Humeral stem loosening is not always prosthetic joint infection.

BACKGROUND: Aseptic humeral stem loosening is an uncommon complication of shoulder arthroplasty, and its presence has been considered a highly specific predictor of prosthetic joint infection (PJI). Literature on aseptic humeral stem loosening is sparse. The primary purpose of this study was to determine the rate of aseptic humeral loosening in revision shoulder arthroplasty. Secondarily, we sought to identify predictors of septic and aseptic humeral loosening. METHODS: Our institutional revision shoulder arthroplasty database was reviewed. Inclusion criteria were patients with humeral stem loosening as indicated in the operative report. Patient demographics, index surgery and indication, revision surgery and indication, and operative data were recorded. Charts were manually reviewed, and PJI scores were calculated using the International Consensus Meeting scoring criteria. International Consensus Meeting classifications of PJI "unlikely" and "possible" were considered aseptic, and PJI "probable" and "definite" were considered septic. Statistical analysis was performed to determine associations between the abovementioned variables and aseptic humeral loosening. RESULTS: Forty-six patients with 48 shoulders were included in our analysis. Ten cases (21%) were classified as definite PJI, 13 cases (27%) were classified as probable PJI, 4 cases (8%) were classified as possible PJI, and 21 cases (44%) were classified as PJI unlikely. On analysis of stem design, there were no statistically significant associations with aseptic loosening; although, a lack of proximal porous ingrowth surface trended toward higher rates of aseptic loosening in all patients and in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) subgroup analyses. In the index RTSA subgroup, aseptic loosening was associated with female sex (P = .005). Seventeen of 39 shoulders (44%) that underwent either index ATSA or RTSA demonstrated concomitant glenoid loosening. The absence of glenoid loosening was associated with aseptic humeral loosening in index ATSA and RTSA (P < .001). CONCLUSION: Fifty-two % of revision shoulder arthroplasty cases with humeral loosening performed at our institution were aseptic. There appear to be distinct demographic and radiographic factors that are more commonly associated with aseptic as opposed to septic humeral loosening. Our data demonstrate that demographic predictors of aseptic loosening of RTSA include female sex. The absence of glenoid component loosening is associated with aseptic humeral loosening and concomitant glenoid loosening is associated with septic humeral loosening. Understanding of these factors can guide the preoperative index of suspicion for PJI in the setting of humeral stem loosening.

Is Arthroscopic Latarjet a Cost-Effective Procedure? A Decision Analysis.

Objectives: Arthroscopic Latarjet for glenohumeral stabilization has emerged as an alternative to the open approach; however, the evidence to date has questioned if this technique delivers improved outcomes. This analysis provides an assessment of the cost and utility associated with arthroscopic versus open Latarjet. Methods: The cost-effectiveness of Latarjet stabilization was modeled over a ten-year period. Institutional cases were reviewed for equipment utilization. Cost data from ambulatory surgical centers was obtained for each piece of equipment used intraoperatively. Based upon prior analyses, the operating room cost was assigned a value of $36.14 per minute. To determine effectiveness, a utility score was derived based upon prior analysis of shoulder stabilization using the EuroQol (EQ) 5D. For reoperations, a utility score of 0.01 was assigned for a single year for revision surgeries for instability and 0.5 for minor procedures. Probability of surgical outcomes and operative time for arthroscopic and open Latarjet were taken from prior studies comparing outcomes of these procedures. Decision-tree analysis utilizing these values was performed. Results: Based upon equipment and operating room costs, arthroscopic Latarjet was found to cost $2,796.87 more than the equivalent open procedure. Analysis of the utility of these procedures were 1.330 and 1.338 quality adjusted life years obtained over the modeled period for arthroscopic versus open Latarjet, respectively. For arthroscopic Latarjet to be cost-equivalent to open Latarjet, surgical time would need to be reduced to 41.5 minutes or the surgical equipment would need to be provided at no expense, while maintaining the same success rates. Conclusion: With nearly identical utility scores favoring open surgery, the added cost associated with arthroscopic Latarjet cannot be supported with available cost and utility data. To provide value, additional benefits such as decreased post-operative narcotic utilization, decreased blood loss, or lower complications of the arthroscopic approach must be demonstrated.

The impact of elective surgery restrictions during the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic on shoulder and elbow surgery: patient perceptions.

BACKGROUND: In late 2019 and early 2020, a novel coronavirus, COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019), spread across the world, creating a global pandemic. In the state of Pennsylvania, non-emergent, elective operations were temporarily delayed from proceeding with the normal standard of care. The primary purpose of this study was to determine the proportion of patients who required prescription pain medication during the surgical delay. Secondarily, we sought to determine the proportion of patients who perceived their surgical procedure as non-elective and to evaluate how symptoms were managed during the delay. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single institutional database was used to retrospectively identify all shoulder and elbow surgical procedures scheduled between March 13 and May 6, 2020. Charts were manually reviewed. Patients who underwent non-shoulder and elbow-related procedures and patients treated by surgeons outside of Pennsylvania were excluded. Patients whose surgical procedures were postponed or canceled were administered a survey evaluating how symptoms were managed and perceptions regarding the delay. Preoperative functional scores were collected. Statistical analysis was performed to determine associations between procedure status, preoperative functional scores, perception of surgery, and requirement for prescription pain medication. RESULTS: A total of 338 patients were scheduled to undergo shoulder and elbow surgery in our practice in Pennsylvania. Surgery was performed as initially scheduled in 89 of these patients (26.3%), whereas surgery was postponed in 179 (71.9%) and canceled in 70 (28.1%). The average delay in surgery was 86.7 days (range, 13-299 days). Responses to the survey were received from 176 patients (70.7%) in whom surgery was postponed or canceled. During the delay, 39 patients (22.2%) required prescription pain medication. The surgical procedure was considered elective in nature by 73 patients (41%). One hundred thirty-seven patients (78%) would have moved forward with surgery if performed safely under appropriate medical guidelines. Lower preoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores (r = -0.36, P < .001) and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores (r = -0.26, P = .016) and higher preoperative visual analog scale scores (r = 0.28, P = .009) were correlated with requiring prescription pain medication. Higher preoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores were positively correlated with perception of surgery as elective (r = 0.4, P < .001). CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing elective shoulder and elbow surgical procedures during the COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019) pandemic experienced a delay of nearly 3 months on average. Fewer than half of patients perceived their surgical procedures as elective procedures. Nearly one-quarter of patients surveyed required extra prescription pain medicine during the delay. This study elucidates the fact that although orthopedic shoulder and elbow surgery is generally considered "elective," it is more important to a majority of patients. These findings may also be applicable to future potential mandated surgical care delays by other third-party organizations.