream-and-run arthroplasty and 29 patients undergoing TSA. The ream-and-run patients were significantly younger than the TSA patients (60 ± 7 vs. 68 ± 8, P < .001), predominantly male (97% vs. 41%, P < .001), and had a lower American Society of Anesthesiologists classification (P = .018). In the ream-and-run group, the mean pain score improved from a preoperative value of 6.5 ± 1.9 to 0.9 ± 1.3 (P < .001), and the mean SST score improved from 5.4 ± 2.4 to 10.3 ± 2.1 at 10-year follow-up (P < .001). Twenty-eight (82%) achieved an SST improvement above the minimally clinically important difference (MCID) of 2.6. Four patients (12%) underwent single-stage exchange to another hemiarthroplasty, whereas 1 (3%) required manipulation under anesthesia. In the TSA group, the pain score improved from a preoperative value of 6.6 ± 2.2 to 1.2 ± 2.3 (P < .001), and the SST score improved from 3.8 ± 2.6 to 8.9 ± 2.6 at 10-year follow-up (P < .001). Of the 29 patients who underwent a TSA, 27 (93%) achieved an SST improvement above the MCID of 1.6. No patient in the TSA group required reoperation. CONCLUSION: Although the characteristics of the patients differ between the 2 groups, excellent functional results can be obtained with the ream-and-run arthroplasty and TSA for glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

Which Components of the Simple Shoulder Test Show Improvement After Scapulothoracic Fusion for Recalcitrant Scapular Winging? Clinical Results at a Minimum of 5 Years of Follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Scapular winging is an uncommon but important cause of shoulder pain and disability. Surgical management can include soft tissue procedures such as split pectoralis major transfer, the Eden-Lange procedure, or a triple tendon transfer. When these procedures do not alleviate symptomatic winging or are inappropriate, scapulothoracic fusion is an alternative, but data on its longer-term effectiveness are sparse. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: (1) What changes in outcome scores were observed (VAS, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation [SANE], and Simple Shoulder Test [SST] scores), and what proportion of the patients improved by an amount larger than the minimum clinically important difference (MCID) for the outcome tool in question? (2) Which components of the SST are patients able to perform at a minimum of 5 years? (3) What complications occurred after surgery? METHODS: We performed a retrospective study in a single, large, urban referral medical center of patients who underwent scapulothoracic fusion. Between January 2011 and November 2016, 15 patients underwent scapulothoracic fusion to treat symptomatic scapular winging. Only patients with nondystrophic etiology were included in the analysis (n = 13). Of the 13 remaining patients, one patient was lost to follow-up and another patient died during data collection, leaving 11 patients for the final analysis. Six patients had brachial plexus injuries affecting multiple nerve roots and periscapular muscles, and five had persistent symptoms despite prior tendon transfer. The median age of the patients was 43 years (range 20 to 67 years), and there were six male and five female patients. All patients had a minimum of 5 years of follow-up. There was a median follow-up of 79 months (range 61 to 128 months). The VAS pain score (range 0 to 10, higher scores represent more pain; MCID = 2), SST score (range 0 to 12, higher scores represent less pain and better shoulder function; MCID = 2.3), and SANE score (range 0 to 100, higher scores represent better shoulder function; MCID = 28) were recorded before surgery and at the most recent follow-up. We compared scores from before surgery with those taken at the most recent follow-up and ascertained the proportion of patients whose improvement exceeded the MCID. The number of patients achieving fusion (as confirmed by a CT image), complications, and reoperations was recorded via a record review as well as direct patient query by telephone. RESULTS: The median VAS pain score improved from 7 (range 3 to 10) preoperatively to 3 (range 2 to 5) at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). The median SANE score improved from 30 (range 0 to 60) preoperatively to 65 (range 40 to 85) at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). The median SST score improved from 0 (range 0 to 9) to 8 (range 5 to 10) at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Ten of 11 patients had improvements exceeding the MCID for VAS, six of 11 had improvements for SANE scores, and nine of 11 had improvements for SST. Preoperative to postoperative improvements in these components of the SST were seen (responses of "yes"): comfort at rest (three of 11 improved to 11 of 11; p < 0.001), sleep comfortably (three of 11 improved to 11 of 11; p < 0.001), place coin on shelf (two of 11 improved to 10 of 11; p < 0.001), lift 1 pound above shoulder (two of 11 improved to eight of 11; p = 0.03), and carry 20 pounds with the arm at side (one of 11 improved to nine of 11; p < 0.001). All 11 patients had successful fusion noted on CT images. There were three complications (progression of glenohumeral arthritis, broken wires, and perioperative chest tube placement) and one reoperation for progression of glenohumeral arthritis with subsequent total shoulder arthroplasty. CONCLUSION: Patients with recalcitrant symptomatic scapular winging often undergo an exhaustive course of clinical examinations, diagnostic tests, physical therapy, and multiple surgical procedures. Those with brachial plexus palsy with involvement of multiple nerves may continue to have symptoms despite nonoperative management and subsequent soft tissue tendon transfers. Scapulothoracic fusion could be considered for patients with persistent pain and decreased function because of recalcitrant scapular winging who are either not candidates for the procedure or have persistent symptoms despite prior soft tissue procedures. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, therapeutic study.

Risk Factors for Stiffness Requiring Intervention After Ream-and-Run Arthroplasty.

Ream-and-run arthroplasty can improve pain and function in patients with glenohumeral arthritis while avoiding the complications and activity restrictions associated with a prosthetic glenoid component. However, stiffness is a known complication after ream-and-run arthroplasty and can lead to repeat procedures such as a manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) or open surgical revision. The objective of this study was to determine risk factors associated with repeat procedures indicated for postoperative stiffness after ream-and-run arthroplasty. Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of our shoulder arthroplasty database to identify patients who underwent ream-and-run arthroplasty and determined which patients underwent subsequent repeat procedures (MUA and/or open revision) indicated for postoperative stiffness. The minimum follow-up was 2 years. We collected baseline demographic information and preoperative and 2-year patient-reported outcome scores and analyzed preoperative radiographs. Univariate and multivariate analyses determined the factors significantly associated with repeat procedures to treat postoperative stiffness. Results: There were 340 patients who underwent ream-and-run arthroplasty. The mean Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores for all patients improved from 5.0 ± 2.4 preoperatively to 10.2 ± 2.6 postoperatively (p < 0.001). Twenty-six patients (7.6%) underwent open revision for stiffness. An additional 35 patients (10.3%) underwent MUA. Univariate analysis found younger age (p = 0.001), female sex (p = 0.034), lower American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class (p = 0.045), posterior decentering on preoperative radiographs (p = 0.010), and less passive forward elevation at the time of discharge after ream-and-run arthroplasty (p < 0.001) to be significant risk factors for repeat procedures. Multivariate analysis found younger age (p = 0.040), ASA class 1 compared with class 3 (p = 0.020), and less passive forward elevation at discharge (p < 0.001) to be independent risk factors for repeat procedures. Of the patients who underwent open revision for stiffness, 69.2% had multiple positive cultures for Cutibacterium. Conclusions: Younger age, ASA class 1 compared with class 3, and less passive forward elevation in the immediate postoperative period were independent risk factors for repeat procedures to treat postoperative stiffness after ream-and-run arthroplasty. Level of Evidence: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Dynamics of Cutibacterium repopulation onto the skin surface of the shoulder after chlorhexidine application.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to characterize the temporal dynamics of Cutibacterium repopulation of the skin surface after application of chlorhexidine to the shoulder. METHODS: Ten shoulders in five male subjects were used. A skin swab was taken prior to (0 minutes) and then at three, 30, 60, 120, and 240 minutes after skin preparation with 2% chlorhexidine gluconate and 70% isopropyl alcohol. Semi-quantitative bacterial load was measured for each timepoint. RESULTS: From zero minutes (pre-treatment) to three minutes, chlorhexidine-isopropyl alcohol reduced the skin bacterial load in eight out of ten shoulders. Of these eight shoulders, four (50%) had growth by 30 minutes, seven (88%) had growth by 60 minutes, and all eight (100%) had growth by 240 minutes. Compared to the three minutes after chlorhexidine application, bacterial load had significantly increased by 60 minutes but were still significantly lower than the pre-prep bacterial load (0 minutes). CONCLUSION: Following standard surgical skin preparation with chlorhexidine-isopropyl alcohol, the surface of the shoulder is repopulated with Cutibacterium within one hour, presumably from reservoirs in sebaceous glands not penetrated by topical antiseptic agents. Since these dermal glands are transected by skin incision for shoulder arthroplasty, this study suggests that they may be sources of wound contamination during surgery in spite of skin preparation with chlorhexidine.

Factors associated with success of ream-and-run arthroplasty at a minimum of 5 years.

BACKGROUND: Ream-and-run arthroplasty offers improvements in shoulder pain and function for patients with primary glenohumeral arthritis who wish to avoid limitations associated with a polyethylene glenoid component. Longer-term clinical outcome assessments of the ream-and-run procedure are sparse in the literature. This study aimed to present minimum 5-year functional outcomes in a large cohort following ream-and-run arthroplasty to determine factors associated with clinical success and reoperation. METHODS: Patients who underwent ream-and-run surgery with a minimum of 5 years of follow-up were identified through a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database from a single academic institution. To assess clinical outcomes, the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) was administered and assessed to determine achievement of the minimal clinically important difference, as well as the necessity for open revision surgery. Factors associated with P < .1 on univariate analysis were included in multivariate analysis. RESULTS: Of 228 patients who consented to undergo long-term follow-up, 201 (88%) were included in our analysis (mean follow-up period, 7.6 ± 2.1 years). The average age was 59.4 ± 8.8 years, and 93% of patients were men. The majority of patients had a diagnosis of osteoarthritis (79%) or capsulorrhaphy arthropathy (10%). SST scores improved from a mean of 4.9 ± 2.5 preoperatively to a mean of 10.2 ± 2.6 at latest follow-up. The minimal clinically important difference in the SST score of 2.6 was reached by 165 patients (82%). Male sex (P = .020), nondiabetic status (P = .080), and lower preoperative SST score (P < .001) were included in a multivariate analysis. Male sex (P = .010) and lower preoperative SST score (P < .001) were associated with clinically important improvements in SST scores on multivariate analysis. Open revision surgery was required in 22 patients (11%). Younger age (P < .001), female sex (P = .055), and higher preoperative pain score (P = .023) were included in a multivariate analysis. Only younger age was predictive of open revision surgery (P = .003). CONCLUSIONS: Ream-and-run arthroplasty can provide significant and clinically important improvements in clinical outcomes at minimum 5-year follow-up. Successful clinical outcomes were significantly associated with male sex and lower preoperative SST scores. Reoperation was more common in younger patients.

Predictors of success following single-stage revision shoulder arthroplasty: results at a mean of five year follow-up in one hundred and twelve patients.

PURPOSE: The objective was to determine factors associated with a successful outcome at a minimum of two years after revision of a failed shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of revision shoulder arthroplasties performed over a ten year period and collected patient-reported outcome data and re-revision data. A successful outcome was defined by improvement greater than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for the Simple Shoulder Test (SST). RESULTS: One hundred twelve patients with average follow-up of five years were included. Improvement of VAS pain scores (6.6 ± 2.3 to 2.9 ± 2.6) and SST scores (2.7 ± 2.6 to 6.6 ± 3.3) were significant (p < 0.001). Males were more likely to have a successful outcome than females (p = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Two-thirds of patients experienced clinically significant improvement at a minimum of two years after revision shoulder arthroplasty. Male sex was the strongest independent predictor of a successful outcome.

What is the optimal management of a loose glenoid component after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) provides excellent long-term clinical outcomes in the treatment of glenohumeral arthritis. However, symptomatic glenoid polyethylene loosening can be seen at intermediate follow-up and can lead to shoulder pain and dysfunction. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review of the available literature to determine the optimal management of symptomatic glenoid loosening with regard to reoperation and patient satisfaction following various approaches to symptomatic glenoid loosening. METHODS: This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement. Studies investigating revision arthroplasty for the treatment of glenoid loosening with clinical outcomes were identified. Clinical failure was defined as a repeat procedure after revision arthroplasty. RESULTS: Overall, 14 studies met inclusion criteria that included 483 patients with a mean age of 66.5 ± 3.0 years who underwent revision arthroplasty for symptomatic glenoid loosening. There were 8 studies that discussed conversion to a hemiarthroplasty (HA, 148 patients), 7 studies that discussed glenoid reimplantation in a single setting (1-stage TSA, 157 patients), 2 studies that discussed glenoid reimplantation in a staged setting (2-stage TSA, 18 patients), and 2 studies that discussed conversion to a reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA, 164 patients). All patients underwent glenoid component removal. The length of follow-up was significantly shorter in the RSA group (41 months for RSA vs. 56 months for HA vs. 55 months for 1-stage TSA vs. 62 months for 2-stage TSA, P < .001). The reoperation rate at the final follow-up was 19% for the HA cohort, 20% for the 1-stage TSA cohort, 22% for the 2-stage TSA cohort, and 21% for the RSA cohort (P = .971). Patient satisfaction rate at the final follow-up was 62% for the HA cohort, 66% for the 1-stage TSA cohort, 71% for the 2-stage TSA cohort, and 86% for the RSA cohort (P = .045). Positive cultures were noted in 15% of patients with Cutibacterium acnes comprising 72% of positive cultures. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the optimal management of symptomatic glenoid loosening remains unclear. All 4 types of revision arthroplasty (HA, 1-stage TSA, 2-stage TSA, and RSA) had a similar reoperation rate (20%) at the latest follow-up. Conversion to RSA provided a higher proportion of patients satisfied with the procedure. However, the length of follow-up was significantly shorter than other groups, and therefore longer-term follow-up of this group is needed to determine if results are durable.

Revision of total shoulder arthroplasty to hemiarthroplasty: results at mean 5-year follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Although there is a trend to manage failed anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties (aTSA) with revision to a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, such revisions can be complicated by difficulties in baseplate fixation, instability, and acromial stress fractures. Some cases of failed aTSA may be safely revised to a hemiarthroplasty (HA). The objectives of this study were to report patient-reported outcomes after conversion from aTSA to HA and assess patient and shoulder characteristics associated with a successful outcome. METHODS: Patients who underwent revision from aTSA to HA between 2009 and 2018 were contacted. Patient demographics, surgical history, intraoperative findings, and microbiology results were collected. Patient-reported outcomes were collected with minimum 2-year follow-up. Preoperative radiographic characteristics were reviewed for component positioning and component loosening. Patients with a clinically significant improvement exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of the Simple Shoulder Test (SST) were compared with those patients who did not improve past the MCID. RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients underwent conversion from aTSA to HA with a mean follow-up of 4.5 ± 1.8 years. Intraoperative glenoid or humeral component loosening was found in all 29 patients. Pain improved in 25 of 30 patients (87%), and mean pain scores improved from 6.2 ± 2.3 to 3.1 ± 2.4 (P < .001). SST scores improved from 4.1 ± 3.1 to 7.3 ± 3.2 (P < .001), and 18 of 29 patients (62%) had improvement above the SST MCID threshold of 2.4. The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score at the latest follow-up was 64 ± 19, and the Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score was 65 ± 23. Twenty-two of 29 (76%) patients were satisfied with the procedure. Four patients (14%) required conversion to total shoulder arthroplasty-2 to anatomic and 2 to reverse. An additional 3 patients (10%) had a revision HA performed. No significant differences in patient or shoulder characteristics were found in those patients who improved greater than the MCID of the SST compared patients who improved less than the MCID of the SST. Fifty-nine percent of patients had ≥2 positive cultures with the same bacteria, and 82% of these were with Cutibacterium. Seven of 8 patients (88%) with a loose humeral component had ≥2 positive cultures with the same bacteria. DISCUSSION: Component loosening is a common failure mode after aTSA. Revision to HA can improve pain and patient-reported outcomes in most patients.