Outcomes of a cementless onlay short stem reverse shoulder arthroplasty in elderly patients: a comprehensive analysis of clinical and radiological findings.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate clinical and radiological outcomes of a short stem reverse shoulder prosthesis with metaphyseal fixation specifically in older patients. METHODS: All patients, older than 70 years, submitted to a Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty (RSA) using a cementless onlay short stem (Aequalis Ascend™ Flex Convertible Shoulder System (Stryker®)) from January 2017 to December 2021, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years, were included. Postoperative radiographs were assessed for stem loosening, subsidence, and varus-valgus tilt. Range of motion, visual analogue scale for pain, constant score, complication rate and revision rate were also analysed. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients with a mean age of 75 years (range 71-83 years) were submitted to a cementless onlay short stem RSA with a Bone Increased Off-Set (BIO-RSA) construct. The mean follow-up period was 61 months (range 54-87). Significant improvements (p < 0.001) were observed for the constant score and range of motion from the preoperative state to final follow-up. One case exhibited a significant varus deviation (> 5˚) during the follow-up period. No case of stem loosening was identified. There was only one case of complication because of post-traumatic dislocation, but the stem didn't need revision. CONCLUSION: Short stem RSA, even in patients older than 70 years, can yield a stable fixation with a good clinical and radiological outcome at short-medium term follow-up. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III; Retrospective Study.

Biomechanical Characteristics of Glenosphere Orientation Based on Tilting Angle and Overhang Changes in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Background: Glenoid position and inclination are important factors in protecting against scapular notching, which is the most common complication that directly affects the longevity of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical characteristics of glenosphere orientation, comparing neutral tilt, inferior overhang with an eccentric glenosphere at the same placement of baseplate, and inferior tilt after 10° inferior reaming in the lower part of the glenoid in RSA. Methods: Nine cadaveric shoulders were tested with 5 combinations of customized glenoid components: a centric glenosphere was combined with a standard baseplate (group A); an eccentric glenosphere to provide 4-mm inferior overhang than the centric glenosphere was combined with a standard baseplate (group B); a centric glenosphere was combined with a wedge-shaped baseplate tilted inferiorly by 10° with the same center of rotation (group C); an eccentric glenosphere was attached to a wedge-shaped baseplate (group D); and 10° inferior reaming was performed on the lower part of the glenoid to apply 10° inferior tilt, with a centric glenosphere secured to the standard baseplate for simulation of clinical tilt (group E). Impingement-free angles for adduction, abduction, forward flexion, external rotation, and internal rotation were measured. The capability of the deltoid moment arm for abduction and forward flexion, deltoid length, and geometric analysis for adduction engagement were evaluated. Results: Compared with neutral tilt, inferior tilt at the same position showed no significant difference in impingement-free angle, moment arm capability, and deltoid length. However, group D resulted in better biomechanical properties than a central position, regardless of inferior tilt. Group E demonstrated a greater range of adduction, internal and external rotation, and higher abduction and forward flexion capability with distalization, compared to corresponding parameters for inferior tilt with a customized wedge-shaped baseplate. Conclusions: A 10° inferior tilt of the glenosphere, without changing the position of the baseplate, had no benefit in terms of the impingement-free angle and deltoid moment arm. However, an eccentric glenosphere had a significant advantage, regardless of inferior tilt. Inferior tilt through 10° inferior reaming showed better biomechanical results than neutral tilt due to the distalization effect.

The Influence of Component Design and Positioning on Soft-Tissue Tensioning and Complications in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Review.

¼ Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty was designed to function in the rotator cuff deficient shoulder by adjusting the glenohumeral center of rotation (COR) to maximize deltoid function.¼ Adjustments in the COR ultimately lead to changes in resting tension of the deltoid and remaining rotator cuff, which can affect implant stability and risk of stress fracture.¼ Soft-tissue balance and complication profiles can be affected by humeral component (version, neck shaft angle, and inlay vs. onlay) and glenoid component (sagittal placement, version, inclination, and lateralization) design and application.¼ A good understanding of the effects on soft-tissue balance and complication profile is critical for surgeons to best provide optimal patient outcomes.

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.

A two-year comparison of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty mini-humeral tray and augmented mini-glenoid baseplate implants vs. standard implants.

BACKGROUND: Patients who undergo reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) are getting younger with greater function expectations. This retrospective, longitudinal study of prospectively collected data compared perceived shoulder function and strength, active shoulder mobility, radiographic evidence of scapular notching, and implant survival over the initial 2-years post-RTSA among patient groups who received either standard central fixation point liner and glenoid baseplate implants, or lower size profile mini-humeral tray with offset trunnion options and mini-augmented glenoid baseplate implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent primary RTSA using standard central fixation point liner and glenoid baseplate implants (Group 1, n = 180) were compared with patients who underwent primary RTSA using lower size profile mini-humeral tray with offset trunnion options and mini-augmented glenoid baseplate implants (Group 2, n = 53) for active shoulder mobility, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, perceived ability to lift 10 lbs (4.5 kg) overhead, radiographic evidence of scapular notching, and implant survival. Data was collected pre-surgery, 6-weeks, 6-months, 1-year, and 2-years post-RTSA (p ≤ 0.05). RESULTS: More Group 2 patients had more complex B or C Walch glenoid morphology, while Group 1 had more A1 or A2 types (p ≤ 0.001). Group 2 had greater active shoulder flexion at 6-months, 1-year, and 2-years (p ≤ 0.018) and external rotation (in adduction) at 6-months and 2-years (p ≤ 0.004) compared to Group 1, with higher ASES scores at 6-months and 2-years (p ≤ 0.026) (with small-to-medium effect sizes), and with more patients meeting or exceeding the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) at 2-years (p = 0.045) and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) levels at 6-months, 1-year and 2-years (p ≤ 0.045). Scapular notching was identified in six of 53 (11.3%) Group 2 patients and in 32 of 180 (17.7%) Group 1 patients. Group 1 patients had more grade 2 or greater scapular notching grades compared to Group 2 (p = 0.04). Implant survival was comparable with Group 1 = eight of 180 (4.4%) and Group 2 = 1 of 53 (1.9%) of patients requiring removal for 95.6% and 98.1% implant survival, respectively. CONCLUSION: Limited scapular notching and excellent implant survival was observed in both groups. Despite including individuals with more complex glenoid deficiency, patients receiving the lower size profile implants generally displayed better active shoulder mobility and perceived shoulder function compared to those who received standard implants. These patients also more frequently met or exceeded the MCID by 2-years post-RTSA and PASS levels by 6-months, 1-year, and 2-years post-RTSA, with lower scapular notching grades. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Retrospective comparative study.

Analysis of three different reverse shoulder arthroplasty designs for cuff tear arthropathy - the combination of lateralization and distalization provides best mobility.

BACKGROUND: The two major reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) designs are the Grammont design and the lateralized design. Even if the lateralized design is biomechanically favored, the classic Grammont prosthesis continues to be used. Functional and subjective patient scores as well as implant survival described in the literature so far are comparable to the lateralized design. A pure comparison of how the RSA design influences outcome in patients has not yet been determined. The aim of this study was a comparison focused on patients with cuff tear arthropathy (CTA). METHODS: We analyzed registry data from 696 CTA patients prospectively collected between 2012 and 2020 in two specialized orthopedic centers up to 2 years post-RSA with the same follow-up time points (6,12 24 months). Complete teres minor tears were excluded. Three groups were defined: group 1 (inlay, 155° humeral inclination, 36 + 2 mm eccentric glenosphere (n = 50)), group 2 (inlay, 135° humeral inclination, 36 + 4 mm lateralized glenosphere (n = 141)) and group 3 (onlay, 145° humeral inclination, + 3 mm lateralized base plate, 36 + 2 mm eccentric glenosphere (n = 35)) We compared group differences in clinical outcomes (e.g., active and passive range of motion (ROM), abduction strength, Constant-Murley score (CS)), radiographic evaluations of prosthetic position, scapular anatomy and complications using mixed models adjusted for age and sex. RESULTS: The final analysis included 226 patients. The overall adjusted p-value of the CS for all time-points showed no significant difference (p = 0.466). Flexion of group 3 (mean, 155° (SD 13)) was higher than flexion of group 1 (mean, 142° (SD 18) and 2 (mean, 132° (SD 18) (p < 0.001). Values for abduction of group 3 (mean, 145° (SD 23)) were bigger than those of group 1 (mean, 130° (SD 22)) and group 2 (mean, 118° (SD 25)) (p < 0.001). Mean external rotation for group 3 (mean, 41° (SD 23)) and group 2 (mean, 38° (SD 17)) was larger than external rotation of group 1 (mean, 24° (SD 16)) (p < 0.001); a greater proportion of group 2 (78%) and 3 (69%) patients reached L3 level on internal rotation compared to group 1 (44%) (p = 0.003). Prosthesis position measurements were similar, but group 3 had significantly less scapular notching (14%) versus 24% (group 2) and 50% (group 1) (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Outcome scores of different RSA designs for CTA revealed comparable results. However, CTA patients with a lateralized and distalized RSA configuration were associated with achieving better flexion and abduction with less scapular notching. A better rotation was associated with either of the lateralized RSA designs in comparison with the classic Grammont prosthesis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic study, Level III.

Both angled bony-increased offset and metal-augmented baseplates provide satisfactory bone incorporation to the glenoid in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a radiographic evaluation using tomosynthesis.

BACKGROUND: Angled bony-increased offset and metal-augmented baseplate have recently been used to achieve neutral to inferior inclination of the glenoid implant. Nonetheless, bone incorporation is difficult to evaluate using computed tomography or other conventional methods owing to the presence of metal artifacts; therefore, whether bone incorporation between the grafted bone and glenoid or between the graft and baseplate implant can be achieved remains unclear. Several studies have reported the effectiveness of tomosynthesis in reducing metal artifacts for the evaluation of implant loosening, bone resorption, and spot welds. We aimed to evaluate and compare the bone incorporation rates between angled bony-increased offset and metal-augmented implants using tomosynthesis with metal artifact reduction technology. We hypothesized that a high bone incorporation rate would be obtained with angled bony-increased offset and a metal-augmented baseplate. METHODS: A total of 52 patients who underwent reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with angled bony-increased offset and 42 patients who underwent reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with metal-augmented baseplate were assessed and followed up for a minimum of 2 years. The bone incorporation and implant loosening rates were compared between the 2 groups, and the sites of spot welds and trabeculation were recorded according to zones. Bone incorporation between the bone and prosthesis was defined as a confirmation of spot welds connecting the porous area and bone in more than three zones. Bone incorporation between the native bone and grafted bone was defined as an observation of trabeculation. Glenoid loosening was defined as the presence of at least 1 mm radiolucency around the prosthesis in more than 2 zones. RESULTS: Both the angled bony-increased offset and metal-augmented baseplate groups achieved sufficient bone incorporation rates (98% [51/52 cases] vs. 100% [42/42 cases], P = 1.0) and low implant loosening rates (2% [1/52 cases] vs. 0% [0/42 cases], P = 1.0). Spot welds and trabeculation were likely to be confirmed in the lower parts of the glenoid. CONCLUSION: The two groups did not show any significant differences regarding bone incorporation rates. Considering the complexity of performing the procedure with angled bony-increased offset, the use of a metal-augmented baseplate can serve as an alternative treatment to avoid superior inclination in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Medium-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of a cementless prosthesis with a 140° neck-shaft angle in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The design of humeral implants has evolved from the initial Grammont design, notably regarding the neck-shaft angle (NSA) and through the use of cementless prostheses. Stress shielding was frequently reported with cementless implants, the 2 main risk factors being humeral stem misalignment and high filling ratios. Our hypothesis was that standard length cementless stems with an NSA of 140° would facilitate good alignment with moderate filling ratios, thereby limiting stress shielding and ensuring good clinical outcomes. METHODS: A single-center retrospective study was conducted of patients who underwent reverse total shoulder arthroplasty between January 2015 and August 2017, with at least 2 years' follow-up. Clinical evaluations included range of motion measurements and Constant and subjective shoulder values scores. Frontal alignment was assessed in terms of the angle (α) between axes of the stem and of the humerus. Filling ratios were measured in the metaphysis of the humerus, in the diaphysis, and at the distal end of the stem and considered excessive above 0.7. Stress shielding was evidenced radiographically by the observation of medial cortical narrowing, medial metaphysis thinning, lateral metaphysis thinning or under-the-baseplate osteolysis. RESULTS: Eighty-two shoulders were included and 70 had radiographic follow-up data available. The mean patient age was 78 years and 63/81 patients (78%) were female. The mean follow-up time was 39 ± 7 months. The mean α angle was 1.4° ± 0.9° and was less than 5° in all cases. The mean metaphyseal, diaphyseal, and distal filling ratios were 0.61 ± 0.06, 0.70 ± 0.08, and 0.64 ± 0.09, respectively. The mean Constant score improved from 28 ± 11 preoperatively to 64 ± 14 at last follow-up. The mean subjective shoulder values score at last follow-up was 81 ± 12. Seventy-nine percent of patients (55/70) had at least 1 form of stress-shielding related, which were not associated with clinical outcomes, apart from lateral metaphysis thinning, which was associated with lower active anterior elevation (mean, 106° ± 30° vs. 126° ± 28°; P = .01) and lower Constant scores (mean, 56 ± 17 vs. 65 ± 14; P = .06). CONCLUSION: The use of cementless reverse shoulder prostheses with a NSA of 140° was associated with good clinical outcomes at 2 years' follow-up. The prosthesis stem was correctly aligned with the humeral axis and the filling ratios were <0.7 in all cases. Stress-shielding was common but, apart from lateral metaphysis thinning, this had no impact on clinical outcomes.

Mid-term outcomes following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: The utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty now exceeds the incidence of anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. Previous mid-to-long-term studies on rTSA have reported a decrease in shoulder function as follow-up increased. The purpose of this study was to provide data on mid-term outcomes and implant survival in a series focusing on reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Demographic information such as age at surgery, revision surgery status, BMI, and smoking status were recorded. The clinical endpoints measured in this study were range of motion scores (forward elevation, external rotation, internal rotation) and patient reported outcomes (VAS, ASES, SST). Radiographic variables captured included preoperative glenoid morphology, humeral lucency, and glenoid loosening. RESULTS: Fifty-six shoulders were included in this study. The overall mean age at surgery was 72.5 ± 7.2 years with an average follow-up time of 6.8 ± 3.5 years. The mean BMI was 28.1 ± 5.5. All measurements of range of motion saw significant and sustained improvements. Overall, forward elevation improved from 82° preoperatively to 133° postoperatively (p < 0.01). External rotation improved from 23° preoperatively to 36° (p < 0.01), while internal rotation improved from L3 to L1 (p = 0.05). ASES scores improved from 31 preoperatively to 70 postoperatively (p < 0.01). SST scores improved from 2 preoperatively to 7 (p < 0.01). VAS pain index scores improved from 6 to 2 following surgery (p < 0.01). Postoperative scapular notching was seen in 18 patients at final follow-up. Glenoid loosening was seen in 3 shoulders. Humeral loosening was seen in 18 shoulders. Tuberosity resorption was seen in 8 shoulders. The 5 year survival estimate was 98%, and the 10 year survival estimate was 83%. CONCLUSION: In this series, we found that rTSA provides mid-term improvements in range of motion in patients while reducing pain levels. When considered together, this demonstrates that most patients undergoing rTSA can have excellent use of their shoulder from age at surgery to end-of-life.

Revision of failed reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with reverse: short-term clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of failed reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is increasing. This can often present a challenging clinical situation with substantial bone loss and limited reconstruction options. This study reports a single tertiary referral center's experience with revision of failed rTSA managed with revision rTSA of bone-interfacing components. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, all revision shoulder arthroplasty cases performed at a single institution between 2012 and 2020 were reviewed. Cases in which rTSA was revised to a new rTSA construct with revision of at least 1 bone-interfacing implant (humeral stem and/or baseplate) with a minimum 2-year follow-up were identified. Characteristics of revision cases-including indications, bony stock, revised components, and use of bone graft-were collected. All patients were contacted for patient-reported outcome measures at a minimum of 2 years after surgery. In addition, the incidence and indication for any reoperation after revision were determined. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients with an average age of 66 years (range: 46-82 years), with 19 (58%) being female, met the inclusion criteria and had a mean follow-up of 4.2 years (range: 2-8 years). The most common indication for revision rTSA included humeral component loosening (33%; 11/33), baseplate loosening (27%; 9/33), and instability (21%; 7/33). Prerevision infectious workup demonstrated no cases of periprosthetic shoulder infection. Thirteen cases had massive bone loss-5 treated with humeral allograft prosthetic composite, 5 with glenoid bone grafting, and 3 with custom glenoid implant. In total, 10 of 33 cases (30%) required reoperation at a mean of 13 months (range: 1-44 months) for instability (4), humeral loosening (2), infection (1), baseplate loosening (1), or periprosthetic fracture (1). The reoperation rate for patients with revised baseplates only, humerus only, or combined was 23% (3/13), 28% (5/18), and 27% (3/11), respectively. Overall, the visual analog scale pain score improved from 6.5 preoperatively to 2.0 (P < .001), and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved from 30.7 to 67.5 (P < .001). However, the postoperative Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score averaged only 51.2% (range: 2-100%). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that failed rTSA can be salvaged with a revision rTSA. However, patient expectations for functional improvements should be tempered, and a high reoperation rate should be expected.

Can we separately measure glenoid vs. humeral lateralization and distalization in reverse shoulder arthroplasty?

BACKGROUND: Lateralization and distalization in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) can be measured on anteroposterior (AP) radiographs using 2 previously described angles: lateralization shoulder angle (LSA) and distalization shoulder angle (DSA). However, these 2 angles measure global lateralization and distalization but do not allow to differentiate how much lateralization or distalization are attributable to the glenoid and the humerus. We hypothesized that new angles could allow us to separately measure glenoid vs. humeral lateralization and distalization. A more precise understanding of independent glenoid and humeral contributions to lateralization and distalization may be beneficial in subsequent clinical research. METHOD: Retrospective analysis of postoperative AP radiographs of 100 patients who underwent primary RSA for cuff-tear arthropathy, massive cuff tear, or glenohumeral osteoarthritis were analyzed. The new angles that we proposed use well-known bony landmarks (the acromion, glenoid, and humerus) and the most lateral point of the glenosphere, which we termed the "glenoid pivot point" (GPP). For lateralization, we used the GPP to split LSA into 2 new angles: glenoid lateralization angle (GLA) and humeral lateralization angle (HLA). For distalization, we introduced the modified distalization shoulder angle (mDSA) that can also be split into 2 new angles: glenoid distalization angle (GDA) and humeral distalization angle (HDA). Three orthopedic surgeons measured the new angles, using the online tool Tyche. Mean values with overall and individual standard deviations as well as intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated. RESULTS: Because the angles form a triangle, the following equations can be made: LSA = GLA + HLA, and mDSA = GDA + HDA. All angles showed excellent inter- and intraobserver reliability (ICC = 0.92-0.97) with low means of individual standard deviations that indicate a precision of 2° for each angle. CONCLUSION: Use of the most lateral part of the glenosphere (termed glenoid pivot point) allows us to separately measure glenoid vs. humeral lateralization and distalization. The 4 new angles (HLA, GLA, GDA, HDA) described in the present study can be used on true AP radiographs, routinely obtained after shoulder replacement, and the measured angles may be used with all types of reverse prostheses available.

Mini-augmented glenoid baseplate and mini-humeral tray reverse total shoulder arthroplasty implant comparisons: two-year clinical outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Augmented glenoid baseplate and offset humeral tray reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) implants may decrease the mechanical impingement that creates scapular notching and improve shoulder function. This study evaluated the clinical efficacy of three different RTSA glenoid baseplate and offset humeral tray combinations for patient-reported shoulder function, pain and instability, radiographic imaging evidence of glenoid baseplate or humeral stem subsidence and migration, bony changes associated with implant loosening, and scapular notching over the initial 2 years post-RTSA. Primary outcomes included active shoulder mobility, perceived function, pain, instability, scapular notching, and implant survival. METHODS: Sixty-seven patients from 6 research sites received one of three different glenoid baseplate and humeral tray combinations. Group 1 (n = 21) received a mini-augmented glenoid baseplate with a standard humeral tray; Group 2 (n = 23) received a standard glenoid baseplate and a mini-humeral tray with 3 trunnion offset options; Group 3 (n = 23) received both a mini-augmented glenoid baseplate and a mini-humeral tray with 3 trunnion offset options. Subjects underwent radiologic evaluation, completed the ASES scale, the EQ-5D-5L quality of life scale, VAS shoulder pain and instability questions, and active shoulder mobility measurements pre-operatively, and 6-weeks, 6-months, 1-2 years post-RTSA. RESULTS: Improved active shoulder mobility, quality of life, perceived function, decreased shoulder pain and instability, excellent implant survival and minimal scapular notching were observed for all groups. Group 3 had better overall active shoulder mobility than the other groups and better perceived function than Group 1. CONCLUSION: The group that received the mini-augmented glenoid baseplate and mini-humeral tray combination had better overall active shoulder flexion, external rotation at 90° abduction, and internal rotation. This group also had better perceived shoulder function compared to the group that received a mini-augmented glenoid baseplate with a standard humeral tray.

Lateralization and distalization shoulder angles do not predict outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty for cuff tear arthropathy.

BACKGROUND: In reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), there are a plethora of measurements regarding implant lateralization and distalization to optimize the center of rotation. Two specific measurements known as the "lateralization shoulder angle" (LSA) and "distalization shoulder angle" (DSA) have been the recent focus of studies to assess their association with RSA and postoperative function. The aim of this study was to evaluate the prognostic clinical value of the LSA and DSA in a large cohort of patients with cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) who were treated with different RSA systems. METHODS: Two local shoulder arthroplasty registries were reviewed for all RSA patients documented to have undergone a radiologic assessment and complete 2-year follow-up examination. The main inclusion criterion was primary RSA in patients with CTA. Patients with either a complete teres minor tear, os acromiale, or acromial stress fracture reported between the time of surgery and the 24-month follow-up were excluded. Five RSA implant systems with 4 neck-shaft angles (NSAs) were assessed. The Constant score, Subjective Shoulder Value, and range of motion at 2 years were correlated with both the LSA and DSA assessed on 6-month anteroposterior radiographs. Linear and parabolic univariable regressions were calculated for both shoulder angles, for each prosthesis system, and for the entire patient cohort. RESULTS: Between May 2006 and November 2019, there were a total of 630 CTA patients who had undergone primary RSA. Of this large cohort of patients, 270 were treated with the Promos Reverse prosthesis system (NSA, 155°); 44, Aequalis Reversed II (NSA, 155°); 62, Lima SMR Reverse (NSA, 150°); 25, Aequalis Ascend Flex (NSA, 145°); and 229, Univers Revers (NSA, 135°). The mean LSA was 78° (standard deviation [SD], 10°; range, 6°-107°), and the mean DSA was 51° (SD, 10°; range, 7°-91°). The average Constant score at 24 months' follow-up was 68.1 points (SD, 13 points; range, 13-96 points). Neither the linear nor parabolic regression calculations for the LSA or DSA revealed significant associations with any of the clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: Different patients may achieve different clinical outcomes despite having identical LSA and DSA values. There is no association between angular radiographic measurements and 2-year functional outcomes after RSA.

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.

Impact of humeral stem length on calcar resorption in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Use of standard-length anatomic total shoulder (TSA) humeral stems has been associated with high rates of medial calcar bone loss. Calcar bone loss has been attributed to stress shielding, debris-induced osteolysis, and undiagnosed infection. Short stem and canal-sparing humeral components may provide more optimal stress distribution and thus lower rates of calcar bone loss related to stress shielding. The purpose of this study is to determine whether implant length will affect the rate and severity of medial calcar resorption. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on TSA patients treated with three different-length humeral implants (canal-sparing, short, and standard-length designs). Patients were matched 1:1:1 based on both gender and age (±4 years), resulting in 40 patients per cohort. Radiographic changes in medial calcar bone were evaluated and graded on a 4-point scale, from the initial postoperative radiographs to those at 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months. RESULTS: The presence of any degree of medial calcar resorption demonstrated an overall rate of 73.3% at one year. At 3 months, calcar resorption was observed in 20% of the canal-sparing cohort, while the short and standard designs demonstrated resorption in 55% and 52.5%, respectively (P = .002). At 12 months, calcar resorption was seen in 65% of the canal-sparing design, while both the short and standard designs had a 77.5% rate of resorption (P = .345). The severity of calcar resorption for the canal-sparing cohort was significantly lower at all time points when compared to the short stem (3 months, P = .004; 6 months, P = .003; 12 months, P = .004) and at 3 months when compared to the standard-length stem (P = .009). CONCLUSION: Patients treated with canal-sparing TSA humeral components have significantly lower rates of early calcar resorption with less severe bone loss when compared to patients treated using short and standard-length designs.

Medium-term results of inlay vs. onlay humeral components for reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a New Zealand Joint Registry study.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare medium-term results of inlay and onlay humeral components in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Specifically, we report differences in revision rate and functional outcomes between the 2 designs. METHODS: The 3 most used inlay (in-RSA) and onlay (on-RSA) implants by volume from the New Zealand Joint Registry were included in the study. In-RSA was defined as having a humeral tray that recessed within the metaphyseal bone, whereas on-RSA was defined as having a humeral tray that rested on the epiphyseal osteotomy surface. The primary outcome was revision up to 8 years postsurgery. Secondary outcomes included the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), implant survival, and revision cause for in-RSA and on-RSA as well as individual prostheses. RESULTS: There were 6707 patients (5736 in-RSA; 971 on-RSA) included in the study. For all causes, in-RSA demonstrated a lower revision rate compared to on-RSA (revision rate/100 component years: in-RSA 0.665, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.569-0.768; on-RSA 1.010, 95% CI 0.673-1.415). However, the mean 6-month OSS was higher for the on-RSA group (mean difference 2.20, 95% CI 1.37-3.03; P < .001). However, this was not clinically significant. At 5 years, there were no statistically or clinically significant differences between the 2 groups with respect to the OSS. CONCLUSION: The medium-term survival of in-RSA was higher than that of on-RSA. However, functional outcomes at 6 months were better for on-RSA compared to in-RSA. Further follow-up is required to understand the long-term survivorship and functional outcomes between these designs.

A survey and biomechanical analysis of the feasibility of the thumb test for determining the cancellous bone quality for stemless shoulder prosthesis.

BACKGROUND: The effect of the thumb test for assessing the cancellous bone quality at the resection plane of the proximal humerus on determining the application of a stemless shoulder prosthesis remains unclear. This study was conducted to survey the current utilization of the thumb test among surgeons and to investigate biomechanical features of the thumb test. METHOD: A survey among shoulder surgeons who had experience with stemless prostheses was conducted to investigate the current utilization of preoperative assessments and intraoperative thumb test when applying stemless prosthesis. Biomechanical experiments for the thumb test using artificial bone models were performed to assess the compression force, contact pressure and area. According to the preliminary survey, three compression techniques were assessed: compression perpendicular to the surface with thumb pad (P-pad technique) or tip of the thumb (P-tip technique), or compression in the vertical direction simulating compression along the longitudinal axis of the humeral shaft with tip-pad of the thumb (H-axis technique). The contact area was separated into three subregions (proximal, middle and distal) to assess the distribution of contact pressure. RESULTS: Among 38 surgeons, 66% utilized the thumb test intraoperatively. The P-pad technique was more frequently applied than the P-tip or H-axis techniques (80%, 4% and 16%, respectively). Although with wide variation among the examiners, biomechanical assessments revealed the P-pad technique showed larger contact area and less compression force than the P-tip technique. The P-pad technique provided no significant localized differences in the mean contact pressure on the compressed plane, whereas the P-tip and H-axis techniques showed significant differences among subregions. CONCLUSION: This survey demonstrated relatively frequent application of the thumb test on applying the stemless shoulder prosthesis. Biomechanical assessment revealed the thumb test can hinder objective reproducibility among examiners; therefore, further investigations to identify feasible assessments of the bone quality is required.

Implant breakage after shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review of data from worldwide arthroplasty registries and clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Implant breakage after shoulder arthroplasty is a rare complication after aseptic loosening, infection or persistent pain, resulting in malfunction of the components requiring revision surgery. This correlates with a high burden for the patient and increasing costs. Specific data of complication rates and implant breakage are available in detailed arthroplasty registries, but due to the rare occurrence and possibly underestimated value rarely described in published studies. The aim of this systematic review was to point out the frequency of implant breakage after shoulder arthroplasty. We hypothesized that worldwide arthroplasty registry datasets record higher rates of implant breakage than clinical trials. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINHAL, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials database were utilized for this systematic review using the items "(implant fracture/complication/breakage) OR (glenoid/baseplate complication/breakage) AND (shoulder arthroplasty)" according to the PRISMA guidelines on July 3rd, 2023. Study selection, quality assessment, and data extraction were conducted according to the Cochrane standards. Case reports and experimental studies were excluded to reduce bias. The breakage rate per 100,000 observed component years was used to compare data from national arthroplasty registries and clinical trials, published in peer-reviewed journals. Relevant types of shoulder prosthetics were analyzed and differences in implant breakage were considered. RESULTS: Data of 5 registries and 15 studies were included. Rates of implant breakage after shoulder arthroplasty were reported with 0.06-0.86% in registries versus 0.01-6.65% in clinical studies. The breakage rate per 100,000 observed component years was 10 in clinical studies and 9 in registries. There was a revision rate of 0.09% for registry data and 0.1% for clinical studies within a 10-year period. The most frequently affected component in connection with implant fracture was the glenoid insert. CONCLUSION: Clinical studies revealed a similar incidence of implant failure compared to data of worldwide arthroplasty registries. These complications arise mainly due to breakage of screws and glenospheres and there seems to be a direct correlation to loosening. Periprosthetic joint infection might be associated with loosening of the prosthesis and subsequent material breakage. We believe that this analysis can help physicians to advise patients on potential risks after shoulder arthroplasty. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.