The Fate of the Shoulder Post Rotator Cuff Repair: Biomechanical Properties of the Supraspinatus Tendon and Surrounding Structures.

The study aimed to describe the changes in biomechanical properties of the supraspinatus tendon, deltoid muscle, and humeral head post arthroscopic rotator cuff repair using shear wave elastography. Shear wave velocity of the tendon, deltoid, and humeral head of 48 patients was measured at predetermined sites at 1 week, 6 weeks, 12 weeks, 6 months, and 12 months post repair. One-way ANOVA with Tukey's correction and Spearman's correlation were performed. Mean±SEM healing tendon stiffness, adjacent to tendon footprint, increased from 1 week (6.2±0.2 m/s) to 6 months (7.5±0.3 m/s) and 12 months (7.8±0.3 m/s) (P<0.001). Mean±SEM deltoid muscle stiffness was higher at 12 months (4.1±0.2 m/s) compared to 1 week (3.4±0.1 m/s) and 12 weeks (3.5±0.1 m/s) (P<0.05). Humeral head stiffness did not change. Following arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, supraspinatus tendon stiffness increased in a curvilinear fashion over 6 months. From 6 months, deltoid muscle stiffness increased, corresponding to when patients were instructed to return to normal activities.

Management of Bone Loss in Posterior Glenohumeral Shoulder Instability: Current Concepts.

¼ Posterior glenohumeral instability is relatively uncommon compared with anterior instability, but is becoming an increasingly recognized and surgically managed shoulder pathology.¼ Soft-tissue stabilization alone may not be sufficient in patients who present with substantial bone loss to the posterior glenoid and/or the anterior humeral head.¼ For posterior glenoid defects, posterior glenoid osteoarticular augmentation can be used, and posterior glenoid opening wedge osteotomy can be considered in cases of posterior instability with pathologic retroversion.¼ For humeral head lesions, several surgical treatment options are available including subscapularis transposition into the humeral head defect, autograft or allograft reconstruction, humeral rotation osteotomy, and shoulder arthroplasty.

Revision rate in metal compared to ceramic humeral head total shoulder arthroplasty and hemiarthroplasty.

Aims: Metal and ceramic humeral head bearing surfaces are available choices in anatomical shoulder arthroplasties. Wear studies have shown superior performance of ceramic heads, however comparison of clinical outcomes according to bearing surface in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and hemiarthroplasty (HA) is limited. This study aimed to compare the rates of revision and reoperation following metal and ceramic humeral head TSA and HA using data from the National Joint Registry (NJR), which collects data from England, Wales, Northern Ireland, Isle of Man and the States of Guernsey. Methods: NJR shoulder arthroplasty records were linked to Hospital Episode Statistics and the National Mortality Register. TSA and HA performed for osteoarthritis (OA) in patients with an intact rotator cuff were included. Metal and ceramic humeral head prostheses were matched within separate TSA and HA groups using propensity scores based on 12 and 11 characteristics, respectively. The primary outcome was time to first revision and the secondary outcome was non-revision reoperation. Results: A total of 4,799 TSAs (3,578 metal, 1,221 ceramic) and 1,363 HAs (1,020 metal, 343 ceramic) were included. The rate of revision was higher for metal compared with ceramic TSA, hazard ratio (HR) 3.31 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.67 to 6.58). At eight years, prosthesis survival for ceramic TSA was 98.7% (95% CI 97.3 to 99.4) compared with 96.4% (95% CI 95.2 to 97.3) for metal TSA. The majority of revision TSAs were for cuff insufficiency or instability/dislocation. There was no significant difference in the revision rate for ceramic compared with metal head HA (HR 1.33 (95% CI 0.76 to 2.34)). For ceramic HA, eight-year prosthetic survival was 92.8% (95% CI 86.9 to 96.1), compared with 91.6% (95% CI 89.3 to 93.5) for metal HA. The majority of revision HAs were for cuff failure. Conclusion: The rate of all-cause revision was higher following metal compared with ceramic humeral head TSA in patients with OA and an intact rotator cuff. There was no difference in the revision rate for HA according to bearing surface.

How anatomic should anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty be? Evaluation of humeral head reconstruction with the best-fit circle.

BACKGROUND: Humeral implant designs for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) focus on anatomic reconstruction of the articular segment. Likewise, the pathoanatomy of advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis often results in humeral head deformity. We hypothesized the anatomic reconstruction of the humeral head in aTSA risks overstuffing the glenohumeral joint. METHODS: Ninety-seven cases (52 females) of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis in patients treated with aTSA were evaluated. Preoperative computed tomography scans were used to classify glenoid morphology according to the Walch classification. Coronal plane images in the plane of the humerus were used to determine the anatomic best-fit circle as described by Youderian et al. Humeral head thinning was determined as the distance from the center of rotation of the best-fit circle to the nearest point along the humeral articular surface. aTSA was modeled with a predicted anatomic humeral head and a simulated 4-mm polyethylene glenoid component. The change in the position of the native humerus was determined. Wilcoxon Rank Sum tests were used to evaluate differences in humeral head thinning and humeral lateralization between monoconcave and biconcave glenoid morphologies. Spearman's rank correlation coefficients were used to assess the relationship between humeral head thinning with preoperative active forward elevation and external rotation. RESULTS: The mean radius of the best-fit circle was 25.0 ± 2.1 mm. There was a mean thinning of 2.4 ± 2.0 mm (range -1.7 to 8.3). The mean percent thinning of the humeral head was 9.4% ± 7.7%. The mean humeral lateralization was 6.4 ± 2.0 mm. Humeral head thinning was not significantly associated with active forward elevation (r = -0.15, P = .14) or active external rotation (r = -0.12, P = .25). There were no significant differences in the percentage of humeral head thinning (P = .324) or humeral lateralization (P = .350) between concentric and eccentric glenoid wear patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Utilization of the best-fit circle as a guide in aTSA may risk excessive lateralization of the humerus and overstuffing the glenohumeral joint. This may have implications for subscapularis repair and healing, as well as glenoid implant and rotator cuff longevity. These findings call into question whether recreation of normal glenohumeral anatomy in aTSA is appropriate for all patients. Humeral head reconstruction in aTSA should account for glenohumeral joint volume and soft tissue contracture.

The Global Track Concept for Assessment of Engaging Hill-Sachs Defects in Anterior Shoulder Instability.

BACKGROUND: The glenoid track concept is used to determine preoperatively whether a Hill-Sachs defect is engaging or not. Currently, the glenoid track concept relies on measurements of bony structures as well as on the confines and elasticity of the rotator cuff as a reference point, which varies extensively among individuals and therefore limits the reliability and accuracy of this concept. PURPOSE: To evaluate the reliability of the global track concept, which determines the angular distance of the Hill-Sachs defect from the center of the articular surface of the humeral head as a new reference point with the help of an automated image analysis software and 3-dimensional analysis of the humeral head. STUDY DESIGN: Controlled laboratory study. METHODS: Computed tomography scans of 100 patients treated for anterior shoulder instability with different sizes of Hill-Sachs defects were evaluated manually by 2 orthopaedic surgeons independently using the software OsiriX as well as automatically by using a dedicated prototype software (ImFusion). Obtained manual and automated measurements included the Hill-Sachs length, Hill-Sachs width, and Hill-Sachs depth of the defect; the Hill-Sachs interval (HSI); and the glenoid width for the glenoid track concept, as well as the angular distance of the Hill-Sachs defect from the center of the articular surface of the humeral head (global track concept). The reliability of the different measurement techniques was compared by calculating intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs). RESULTS: There was a significant difference for all obtained parameters comparing manual and automatic measurements. For manually obtained parameters, measurements referring to bony boundaries (glenoid width, Hill-Sachs length, and Hill-Sachs width) showed good to excellent agreement (ICC, 0.86, 0.82, and 0.62, respectively), while measurements referring to soft tissue boundaries (HSI and glenoid track; ICC, 0.56 and 0.53, respectively) or not directly identifiable reference points (center of articular surface and global track) only showed fair reliability (ICC middle excursion, 0.42). When the same parameters were measured with the help of an automated software, good reliability for the glenoid track concept and excellent reliability for the global track concept in the middle excursion were achieved. CONCLUSION: The present study showed that the more complex global track measurements of humeral defects are more reliable than the current standard HSI and glenoid track measurements. However, this is only true when automated software is used to perform the measurements. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Future studies using the new proposed method in combination with an automated software need to be conducted to determine critical threshold values for defects prone to engagement.

Defining Critical Humeral Bone Loss: Inferior Craniocaudal Hill-Sachs Extension as Predictor of Recurrent Instability After Primary Arthroscopic Bankart Repair.

BACKGROUND: The glenoid track concept for shoulder instability primarily describes the medial-lateral relationship between a Hill-Sachs lesion and the glenoid. However, the Hill-Sachs position in the craniocaudal dimension has not been thoroughly studied. HYPOTHESIS: Hill-Sachs lesions with greater inferior extension are associated with increased risk of recurrent instability after primary arthroscopic Bankart repair. STUDY DESIGN: Case-control study; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective analysis of patients with on-track Hill-Sachs lesions who underwent primary arthroscopic Bankart repair (without remplissage) between 2007 and 2019 and had a minimum 2-year follow-up. Recurrent instability was defined as recurrent dislocation or subluxation after the index procedure. The craniocaudal position of the Hill-Sachs lesion was measured against the midhumeral axis on sagittal magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) using either a Hill-Sachs bisecting line through the humeral head center (sagittal midpoint angle [SMA], a measure of Hill-Sachs craniocaudal position) or a line tangent to the inferior Hill-Sachs edge (lower-edge angle [LEA], a measure of Hill-Sachs caudal extension). Univariate and multivariate regression were used to determine the predictive value of both SMA and LEA for recurrent instability. RESULTS: In total, 176 patients were included with a mean age of 20.6 years, mean follow-up of 5.9 years, and contact sport participation of 69.3%. Of these patients, 42 (23.9%) experienced recurrent instability (30 dislocations, 12 subluxations) at a mean time of 1.7 years after surgery. Recurrent instability was found to be significantly associated with LEA >90° (ie, Hill-Sachs lesions extending below the humeral head equator), with an OR of 3.29 (P = .022). SMA predicted recurrent instability to a lesser degree (OR, 2.22; P = .052). Post hoc evaluation demonstrated that LEA >90° predicted recurrent dislocations (subset of recurrent instability) with an OR of 4.80 (P = .003). LEA and SMA were found to be collinear with Hill-Sachs interval and distance to dislocation, suggesting that greater LEA and SMA proportionally reflect lesion severity in both the craniocaudal and medial-lateral dimensions. CONCLUSION: Inferior extension of an otherwise on-track Hill-Sachs lesion is a highly predictive risk factor for recurrent instability after primary arthroscopic Bankart repair. Evaluation of Hill-Sachs extension below the humeral equator (inferior equatorial extension) on sagittal MRI is a clinically facile screening tool for higher-risk lesions with subcritical glenoid bone loss. This threshold for critical humeral bone loss may inform surgical stratification for procedures such as remplissage or other approaches for at-risk on-track lesions.

The Long Head of the Biceps Has a Stabilizing Effect on the Glenohumeral Joint in Simulated Infraspinatus or Subscapularis but Not Supraspinatus Rotator Cuff Deficiency: A Biomechanical Study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the stabilizing role of the long head of the biceps (LHB) for different simulated rotator cuff (RC) tears. METHODS: Human cadaveric specimens (n = 8) were fixed in a robotic-based experimental setup with a static loading of the RC, deltoid, and the LHB. RC tears were simulated by unloading of the corresponding muscles. A throwing motion and an anterior load-and-shift test were simulated under different RC conditions by unloading the supraspinatus (SS), subscapularis (SSc), infraspinatus (IS), and combinations (SS + SSc, SS + IS, SS + SSc + IS). The LHB was tested in 3 conditions: unloaded, loaded, and tenotomy. Translation of the humeral head and anterior forces depending on loading of the RC and the LHB was captured. RESULTS: Loading of LHB produced no significant changes in anterior force or glenohumeral translation for the intact RC or a simulated SS tear. However, if SSc or IS were unloaded, LHB loading resulted in a significant increase of anterior force ranging from 3.9 N (P = .013, SSc unloaded) to 5.2 N (P = .001, simulated massive tear) and glenohumeral translation ranging from 2.4 mm (P = .0078, SSc unloaded) to 7.4 mm (P = .0078, simulated massive tear) compared to the unloaded LHB. Tenotomy of the LHB led to a significant increase in glenohumeral translation compared to the unloaded LHB in case of combined SS + SSc (2.6 mm, P = .0391) and simulated massive tears of all SS + SSc + IS (4.6 mm, P = .0078). Highest translation was observed in simulated massive tears between loaded LHB and tenotomy (8.1 mm, P = .0078). CONCLUSIONS: Once SSc or IS is simulated to be torn, the LHB has a stabilizing effect for the glenohumeral joint and counteracts humeral translation. With a fully loaded RC, LHB loading has no influence. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: With an intact RC, the condition of the LHB showed no biomechanical effect on the joint stability. Therefore, from a biomechanical point of view, the LHB could be removed from the joint when the RC is intact or reconstructable. However, since there was a positive effect even of the unloaded LHB in this study when SSc or IS is deficient, techniques with preservation of the supraglenoid LHB origin may be of benefit in such cases.

Pyrocarbon humeral heads for hemishoulder arthroplasty grant satisfactory clinical scores with minimal glenoid erosion at 5-9 years of follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Hemishoulder arthroplasty (HSA) is a more conservative alternative to total shoulder arthroplasty for young and active patients with minimal glenoid erosion or deformity. Pyrocarbon humeral heads were introduced as an alternative to metallic humeral heads, which were associated with glenoid erosion in 28%-43%. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the progression of glenoid erosion and clinical scores of HSA using pyrocarbon humeral heads from short- (2-4 years) to midterm (5-9 years). METHODS: We retrieved the records of 45 consecutive patients who underwent HSA with pyrocarbon humeral heads from 2013 to 2017. Patients were evaluated radiographically and clinically at a first follow-up (2-4 years) and a second follow-up (5-9 years). Preoperative glenoid morphology was assessed using computed tomography scans, and glenoid erosion was assessed using plain radiographs according to Sperling et al. The Constant score (CS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV) score were assessed by an independent observer. RESULTS: From the initial cohort of 45 patients, 2 underwent revision surgery (4.4%) due to persistent pain (without signs of rotator cuff pathology or glenoid erosion) and 6 were lost to follow-up (13%), leaving 37 for outcome assessment (82%). At the first follow-up of 2.2 ± 0.4 years, all clinical scores improved substantially (CS from 29.3 ± 13.5 to 76.7 ± 14.4, ASES from 23.7 ± 15.6 to 87.0 ± 16.0, and SSV from 25.3 ± 12.2 to 84.1 ± 15.2), and at the second follow-up of 6.2 ± 1.2 years, good clinical scores were maintained (CS from 76.7 ± 14.4 to 80.8 ± 16.0, ASES from 87.0 ± 16.0 to 92.3 ± 15.0, and SSV from 84.1 ± 15.2 to 82.8 ± 18.3). At the second follow-up, glenoid erosion was moderate in 9 (24%) and severe in 3 (8.1%). When comparing with immediate postoperative radiographs, 10 shoulders exhibited progression of glenoid erosion by 1 grade (n = 9) or 2 grades (n = 1). CONCLUSION: Pyrocarbon humeral heads for HSA grant satisfactory clinical scores with minimal glenoid erosion.

The arthroscopic double-button Latarjet does not modify the static posterior translation of the humeral head.

INTRODUCTION: The Latarjet procedure treats anterior instability of the shoulder and is based on a triple anterior lock, where the conjoint tendon straps the lower third of the subscapularis muscle. Excessive posterior translation of the humeral head is a known risk factor for shoulder osteoarthritis. No in vivo study has investigated the effect of the bone block on the posterior static translation of the humeral epiphysis. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of the bone block on the static posterior translation of the humeral head. The hypothesis was that this procedure increased this translation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study included patients treated arthroscopically for anterior shoulder instability by a double-button Latarjet. An independent examiner analyzed the CT scans preoperatively, at 15 days, and at least 6 months postoperatively according to a standardized protocol. The analysis focused on the position of the bone block in the axial and coronal planes relative to the glenoid. The posterior translation was automatically calculated using the Blueprint© planning software. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were included with a mean age of 25 years (16-43), according to a 4M/1F sex ratio. The graft was perfectly flush to the subchondral bone in 63% (n=22) of cases and subequatorial in 91% (n=32). Preoperative posterior humeral translation was 52%. The mean immediate postoperative posterior humeral translation was 56%, and 57% at more than 6 months. The change in mean posterior humeral translation between preoperative/6 months was +0.94% [-20%; +12%] (p=0.29) and immediate postoperative/6 months +0.34% [-18%; +15%] (p=0.84). Gender, hypermobility and the axial position of the bone block did not influence the change in posterior humeral translation. The equatorial position of the bone block appeared to increase posterior humeral translation by +10%±5.2% [-0.427; 20.823] (p=0.07). CONCLUSION: This work refutes our initial hypothesis. The change in static posterior humeral translation after arthroscopic Latarjet bone block remains stable at more than 6 months of follow-up. This procedure does not alter the anatomical position of the humeral head in relation to the glenoid. On the other hand, a more cranial positioning of the bone block could have an influence. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Missed Osteochondral Shear Injury of the Humeral Head Following Anterior Shoulder Dislocation - A Case Report.

CASE: Two months after anterior shoulder dislocation and spontaneous reduction, a 41-year-old man presented movement-related shoulder pain and a functional deficit. An initially missed osteochondral shearing injury of the humeral head with a Bankart lesion was diagnosed. Due to an extensive posteroinferior defect, an open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) using bioabsorbable chondral darts was performed. At the 1-year follow-up, magnetic resonance images showed a completely healed osteochondral fragment and the patient presented an unrestricted shoulder function. CONCLUSION: Even in missed osteochondral shear injuries, ORIF with bioabsorbable implants can be associated with an excellent functional outcome and sufficient integrity of the fragment. The absorbable implants are biocompatible, therefore the risk of revision surgery due to implant irritations is minimized.

[Imaging of posttraumatic shoulder instability : Current concepts]. / Bildgebung bei posttraumatischen Instabilitäten der Schulter : Aktuelle Konzepte.

Posttraumatic instability accounts for more than 95% of all shoulder instabilities with the highest incidence in patients between 20 and 30 years of age. In this age group, lesions of the capsulolabral complex are the most common sequelae after the first shoulder dislocation. Typical acute findings are the Bankart and Perthes lesions and humeral avulsion of the glenohumeral ligament (HAGL). Chronic sequelae are anterior labroligamentous periosteal sleeve avulsion (ALPSA) lesions, and nonclassifiable lesions with deficient anterioinferior labrum and glenohumeral ligaments. Recently, quantification of Hill-Sachs and bony Bankart lesions with glenoid defects have become the focus of interest: bipolar bone loss has emerged to be one important factor of recurrent instability that has not been addressed during the first stabilizing operation. The glenoid track concept emphasizes the importance of bipolar bone loss, where the glenoid track refers to the contact area between the humeral head and the glenoid at the end-range of motion in abduction, extension and external rotation. Any lesion of the humeral head that extends beyond the glenoid track is considered high risk for engagement of the humeral head at the glenoid margin with subsequent dislocation. Both the Hill-Sachs interval and the glenoid track can be determined using computed tomography (CT) and magnetic resonance imaging and, thus, help to define the status of the shoulder (on-track vs. off-track), which is prerequisite for planning the appropriate operative procedure. Similar tendencies also exist for posttraumatic posterior instabilities which are much rarer.

Middle trapezius tendon transfer using Achilles allograft for irreparable isolated supraspinatus tendon tears effectively restores the superior stability of the humeral head without restricting range of motion: a biomechanical study.

BACKGROUND: Middle trapezius tendon (MTT) transfer has been suggested for promising treatment of irreparable isolated supraspinatus tendon tears (IISTTs). However, there have been no attempts to assess the biomechanical efficacy of MTT transfer. This study aims to evaluate the biomechanical efficacy of MTT transfer in the setting of IISTTs. METHODS: Eight fresh frozen cadaveric shoulders were tested in 3 conditions: (1) intact rotator cuff, (2) IISTT, and (3) MTT transfer using Achilles allograft for IISTTs. Total humeral rotational range of motion (ROM), superior translation of the humeral head, and subacromial contact characteristics were measured at 0°, 20°, and 40° glenohumeral abduction (representing 0°, 30°, and 60° shoulder abduction). Superior translation and subacromial contact pressures were measured at 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° external rotation (ER). Two different MTT muscle loading conditions were investigated. A linear mixed effects model and Tukey post hoc test were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Total ROM was significantly increased after IISTT at 20° abduction (P = .037). There were no changes in total ROM following MTT transfer compared to the IISTT condition (P > .625 for all comparisons). The IISTT condition significantly increased superior translation compared to the intact rotator cuff condition in 0° and 20° abduction with all ER angles (P < .001), 40° abduction-30° ER (P = .016), and 40° abduction-60° ER (P = .002). MTT transfer significantly decreased superior translation of the humeral head at all abduction angles compared to the IISTT condition (P < .026). MTT transfer significantly decreased peak contact pressure by 638.7 kPa (normal loading) and 726.8 kPa (double loading) at 0° abduction-30° ER compared to the IISTT condition (P < .001). Mean contact pressure was decreased by 102.8 kPa (normal loading) and 118.0 kPa (double loading) at 0° abduction-30° ER (P < .001) and 101.0 kPa (normal loading) and 99.2 kPa (double loading) at 0° abduction-60° ER (P < .001). MTT transfer at 20° abduction-30° ER with 24 N loading significantly decreased contact pressure by 91.2 kPa (P = .035). CONCLUSIONS: The MTT transfer biomechanically restored the superior humeral head translation and reduced the subacromial contact pressure in a cadaveric model of IISTT, while not restricting total ROM. These findings suggest that MTT transfer may have potential as a surgical treatment for IISTTs.

Does age affect patient outcomes after humeral head replacement in the treatment of acute proximal humeral fractures? A comparative cohort study with a minimum 10 years long-term follow-up.

BACKGROUND: Humeral head replacement (HHR) is now rarely recommended for complex proximal humeral fractures (PHFs) in older patients. However, in relatively young and active patients with unreconstructable complex PHFs, controversy still exists regarding the treatment options of reverse shoulder arthroplasty and HHR. The goal of this study was to compare the survival, functional, and radiographic outcomes of HHR in patients aged <70 years and those aged ≥70 years after a minimum 10 years follow-up. METHODS: Eighty-seven out of 135 patients undergoing primary HHR were enrolled and then divided into 2 groups based on age: <70 years and ≥70 years. Clinical and radiographic evaluations were performed with a minimum follow-up of 10 years. RESULTS: There were 64 patients (mean, 54.9 years) in the younger group and 23 patients (mean, 73.5 years) in the older group. The younger and older groups had comparable 10-year implant survivorship (98.4% vs. 91.3%). Patients aged ≥70 years had worse American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores (74.2 vs. 81.0, P = .042) and lower satisfaction rates (12% vs. 64%, P < .001) than younger patients. At the final follow-up, older patients had worse forward flexion (117° vs. 129°, P = .047) and internal rotation (17 vs. 15, P = .036). More greater tuberosity complications (39% vs. 16%, P = .019), glenoid erosion (100% vs. 59%, P = .077), and humeral head superior migration (80% vs. 31%, P = .037) were also identified in patients aged ≥70 years. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike the increased risk for revision and functional deterioration over time after reverse shoulder arthroplasty for PHFs in younger patients, a high implant survival rate with lasting pain relief and stable functional outcomes could be observed in younger patients after HHR during long-term follow-up. Patients aged ≥70 years had worse clinical outcomes, lower patient satisfaction, more greater tuberosity complications, and more glenoid erosion and humeral head superior migration than those aged <70 years. HHR should not be recommended for the treatment of unreconstructable complex acute PHFs in older patient populations.

Radiographic comparison of eccentric stemmed vs. concentric stemless prosthetic humeral head positioning after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Maintaining premorbid proximal humeral positioning is an essential consideration of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA), as malposition of the prosthetic humeral head can result in poor clinical outcomes. Stemless aTSA prosthetic heads are usually concentric, while stemmed aTSA prosthetic heads are typically eccentric in nature. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the ability to restore native humeral head position between stemmed (eccentric) vs. stemless (concentric) aTSA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Postoperative anteroposterior radiographs of 52 stemmed and 46 stemless aTSAs were analyzed. A best-fit circle was created using previously published and validated techniques to represent the premorbid humeral head position and axis of rotation. This circle was juxtaposed with another circle following the arc of the implant head. Next, the offset in center of rotation (COR), radius of curvature (RoC), and humeral head height above the greater tuberosity (HHH) were measured. Additionally, based on prior studies, an offset of >3 mm at any point between the implant head surface and premorbid best-fit circle was considered significant and further classified as overstuffed or understuffed. RESULTS: RoC deviation was significantly greater in the stemmed cohort than the stemless cohort (1.19 ± 1.37 mm vs. 0.65 ± 1.17 mm, P = .025). There was no statistically significant difference in deviation from premorbid humeral head between the stemmed and stemless cohorts for COR (3.20 ± 2.28 mm vs. 3.23 ± 2.09 mm, P = .800) or HHH (1.12 ± 3.27 mm vs. 0.92 ± 2.70 mm, P = .677). When comparing overstuffed implants to appropriately placed implants, there was a significant difference in overall COR deviation in stemmed implants (3.93 ± 2.51 mm vs. 1.92 ± 1.05 mm, P < .001). Superoinferior COR deviation (stemmed: 2.38 ± 3.01 mm vs. -0.61 ± 1.59 mm, P < .001; stemless: 2.70 ± 1.75 mm vs. -0.16 ± 1.87 mm, P < .001), mediolateral COR deviation (stemmed: 0.79 ± 2.65 mm vs. -0.62 ± 1.27 mm, P = .020; stemless: 0.40 ± 1.41 mm vs. -1.13 ± 1.96 mm, P = .020), and HHH (stemmed: 3.61 ± 2.73 mm vs. 0.50 ± 1.31 mm, P < .001; stemless: 3.98 ± 1.18 mm vs. 0.53 ± 1.41 mm, P < .001) were significantly different between overstuffed implants and appropriate implants in both the stemmed and stemless cohorts. DISCUSSION: Stemless and stemmed aTSA implants have similar rates of reproducing satisfactory postoperative humeral head COR with both producing COR deviation most commonly in the superomedial direction. Deviation in HHH contributes to overstuffing in both stemmed and stemless implants, COR deviation contributes to overstuffing in stemmed implants, while RoC (humeral head size) is not associated with overstuffing. Based on this study, it appears that neither eccentric nor concentric prosthetic heads are superior in recreating premorbid humeral head position.

Stemless reverse humeral component neck-shaft angle has an influence on initial fixation.

BACKGROUND: Stemless anatomic humeral components are commonly used and are an accepted alternative to traditional stemmed implants in patients with good bone quality. Presently, little literature exists on the design and implantation parameters that influence primary time-zero fixation of stemless reverse humeral implants. Accordingly, this finite element analysis study assessed the surgical implantation variable of neck-shaft angle, and its effect on the primary time-zero fixation of reversed stemless humeral implants. METHODS: Eight computed tomography-derived humeral finite element models were used to examine a generic stemless humeral implant at varying neck-shaft angles of 130°, 135°, 140°, 145°, and 150°. Four loading scenarios (30° shoulder abduction with neutral forearm rotation, 30° shoulder abduction with forearm supination, a head-height lifting motion, and a single-handed steering motion) were employed. Implantation inclinations were compared based on the maximum bone-implant interface distraction detected after loading. RESULTS: The implant-bone distraction was greatest in the 130° neck-shaft angle implantation cases. All implant loading scenarios elicited significantly lower micromotion magnitudes when neck-shaft angle was increased (P = .0001). With every 5° increase in neck-shaft angle, there was an average 17% reduction in bone-implant distraction. CONCLUSIONS: The neck-shaft angle of implantation for a stemless reverse humeral component is a modifiable parameter that appears to influence time-zero implant stability. Lower, more varus, neck-shaft angles increase bone-implant distractions with simulated activities of daily living. It is therefore suggested that humeral head osteotomies at a higher neck-shaft angle may be beneficial to maximize stemless humeral component stability.

Humeral Head Reconstruction of Reverse Hill-Sachs Lesions.

Compared with anterior instability, posterior shoulder dislocations are a rare entity and are often missed at presentation. A concomitant anteromedial impression fracture of the humeral head, or a reverse Hill-Sachs lesion, is commonly present with these dislocations and is more pronounced with a longer timeline to reduction. Treatment of these defects ranges from nonsurgical treatment to soft-tissue procedures, bony reconstruction, and arthroplasty. Management may be dictated by various factors, such as patient demands, defect size and location, concomitant injuries, and underlying etiology. Small reverse Hill-Sachs defects without engagement can generally be treated nonsurgically or with benign neglect, whereas larger defects (>20%) often require surgery. The most reported surgical techniques are the (arthroscopic) McLaughlin and modified McLaughlin procedure, disimpaction and bone grafting, or reconstruction of the defect with autograft or with fresh (or fresh-frozen) osteochondral allograft. Finally, arthroplasty is generally required for large defects, where more than 45% to 50% of the articular cartilage is involved. Overall, reported outcomes generally reflect patient satisfaction for most patients, with a low incidence of secondary instability or posttraumatic arthritis, although better results are achieved when recognizing and treating these injuries in the more acute setting.

Comparison between osteonecrosis of the humeral and femoral heads - epidemiological analysis of the surgical trend using the nationwide claims database of the republic of Korea.

BACKGROUNDS: The humeral head is the second most common site of osteonecrosis, after the femoral head. However, compared to osteonecrosis of the femoral head (ONFH), epidemiological information on osteonecrosis of the humeral head (ONHH) is scarce. We hypothesised that different biomechanical properties of the shoulder from the hip joint might present different epidemiological characteristics of ONHH from those of the ONFH. To evaluate epidemiological differences, we compared trends in the surgical treatment of ONHH and ONFH using the nationwide medical claims database of the Republic of Korea (ROK). METHODS: We analysed epidemiological data from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment (HIRA) database of the ROK between 2008 and 2018. HIRA database contains almost all medical information in an anonymised form, including demographics, diagnoses, and types of surgical procedures, generated through healthcare practices in ROK. The annual incidence rates of ONHH and ONFH were calculated based on the total number of the general population. Demographics, annual incidence, and the proportion of post-traumatic osteonecrosis and surgical procedures were compared according to the anatomical site and the affected year. RESULTS: The total number of patients treated for ONHH and ONFH during the study period was 1,028 and 66,260, respectively. Although the incidence of ONHH increased, it is a relatively rare disease compared to ONFH. ONHH occurred more frequently in females, while ONFH occurred predominantly in male patients (p < 0.001). Surgical treatment for ONHH was most frequently performed in older patients (63.7%), whereas middle-aged patients had the largest proportion of ONFH (48.9%, p < 0.001). The proportion of post-traumatic osteonecrosis was significantly higher in the ONHH (5.1%) than in the ONFH (1.9%, p < 0.001). Arthroplasty was performed more frequently in the ONHH (96.0%) than in the ONFH (92.9%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Despite the anatomical similarities between the hip and shoulder joints, the different biomechanical properties, such as weight-bearing functions, might cause epidemiological differences between ONHH and ONFH.

Segmental Humeral Head Reconstruction in Patients with Chronic Locked Posterior Shoulder Dislocation.

Background and Objectives: The goal of this study was to evaluate the functional outcomes of patient treatment using an allograft after chronic locked posterior shoulder dislocation associated with a bony defect of the upper edge of the humerus that involves 25-50% of the articular surfaces. Materials and Methods: A total of 20 patients were included in this study. Electrocution was the cause of injury in eight patients; in ten patients, the cause was direct trauma; and in two patients, the cause of injury was a fall due to hypoglycemic coma. A standard deltoid pectoral approach was used and a fresh-frozen osteochondral allograft of the femoral condyle was applied. In evaluating the results, Constant's scoring scale was used. Results: The average value of Constant's point scale for the operated shoulder is 84.14 points. This result is good according to the average value of Constant's point scale. Conclusions: Patients with locked chronic posterior dislocation in combination with a bony defect of the humeral head that covers 25-50% of the articular surface, in our opinion, should be treated using bone allografts rather than non-anatomical reconstruction methods.

Evaluation of Mid-term Outcomes Following Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty for Avascular Necrosis of the Humeral Head in Patients 40 Years and Younger.

In order to evaluate postoperative function and failure rates among younger patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty for humeral head avascular necrosis (AVN), data from patients < 40 years treated between December 2008 - January 2018 was retrospectively analyzed. Pain was assessed preoperatively and at final follow up using a visual analogue scale (VAS). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) standardized assessment, single assessment numeric evaluation (SANE) score, and patient satisfaction were assessed at final follow up, as well as surgical revision rates. In total, eight shoulders were included in the final analysis, with a follow up of 6.6 + 3.6 years. Analysis indicated a statistical improvement in VAS pain (p = 0.001), while comparison of postoperative function between surgical and non-surgical limbs did not demonstrate statistical differences in SANE or ASES averages (p > 0.05). At final follow up, 25% of patients expressed dissatisfaction; however, there were no cases of revision surgery. In conclusion, younger patients undergoing hemiarthroplasty for humeral head AVN experienced pain improvement and no revisions at short-to-mid-term follow up, but one-in-four indicated dissatisfaction. Level of evidence: IV, case series. (Journal of Surgical Orthopaedic Advances 32(2):118-121, 2023).