Superior functional outcome following reverse shoulder arthroplasty compared to hemiarthroplasty for displaced three and four-part fractures in patients 65 and older: Results from a prospective multicentre randomised controlled trial - The Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty or Reverse Polarity Arthoplasty (SHeRPA) trial.

BACKGROUND: Acute unreconstructible 3- or 4-part proximal humerus fractures can be treated with hemiarthroplasty or reverse polarity shoulder arthroplasty. Randomized trials using implants from multiple different companies or uncemented implants have found superior results with reverse polarity arthroplasty. AIMS: This study aims to determine whether cemented reverse polarity arthroplasty produces a superior outcome compared to cemented hemiarthroplasty using one implant system in patients aged 65 years and over at 12 months follow-up as measured with the Constant score. METHODS: A prospective patient and assessor blinded multicenter randomized controlled trial was conducted of shoulder hemiarthroplasty or reverse polarity arthroplasty in patients aged 65 years and older with acute 3- and 4-part proximal humerus fracture not amenable to osteosynthesis. The primary outcome was the Constant score at 12 months with total follow-up to 24 months. Block randomization by site was undertaken using random number generation and sealed envelopes. Power analysis indicated that 17 patients were required in each arm to achieve 80% power with an alpha-value of 5%. Secondary outcome measures were the difference in the mean Constant Score, Quick Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire (QuickDASH), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Score and EQ5D-5L up to two years; differences in complication rate at one and two years; differences in revision and implant failure at one and two years. RESULTS: 18 patients were randomized to hemiarthroplasty and 18 to reverse polarity arthroplasty across 4 sites. The primary outcome as measured by the Constant score at 12 months was better in the reverse polarity shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) group (Mean 51.1, s.d. 14.9) compared to the hemiarthroplasty (HA) group (mean 35.0, s.d. 13.5) (p=0.004). No significant difference was reported at 24 months but this may be due to high rates of attrition (22%). The mean EQ-5D-5L patient rated health status score was significantly higher in the RSA group compared to the HA group at 12 months. One hemiarthroplasty was revised due to implant uncoupling and one reverse polarity shoulder replacement was revised due to instability. No other complications were recorded. DISCUSSION: Treatment of unreconstructible 3- or 4-part proximal humerus fractures with reverse polarity shoulder arthroplasty results in a superior outcome compared to shoulder hemiarthroplasty at 12 months measured with the Constant score with no increased risk of failure up to 24 months in patients age 65 years and over. High attrition rates are observed in this older population due to cognitive decline and death from other causes.

Reducing unnecessary fixation of midshaft clavicle fractures.

PURPOSE: Displaced midshaft clavicle fractures have a non-union rate of 10-20%. Those who unite with conservative treatment have similar outcomes to those who undergo operative treatment; therefore, protocols to identify potential non-unions are important to avoid unnecessary surgery. The aim of this study is to report one such protocol. METHODS: A protocol was introduced, where all isolated closed displaced midshaft clavicle fractures were initially managed non-operatively in a sling. At 2 weeks patients were assessed clinically and those who were struggling with their symptoms were offered surgery, with the remainder mobilised as comfortable. All cases treated at one centre over a three-year period, with a minimum follow-up of one-year underwent case note review. RESULTS: Between 2015 and 2017 613 clavicle fractures were managed through clinic. 347 were middle third (56%), 75% were male, mean age 41(range16-97). Forty-one middle third clavicle fracture patients underwent early fixation. Eleven patients required late fixation for symptomatic delayed, non- or malunion, 6 for symptomatic non-unions and 1 was a symptomatic malunion. For displaced fractures the early operative rate was 17.8%, and symptomatic non/malunion rate was 3.2%. This led to a total operative rate of 21%. CONCLUSION: A protocol for managing clavicle fractures has demonstrated an effective management of these injuries. It is cost-effective reducing the number of patients with displaced fractures requiring fixation with a fixation rate of 21% whilst reducing the rate of symptomatic non- and malunion (3.2%). The management pathway is simple and could be introduced into any orthopaedic outpatient department with ease.

Proximity of Axillary Nerve During Cortical Button Repair of Pectoralis Major Tendon Rupture.

BACKGROUND: Rupture of the pectoralis major (PM) tendon is a rare but severe injury. Several techniques have been described for PM fixation, including a transosseus technique, placing cortical buttons at the superior, middle and inferior PM tendon insertion points. The present cadaveric study investigates the proximity of the posterior branch of the axillary nerve to the drill positions for transosseus PM tendon repair. METHODS: Twelve cadaveric shoulders were used. The axillary nerve was marked during a preparatory dissection. Drills were passed through the humerus at the superior, middle and inferior insertions of the PM tendon and the drill bits were left in situ. The distance between these and each axillary nerve was measured using computed tomography. RESULTS: The superior drill position was in closest proximity to the axillary nerve (three-dimensional distance range 0-18.01 mm, mean 10.74 mm, 95% confidence interval 7.24 mm to 14.24 mm). The middle PM insertion point was also very close to the nerve. CONCLUSIONS: Caution should be used when performing bicortical drilling of the humerus, especially when drilling at the superior border of the PM insertion. We describe 'safe' and 'danger' zones for the positioning of cortical buttons through the humerus reflecting the risk posed to the axillary nerve.