How To Choose The Best Lateralization And Distalization Of The Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty To Optimize The Clinical Outcome In Cuff Tear Arthropathy.

PURPOSE: Lateralization shoulder angle (LSA) and distalization shoulder angle (DSA) are two parameters that had been described for a better planification of the arthroplasty, but the range of these angles are very wide. The purpose of this study was to investigate the best combination in terms of lateralization and distalization to optimize the outcome of Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty(RTSA) for cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) with a functional deltoid. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study, conducted between 2014 and 2018 at a specialized shoulder unit in Paris, focused on patients exclusively treated with RTSA for CTA, ensuring a minimum follow-up of 1 year. The primary outcome measure was the ASES score. Secondary outcome measures included range of motion and patient-reported outcomes at the final follow-up, such as the Constant score, SSV, SST, and VAS. Optimal RTSA outcomes were delineated by scores surpassing the patient's acceptable symptom state (PASS) for ASES, set in literature at 76. Patients were categorized into two groups based on ASES scores at the last follow-up: those below and those above 76. The capabilities of LSA and DSA to predict the outcome of interest were assessed and the corresponding optimal thresholds for having better outcome were calculated using the Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curve. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were included in the study with a mean age of 74.51 ± 6.79. Correlation analysis revealed significant medium correlation between ASES and both LSA (r = -0.43, p = .001) and DSA (r = 0.39, p = .002). The DSA of patients with ASES > 76 was 48.55 ± 12.44 with an IQR of 39.5 - 57.5, as compared to lower values for patients with ASES < 76, which was 37.82 ± 9.8 (IQR 32 - 46.5) (p=0.009). Similarly, the LSA of patients with ASES > 76 was 86.43 ± 11.4 (IQR 79.5 - 93.5), as compared to higher values for patients with ASES < 76, which was 100.09 ± 7.63 (IQR 93 - 105.5) (p<0.001). The ROC curve confirmed LSA and DSA as good predictors for the ASES outcome, with AUCs of 0.851 and 0.741, respectively. The optimal LSA should be no more than 90.5° (Se=100%, Sp=67.7%). The optimal DSA should be no less than 37.5° (Se=78.4%, Sp=63.6%). CONCLUSION: The LSA and DSA angle could represent a helpful tool to optimize the clinical outcomes of an adaptable RTSA in CTA with a functional deltoid and a complete passive range of motion.

Complications after reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus nonunion.

BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus nonunion is a challenging complication of fractures that can be treated surgically with either open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). The few studies published on this subject have shown high rates of complications and revision surgery when RTSA has been performed for proximal humerus nonunion. The purpose of this study was to determine the rates of complications and revision of this procedure at our institution, as well as to identify any variables that may impact risks of complications and reoperations. METHODS: A single-institution retrospective review of all patients who underwent RTSA for proximal humerus nonunion between 2005 and 2021 was performed. Nonunion was defined as imaging evidence of lack of union, at least 90 days after the index fracture. Patients with less than 1 year of clinical follow-up were excluded. Fifty patients were included, with the majority being female (78%). The mean age at time of RTSA was 71 (range: 54-86) years and most patients were initially treated nonoperatively (74%). Mean total follow-up was 49 (range: 11-130) months. Demographic and surgical variables were recorded. Primary outcomes were complications and reoperations. Complications were divided into surgical (those directly related to RTSA), or other (those unrelated to RTSA). Secondary outcomes included visual analog scale pain scores and range of motion. RESULTS: A total of 17 shoulders (34%) sustained complications after revision shoulder arthroplasty, with 10 (20%) requiring reoperation. Six patients (12%) sustained dislocations and 5 (10%) had radiographic evidence of humeral loosening. No variables examined, including nonoperative vs. surgical management of the index fracture, prosthesis type, or management of tuberosities, influenced the risk of dislocation. Survivorship free from reoperation at 2 years was 73%. Younger age at time of RTSA and the presence of diabetes mellitus both increased the risk of reoperation significantly (P = .013 and P = .037, respectively). There was a trend towards increased risk of reoperation in patients who were treated with initial ORIF (hazard ratio = 2.95); however, this did not reach statistical significance (P = .088). Three patients (6%) sustained a periprosthetic fracture after a fall. CONCLUSION: RTSA provides improved pain and function for properly selected patients with proximal humerus nonunion. Dislocation, humeral loosening, and reoperation rates remain high when RTSA is performed for nonunion compared to other diagnoses. In this study, younger age and diabetes mellitus increased the odds of reoperation. Every effort must be made to optimize implant stability and humeral component fixation when RTSA is performed for proximal humerus nonunion.

The effect of lateralization and distalization after Grammont-style reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between multiple radiographic measures of lateralization and distalization and clinical outcome scores after a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated all RTSAs performed by the senior author between January 1, 2007, and November 1, 2017. We then evaluated the visual analog scale for pain (VAS pain), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores and complication and reoperation rates at a minimum of 2-year follow-up. We measured preoperative and postoperative (2-week) radiographs for the lateralization shoulder angle (LSA), the distalization shoulder angle (DSA), lateral humeral offset, and the distance from the glenoid to the lateral aspect of the greater tuberosity. A multivariable analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of the postoperative radiographic measurements on final patient-reported outcomes (ASES scores, SST, and VAS pain). RESULTS: The cohort included 216 shoulders from unique patients who had patient-reported outcome scores available at a minimum of 2-year follow-up (average, 4.0 ± 1.9 years) for a total follow-up rate of 70%. In the multivariable models, more lateralization (LSA) was associated with worse final ASES scores -0.52 (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.88, -0.17; P = .004), and more distalization (DSA) was associated with better final ASES scores 0.40 (95% CI: 0.11, 0.69; P = .007). More lateralization (LSA) was associated with worse final SST scores -0.06 (95% CI: -0.11, -0.003; P = .039). Finally, greater distalization (DSA) was associated with lower final VAS pain scores, ratio = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.96, 1.00; P = .021). CONCLUSIONS: Greater distalization and less lateralization are associated with better function and less pain after a Grammont-style RTSA. When using a Grammont-style implant, remaining consistent with Grammont's principles of implant placement will afford better final clinical outcomes.

Trends in the treatment of proximal humerus fractures from 2010 to 2020.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of proximal humerus fractures (PHF) is continuing to rise due to shifts towards a more aged population as well as advancements in surgical treatment options. The purpose of this study is to examine and compare trends in the treatment of PHFs (nonoperative vs. operative; different surgical treatments) across different age groups over the last decade (2010-2020). METHODS: The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database was queried using International Classification of Diseases and Current Procedural Terminology codes to identify all patients presenting with or undergoing surgery for PHF between 2010 and 2020. Treatment trends, demographics, and insurance information were analyzed during the study period. Comparisons were made between operative and nonoperative trends with respect to the number and type of surgeries performed among 3 age groups: ≤49 years, 50-64 years, and ≥65 years. The rate of postoperative complications and reoperations was evaluated and compared among different surgical treatments for patients with a minimum 1-year postoperative follow-up. RESULTS: A total of 92,308 patients with a mean age of 67.8 ± 16.8 years were included. Over the last decade, there was no significant increase in the percentage of PHFs treated with surgery. A total of 15,523 PHFs (16.82%) were treated operatively, and these patients, compared with the nonoperative cohort, were younger (64.9 years vs. 68.4 years, P < .001), more likely to be White (80.2% vs. 74.7%, P < .001), and more likely to have private insurance (41.4% vs. 32.0%, P < .001). For patients ≤49 years old, trends in operative treatment have remained stable with internal fixation (IF) as the most used surgical modality. For patients 50-64 years old, we observed a gradual decline in the use of hemiarthroplasty (HA), with a corresponding increase in the use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), but IF continued to be the most used operative modality. In patients over 65 years, a steep decline in the use of IF and HA was noted during the first half of the decade along with a significant exponential increase in the use of rTSA, which surpassed the use of IF in 2019. Despite the increase in the use of rTSA, no differences in rate of surgical complications were noted between rTSA and IF (χ2 = 0.245, P = .621) or reoperations (χ2 = 0.112, P = .730). CONCLUSION: Nonsurgical treatment remains the mainstay treatment of PHFs. Although there is no increase in the prevalence of operative treatment in patients ≥50 years in the last decade, there is an exponential increase in the use of rTSA with a corresponding decrease in HA and IF, a trend more substantial in patients ≥65 years compared with patients between 50 and 64 years.

Access to shoulder arthroplasty in Australia: A balance of regulation, surveillance, and monitored efficacy to maximize patient outcome and optimum care.

Prosthetic arthroplasty has emerged as a major contributor to the management of shoulder disorders. This paper outlines the situation in Australia regarding the process by which shoulder replacement devices are made available. Although entry of joint replacement devices to the Australian market is relatively unrestricted, they must be first approved by the Therapeutic Goods Administration-based on safety and efficacy-to be legally used. In addition, to obtain a private insurance rebate (Prescribed List) and thus be commercially viable, the Federal Department of Health and Aged Care requires a more stringent benchmark of comparative clinical effectiveness and value for money. The AOANJRR (Australian Orthopaedic Associate National Joint Replacement Registry) records the implantation and possible revision of virtually all (>98%) major joint arthroplasties in Australia and plays an important role in informing surgeons about their implant selection, but also in identifying and highlighting devices with a higher than anticipated rate of revision. Although the increased cost of health care is placing pressure on health care systems around the world, in Australia, access to shoulder arthroplasty remains relatively unrestricted-but carefully controlled and monitored.

Stratification of the minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state after total shoulder arthroplasty by implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex.

BACKGROUND: Clinical significance, as opposed to statistical significance, has increasingly been utilized to evaluate outcomes after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The purpose of this study was to identify thresholds of the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS) for TSA outcome metrics and determine if these thresholds are influenced by prosthesis type (anatomic or reverse TSA), sex, or preoperative diagnosis. METHODS: A prospectively collected international multicenter database inclusive of 38 surgeons was queried for patients receiving a primary aTSA or rTSA between 2003 and 2021. Prospectively, outcome metrics including ASES, shoulder function score (SFS), SST, UCLA, Constant, VAS Pain, shoulder arthroplasty smart (SAS) score, forward flexion, abduction, external rotation, and internal rotation was recorded preoperatively and at each follow-up. A patient satisfaction question was administered at each follow-up. Anchor-based MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated as defined previously overall and according to implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex. The percentage of patients achieving thresholds was also quantified. RESULTS: A total of 5851 total shoulder arthroplasties (TSAs) including aTSA (n = 2236) and rTSA (n = 3615) were included in the study cohort. The following were identified as MCID thresholds for the overall (aTSA + rTSA irrespective of diagnosis or sex) cohort: VAS Pain (-1.5), SFS (1.2), SST (2.1), Constant (7.2), ASES (13.9), UCLA (8.2), SPADI (-21.5), and SAS (7.3), Abduction (13°), Forward elevation (16°), External rotation (4°), Internal rotation score (0.2). SCB thresholds for the overall cohort were: VAS Pain (-3.3), SFS (2.9), SST 3.8), Constant (18.9), ASES (33.1), UCLA (12.3), SPADI (-44.7), and SAS (18.2), Abduction (30°), Forward elevation (31°), External rotation (12°), Internal rotation score (0.9). PASS thresholds for the overall cohort were: VAS Pain (0.8), SFS (7.3), SST (9.2), Constant (64.2), ASES (79.5), UCLA (29.5), SPADI (24.7), and SAS (72.5), Abduction (104°), Forward elevation (130°), External rotation (30°), Internal rotation score (3.2). MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds varied depending on preoperative diagnosis and sex. CONCLUSION: MCID, SCB, and PASS thresholds vary depending on implant type, preoperative diagnosis, and sex. A comprehensive understanding of these differences as well as identification of clinically relevant thresholds for legacy and novel metrics is essential to assist surgeons in evaluating their patient's outcomes, interpreting the literature, and counseling their patients preoperatively regarding expectations for improvement. Given that PASS thresholds are fragile and vary greatly depending on cohort variability, caution should be exercised in conflating them across different studies.

Anatomic or Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty? How Fellowship Training Affects Selection of Arthroplasty Type.

BACKGROUND: While both anatomic (ATSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) have been popularized as a means of treating individuals with degenerative shoulder conditions, the indications for each can vary widely amongst providers. While surgeons with differing fellowship training commonly perform these procedures, it is not understood how fellowship training influences choice of implant. METHODS: A national database was queried to identify surgeons performing anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. For all surgeons who performed more than 10 cases between 2010-2022, fellowship data was individually collected via online search. For each fellowship group, rates of anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty were identified using International Classification of Diseases (ICD) procedural codes. Those undergoing revision arthroplasty and those with a history of fracture, infection, or malignancy were excluded. Primary outcome measures included the proportion of primary and revision ATSA and RTSA by fellowship in addition to the rate of RTSA performed for a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. RESULTS: A total of 131,974 patients met the inclusion criteria and were retained for this study. RTSA increased from 50.1% of all primary shoulder arthroplasty cases in 2011 to 72.0% in 2022. After adjusting for age and comorbidities, Sports Medicine fellowship-trained (Sports) surgeons opted for primary RTSA over ATSA at a significantly higher rate than Shoulder and Elbow fellowship-trained (Shoulder) surgeons and surgeons who completed another type of fellowship or no fellowship (Other). Sports surgeons also chose RTSA more frequently for the diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis compared to Shoulder surgeons. Surgeons in the Other cohort were more likely to perform primary ATSA rather than RTSA in comparison to surgeons in the Shoulder and Sports cohorts. Sports surgeons were responsible for the greatest increase in percentage of all shoulder arthroplasty procedures from 2010-2022 (28.4% to 40.4%) while the Other group decreased by a comparable amount (45.9% to 32.4%) over the same period. CONCLUSION: Surgeons who have completed a Sports Medicine fellowship choose RTSA over ATSA at a higher rate than Shoulder and Elbow surgeons, both for all indications and also for a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Those who have no fellowship training or fellowship training outside of Sports Medicine and Shoulder and Elbow surgery have the highest percentage of ATSA in their arthroplasty practice. Revision anatomic and revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty represents a larger percentage of overall case volume for Shoulder and Elbow surgeons.

Predictive factors influencing internal rotation following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is increasingly used as a treatment modality for various pathologies. The purpose of this review is to identify preoperative risk factors associated with loss of internal rotation (IR) after RTSA. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, and Scopus were queried. The inclusion criteria were as follows: articles in English language, minimum 1-year follow-up postoperatively, study published after 2012, a minimum of 10 patients in a series, RTSA surgery for any indication, and explicitly reported IR. The exclusion criteria were as follows: articles whose full text was unavailable or that were unable to be translated to English language, a follow-up of less than 1 year, case reports or series of less than 10 cases, review articles, studies in which tendon transfers were performed at the time of surgery, procedures that were not RTSA, and studies in which the range of motion in IR was not reported. RESULTS: The search yielded 3792 titles, and 1497 duplicate records were removed before screening. Ultimately, 16 studies met the inclusion criteria with a total of 5124 patients who underwent RTSA. Three studies found that poor preoperative functional IR served as a significant risk factor for poor postoperative IR. Eight studies addressed the impact of subscapularis, with 4 reporting no difference in IR based on subscapularis repair and 4 reporting significant improvements with subscapularis repair. Among studies with sufficient power, BMI was found to be inversely correlated with degree of IR after RTSA. Preoperative opioid use was found to negatively affect IR. Other studies showed that glenoid retroversion, component lateralization, and individualized component positioning affected postoperative IR. CONCLUSIONS: This study found that preoperative IR, individualized implant version, preoperative opioid use, increased body mass index and increased glenoid lateralization were all found to have a significant impact on IR after RTSA. Studies that analyzed the impact of subscapularis repair reported conflicting results.

Does achieving clinically important thresholds after first shoulder arthroplasty predict similar outcomes of the contralateral shoulder?

BACKGROUND: Patients are increasingly undergoing bilateral total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). At present, it is unknown whether success after the first TSA is predictive of success after contralateral TSA. We aimed to determine whether exceeding clinically important thresholds of success after primary TSA predicts similar outcomes for subsequent contralateral TSA. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of a prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty database for patients undergoing bilateral primary anatomic (aTSA) or reverse (rTSA) total shoulder arthroplasty since January 2000 with preoperative and 2- or 3-year clinical follow-up. Our primary outcome was whether exceeding clinically important thresholds in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score for the first TSA was predictive of similar success of the contralateral TSA; thresholds for the ASES score were adopted from prior literature and included the minimal clinically important difference (MCID), the substantial clinical benefit (SCB), 30% of maximal possible improvement (MPI), and the patient acceptable symptomatic state (PASS). The PASS is defined as the highest level of symptom beyond which patients consider themselves well, which may be a better indicator of a patient's quality of life. To determine whether exceeding clinically important thresholds was independently predictive of similar success after second contralateral TSA, we performed multivariable logistic regression adjusted for age at second surgery, sex, BMI, and type of first and second TSA. RESULTS: Of the 134 patients identified that underwent bilateral shoulder arthroplasty, 65 (49%) had bilateral rTSAs, 45 (34%) had bilateral aTSAs, 21 (16%) underwent aTSA/rTSA, and 3 (2%) underwent rTSA/aTSA. On multivariable logistic regression, exceeding clinically important thresholds after first TSA was not associated with greater odds of achieving thresholds after second TSA when success was evaluated by the MCID, SCB, and 30% MPI. In contrast, exceeding the PASS after first TSA was associated with 5.9 times greater odds (95% confidence interval 2.5-14.4, P < .001) of exceeding the PASS after second TSA. Overall, patients who exceeded the PASS after first TSA exceeded the PASS after second TSA at a higher rate (71% vs. 29%, P < .001); this difference persisted when stratified by type of prosthesis for first and second TSA. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who achieve the ASES score PASS after first TSA have greater odds of achieving the PASS for the contralateral shoulder regardless of prostheses type.

The effects of length and width of the stem on proximal humerus stress shielding in uncemented primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: To preserve humeral bone during RTSA, stems have been made shorter and cement avoided whenever possible. However, with the increased use of uncemented RTSA, a phenomenon comparable to the stress shielding of the hip has been described for the proximal humerus. The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of stem length and width on proximal humeral bone resorption after primary uncemented RTSA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The prospective shoulder arthroplasty database of our institution was reviewed for all primary uncemented RTSAs from 2017 to 2020 in osteoarthritis and cuff tear arthropathy cases with > 2-year follow-up. We compared the clinical and the radiographic 2-year outcome of the short and standard length stems of the same prosthesis design. This allowed us to assess the effects of stem length and width with regard to stress shielding. Furthermore, we defined a cut-off value for the filling ratios to prevent stress shielding. RESULTS: Fifty patients were included in the analysis, nineteen were in the short stem group (SHORT) and thirty-one in the standard stem group (STANDARD). After 2 years, SHORT showed a relative Constant Score of 91.8% and STANDARD of 98.3% (p = 0.256). Stress shielding was found in 4 patients (21%) in SHORT and in 16 patients (52%) in STANDARD (p = 0.03); it occurred more frequently in patients with higher humeral filling ratios (p < 0.05). The calculated cut-off to prevent stress shielding was 0.7 (± 0.03) for the metaphyseal and distal filling ratio. CONCLUSION: While short and standard stems for RTSA have good results after 2 years, we found a significant negative effect of higher length and width of the stem with regard to stress shielding. Even though the clinical effects of stress shielding have to be assessed, short stems should be chosen with a filling ratio at the metaphyseal and distal position below 0.7. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE (A RETROSPECTIVE CASE-CONTROL STUDY): III.

Modified notching classification in inverted-bearing and conventional-bearing reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Scapular notching is a common complication of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Although the notching rate has reduced significantly thanks to modifications to the surgical technique and humeral and glenoid components, uncontrollable polyethylene (PE)-induced osteolysis can still occur. In contrast to conventional-bearing (CB-RTSA), inverted-bearing RTSA (IB-RTSA) systems, with PE glenospheres and metal or ceramic humeral liners, avoid PE abrasion through scapulohumeral contact. If present, the resulting notch has a different size and configuration than with CB-RTSA. Thus, a modified notching classification seems reasonable. Even in CB-RTSA, the early stages of notching show a different configuration than implied by the established Nerot-Sirveaux classification; therefore, a modification of the classification system is recommended. METHODS: In a prospective multicentre study, 250 cases underwent IB-RTSA. Of these, 39 died, and 28 were lost to follow-up for other reasons, leaving 183 shoulders for the final follow-up examination at a mean of 120.7 months (range 84.1-172.4 months). In the CB-RTSA group, we retrospectively evaluated radiographs of 59 consecutive patients with a follow-up ranging from 2 to 7 years. We analysed the appearance, evolution over time, and location of bone loss on the scapular neck according to the modified Nerot-Sirveaux classification. RESULTS: In IB-RTSA, notching resulted in a new morphological configuration: In contrast to the Nerot-Sirveaux classification, notching began far from the baseplate as an impression or abrasion of the humeral component in the inferior scapular rim. Due to simultaneous mechanical ablation, the defect gradually enlarged, but usually did not contact the baseplate or extend beyond the inferior peg. No signs of PE-induced osteolysis were found. The notching rate reached 19% after 2 years and approached 36% after 10 years. Most shoulders had grade 0 notching (64%), followed by grade 1 (29%); extensive erosion (grade 4) was not observed. In the CB-RTSA group, a small bony impression or erosion without signs of PE-induced osteolysis was observed medial to the scapular neck, without contact with the metaglene in the early phase, which was similar to the impression of the humeral component in IB-RTSA. The notching rate was 86% for CB-RTSA. CONCLUSIONS: A new classification was developed for IB-RTSA, which corresponds to the pathophysiological processes and is compatible with the existing Nerot-Sirveaux classification. Bone erosion in CB-RTSA is not adequately represented by the established classification in the early stages. For this reason, a supplement to the existing classification is presented. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level 4, Case Series, Treatment Study.

Initial clinical experience with a predictive clinical decision support tool for anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

PURPOSE: Clinical decision support tools (CDSTs) are software that generate patient-specific assessments that can be used to better inform healthcare provider decision making. Machine learning (ML)-based CDSTs have recently been developed for anatomic (aTSA) and reverse (rTSA) total shoulder arthroplasty to facilitate more data-driven, evidence-based decision making. Using this shoulder CDST as an example, this external validation study provides an overview of how ML-based algorithms are developed and discusses the limitations of these tools. METHODS: An external validation for a novel CDST was conducted on 243 patients (120F/123M) who received a personalized prediction prior to surgery and had short-term clinical follow-up from 3 months to 2 years after primary aTSA (n = 43) or rTSA (n = 200). The outcome score and active range of motion predictions were compared to each patient's actual result at each timepoint, with the accuracy quantified by the mean absolute error (MAE). RESULTS: The results of this external validation demonstrate the CDST accuracy to be similar (within 10%) or better than the MAEs from the published internal validation. A few predictive models were observed to have substantially lower MAEs than the internal validation, specifically, Constant (31.6% better), active abduction (22.5% better), global shoulder function (20.0% better), active external rotation (19.0% better), and active forward elevation (16.2% better), which is encouraging; however, the sample size was small. CONCLUSION: A greater understanding of the limitations of ML-based CDSTs will facilitate more responsible use and build trust and confidence, potentially leading to greater adoption. As CDSTs evolve, we anticipate greater shared decision making between the patient and surgeon with the aim of achieving even better outcomes and greater levels of patient satisfaction.

Characterizing moment arms of the coracobrachialis and short head of biceps in native shoulders and after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty during elevation and rotation: a modeling study.

BACKGROUND: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) alters the line of action of muscles around the glenohumeral joint. The effects of these changes have been well characterized for the deltoid, but there is limited information regarding the biomechanical changes to the coracobrachialis (CBR) and short head of biceps (SHB). In this biomechanical study, we investigated the changes to the moment arms of the CBR and SHB due to RTSA using a computational model of the shoulder. METHODS: The Newcastle Shoulder Model, a pre-validated upper-extremity musculoskeletal model, was used for this study. The Newcastle Shoulder Model was modified with bone geometries obtained from 3-dimensional reconstructions of 15 nondiseased shoulders, constituting the native shoulder group. The Delta XTEND prosthesis, with a glenosphere diameter of 38 mm and polyethylene thickness of 6 mm, was virtually implanted in all the models, creating the RTSA group. Moment arms were measured using the tendon excursion method, and muscle length was calculated as the distance between the muscle's origin and insertion points. These values were measured during 0°-150° of abduction, forward flexion, scapular-plane elevation, and -90° to 60° of external rotation-internal rotation with the arm at 20° and 90° of abduction. Statistical comparisons between the native and RTSA groups were analyzed using 1-dimensional statistical parametric mapping (spm1D). RESULTS: Forward flexion moment arms showed the greatest increase between the RTSA group (CBR, 25.3 ± 4.7 mm; SHB, 24.7 ± 4.5 mm) and native group (CBR, 9.6 ± 5.2 mm; SHB, 10.2 ± 5.2 mm). The CBR and SHB were longer in the RTSA group by maximum values of 15% and 7%, respectively. Both muscles had larger abduction moment arms in the RTSA group (CBR, 20.9 ± 4.3 mm; SHB, 21.9 ± 4.3 mm) compared with the native group (CBR, 19.6 ± 6.6 mm; SHB, 20.0 ± 5.7 mm). Abduction moment arms occurred at lower abduction angles in the RTSA group (CBR, 50°; SHB, 45°) than in the native group (CBR, 90°; SHB, 85°). In the RTSA group, both muscles had elevation moment arms until 25° of scapular-plane elevation motion, whereas in the native group, the muscles only had depression moment arms. Both muscles had small rotational moment arms that were significantly different between RTSA and native shoulders during different ranges of motion. CONCLUSION: Significant increases in elevation moment arms for the CBR and SHB were observed in RTSA shoulders; these increases were most pronounced during abduction and forward elevation motions. RTSA also increased the lengths of these muscles.

Why is female gender associated with poorer clinical outcomes after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty?

INTRODUCTION: There is a lack of gender-specific research after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Although previous studies have documented worse outcomes in women, a more thorough understanding of why outcomes may differ is needed. We therefore asked: (1) Are there gender-specific differences in preoperative and postoperative clinical scores, complications, surgery-related parameters, and demographics? (2) Is female gender an independent risk factor for poorer clinical outcomes after RTSA? (3) If so, why is female gender associated with poorer outcomes after RTSA? MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2005 and 2019, 987 primary RTSAs were performed in our institution. After exclusion criteria were applied, data of 422 female and 271 male patients were analyzed. Clinical outcomes (absolute/relative Constant Score [a/rCS] and Subjective Shoulder Value [SSV]), complications (intra- and/or postoperative fracture, loosening), surgery-related parameters (indication, implant-related characteristics), and demographics (age, gender, body mass index, and number of previous surgeries) were evaluated. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were analyzed (critical shoulder angle, deltoid-tuberosity index, reverse shoulder angle, lateralization shoulder angle, and distalization shoulder angle). RESULTS: Preoperative clinical scores (aCS, rCS, SSV, and pain level) and postoperative clinical outcomes (aCS and rCS) were significantly worse in women. However, the improvement between preoperative and postoperative outcomes was significantly higher in female patients for rCS (P = .037), internal rotation (P < .001), and regarding pain (P < .001). Female patients had a significantly higher number of intraoperative and postoperative fractures (24.9% vs. 11.4%, P < .001). The proportion of female patients with a deltoid-tuberosity index <1.4 was significantly higher than males (P = .01). Female gender was an independent negative predictor for postoperative rCS (P = .047, coefficient -0.084) and pain (P = .017, coefficient -0.574). In addition to female sex per se being a predictive factor of worse outcomes, females were significantly more likely to meet 2 of the 3 most significant predictive factors: (1) significantly worse preoperative clinical scores and (2) higher rate of intra- and/or postoperative fractures. CONCLUSIONS: Female sex is a very weak, but isolated, negative predictive factor that negatively affects the objective clinical outcome (rCS) after RTSA. However, differences did not reach the minimal clinically important difference, and it is not a predictor for the subjective outcome (SSV). The main reason for the worse outcome in female patients seems to be a combination of higher preoperative disability and higher incidence of fractures. To improve the outcome of women, all measures that contribute to the reduction of perioperative fracture risk should be used.

Two-year clinical outcomes and complication rates in anatomic and reverse shoulder arthroplasty implanted with Exactech GPS intraoperative navigation.

INTRODUCTION: We compared the 2-year clinical outcomes of both anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA and RTSA) using intraoperative navigation compared to traditional positioning techniques. We also examined the effect of glenoid implant retroversion on clinical outcomes. HYPOTHESIS: In both ATSA and RTSA, computer navigation would be associated with equal or better outcomes with fewer complications. Final glenoid version and degree of correction would not show outcome differences. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A total of 216 ATSAs and 533 RTSAs were performed using preoperative planning and intraoperative navigation with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Matched cohorts (2:1) for age, gender, and follow-up for cases without intraoperative navigation were compared using all standard shoulder arthroplasty clinical outcome metrics. Two subanalyses were performed on navigated cases comparing glenoids positioned greater or less than 10° of retroversion and glenoids corrected more or less than 15°. RESULTS: For ASTA, no statistical differences were found between the navigated and non-navigated cohorts for postoperative complications, glenoid implant loosening, or revision rate. No significant differences were seen in any of the ATSA outcome metrics besides higher internal and external rotation in the navigated cohort. For RTSA, the navigated cohort showed an ARR of 1.7% (95% CI 0%, 3.4%) for postoperative complications and 0.7% (95% CI 0.1%, 1.2%) for dislocations. No difference was found in the revision rate, glenoid implant loosening, acromial stress fracture rates, or scapular notching. Navigated RTSA patients demonstrated significant improvements over non-navigated patients in internal rotation, external rotation, maximum lifting weight, the Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Constant, and Shoulder Arthroplasty Smart (SAS) scores. For the navigated subcohorts, ATSA cases with a higher degree of final retroversion showed significant improvement in pain, Constant, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), SST, University of California-Los Angeles shoulder score (UCLA), and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) scores. No significant differences were found in the RTSA subcohort. Higher degrees of version correction showed improvement in external rotation, SST, and Constant scores for ATSA and forward elevation, internal rotation, pain, SST, Constant, ASES, UCLA, SPADI, and SAS scores for RTSA. CONCLUSION: The use of intraoperative navigation shoulder arthroplasty is safe, produces at least equally good outcomes at 2 years as standard instrumentation does without any increased risk of complications. The effect of final implant position above or below 10° of glenoid retroversion and correction more or less than 15° does not negatively impact outcomes.

Discordance between patient-reported and objectively measured internal rotation after reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) partly relies on restoring functional internal rotation (IR). Although postoperative assessment of IR includes objective appraisal by the surgeon and subjective report from the patient, these evaluations may not vary together uniformly. We assessed the relationship between objective, surgeon-reported assessments of IR and subjective, patient-reported ability to perform IR-related activities of daily living (IRADLs). METHODS: Our institutional shoulder arthroplasty database was queried for patients undergoing primary RSA with a medialized-glenoid lateralized-humerus design between 2007-2019 and minimum 2-year follow-up. Patients who were wheelchair bound or had a preoperative diagnosis of infection, fracture, and tumor were excluded. Objective IR was measured to the highest vertebral level reached with the thumb. Subjective IR was reported based on patients' rating (normal, slightly difficult, very difficult, or unable) of their ability to perform 4 IRADLs (tuck in shirt with hand behind back, wash back or fasten bra, personal hygiene, and remove object from back pocket). Objective IR was assessed preoperatively and at latest follow-up and reported as median and interquartile ranges. RESULTS: A total of 443 patients were included (52% female) at a mean follow-up of 4.4 ± 2.3 years. Objective IR improved pre- to postoperatively from L4-L5 (buttocks to L1-L3) to L1-L3 (L4-L5 to T8-T12) (P < .001). Preoperatively reported IRADLs of "very difficult" or "unable" significantly decreased postoperatively for all IRADLs (P ≤ .004) except those unable to perform personal hygiene (3.2% vs. 1.8%, P > .99). The proportions of patients who improved, maintained, and lost objective and subjective IR was similar between IRADLs; 14%-20% improved objective IR but lost or maintained subjective IR and 19%-21% lost or maintained the same objective IR but improved subjective IR depending on the specific IRADL assessed. When ability to perform IRADLs improved postoperatively, objective IR also increased (P < .001). In contrast, when subjective IRADLs worsened postoperatively, objective IR did not significantly worsen for 2 of 4 IRADLs assessed. When examining patients who reported no change in ability to perform IRADLs pre- vs. postoperatively, statistically significant increases in objective IR were found for 3 of 4 IRADLs assessed. CONCLUSIONS: Objective improvement in IR parallels improvements in subjective functional gains uniformly. However, in patients with worse or equivalent IR, the ability to perform IRADLs postoperatively does not uniformly correlate with objective IR. When attempting to elucidate how surgeons can ensure patients will have sufficient IR after RSA, future investigations may need to use patient-reported ability to perform IRADLs as the primary outcome measure rather than objective measures of IR.

Survivorship analysis of revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The expansion of indications for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has resulted in a rapid increase in the incidence of subsequent revision procedures. The purpose of this study was to identify the incidence and risk factors for re-revision shoulder arthroplasty after first revision RTSA. METHODS: We retrospectively queried our institutional shoulder arthroplasty database of prospectively collected data from 2003 to 2019. To assess revision implant survival, patients were censored on the date of re-revision surgery or, if the revision arthroplasty was not revised, at the most recent follow-up or their date of death. Patients with a prior infection, concern for infection at the time of revision, antibiotic spacer, or oncologic indication for primary arthroplasty were excluded. A total of 186 revision RTSAs were included, with 32 undergoing re-revision shoulder arthroplasty. The Kaplan-Meier method and bivariate Cox regression were used to assess the relationship of patient and surgical characteristics on implant survivorship. Multivariate Cox regression was performed to identify independent predictors of re-revision. RESULTS: Re-revision shoulder arthroplasty was most commonly performed for instability (34%), infection (28%), and glenoid loosening (19%). Overall re-revision rates at 6 months (7%), 1 year (9%), and 2 years (13%) were relatively low; however, the rate of re-revision increased at 5 years (35%). Men underwent re-revision more often than women within the first 6 months after revision RTSA (12% vs. 2%; P = .025), but not thereafter. On multivariate analysis, increased estimated blood loss was associated with a greater risk of undergoing re-revision shoulder arthroplasty (hazard ratio: 41.16 [3.34-506.50]; P = .004). CONCLUSION: The rate of re-revision after revision RTSA is low in the first 2 years postoperatively (13%) but increases to 35% at 5 years. Increased estimated blood loss, which may reflect greater operative complexity, was identified as a risk factor that may confer an increased chance of re-revision after revision RTSA. Knowledge of risk factors for re-revision after revision RTSA can aid surgeons and patients in preoperative counseling.

Clinical and radiological outcomes in lateralized versus nonlateralized and distalized glenospheres in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND: Lateralization in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has been used to theoretically offer the potential benefits of reduced scapular notching rates and improved stability and range of motion (ROM), particularly external rotation. The aim of this study was to compare ROM and clinical and radiographic outcomes between patients who underwent RTSA with a lateralized vs. a nonlateralized and distalized glenosphere. METHODS: A single-surgeon randomized control trial was conducted comparing 27 patients with a lateralized glenosphere and 26 patients with a nonlateralized and distalized glenosphere. A total of 66 patients were enrolled, 2 patients died before 2-year follow-up, 4 patients withdrew from the study, and 7 patients were lost to follow-up. All patients in the lateralized group received 6 mm of lateralization through the glenosphere. Participants represented a population presenting to an orthopedics sports medicine clinic with any indication for RTSA including revision arthroplasty. Patients completed preoperative and routine postoperative functional outcome measures 3, 6, 12, and a minimum of 24 months postoperatively, including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Upper Extremity, and Activities of Daily Living Requiring Active External and Internal Rotation assessments. Patients were also evaluated with ROM and radiographic measurements. The primary outcome of interest in this study was ROM, particularly external rotation. RESULTS: At 2-year follow-up, both groups had significant improvement in their American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Physical Function Upper Extremity, and Activities of Daily Living Requiring Active External and Internal Rotation scores with no significant difference observed between the groups. There were no statistically significant differences in incidence of scapular notching or acromial stress fractures. ROM in both groups improved significantly at their 2-year assessment with the only exception to this being external rotation at 90° of abduction in the nonlateralized and distalized group (39° ± 31° vs. 48° ± 24°, P = .379). CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of glenosphere lateralization status, patients in both groups had significant improvement in functional outcome scores and ROM, and there were no significant differences observed between the groups at 2-year follow-up. Longer follow-up is needed to determine the effect of implant design on late complications, long-term outcomes, and implant retention.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty with preservation of the rotator cuff for primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis has similar outcomes to anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse shoulder arthroplasty for cuff arthropathy.

INTRODUCTION: Indications for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have expanded to include individuals with intact rotator cuffs such as patients with severe glenoid deformity or with concern of future rotator cuff insufficiency. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of RSA with an intact rotator cuff to RSA for cuff arthropathy and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). We hypothesized that outcomes of RSA with an intact rotator cuff would be comparable to RSA for cuff arthropathy and TSA but with diminished range of motion (ROM) compared with TSA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients at one institution who underwent RSA and TSA between 2015 and 2020 with minimum 12-month follow-up were identified. RSA with preservation of the rotator cuff (+rcRSA) was compared to RSA for cuff arthropathy (-rcRSA) and anatomic TSA (TSA). Demographics and glenoid version/inclination were obtained. Pre- and postoperative ROM; patient-reported outcomes including visual analog scale (VAS), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) scores; and complications were obtained. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients underwent +rcRSA, 69 underwent -rcRSA, and 93 underwent TSA. There were more women in the +rcRSA cohort (75.8%) than in the -rcRSA (37.7%, P = .001) and TSA (37.6%, P = .001) cohorts. Mean age of the +rcRSA cohort (71.1) was greater than that of TSA (66.0, P = .021) but similar to that of -rcRSA (72.4, P = .237). Glenoid retroversion was greater in +rcRSA (18.2°) compared with -rcRSA (10.5°, P = .011) but was similar to TSA (14.7°; P = .244). Postoperatively, there were no differences in VAS or ASES between +rcRSA vs. -rcRSA and +rcRSA vs. TSA. SSV was lower in +rcRSA (83.9) compared with -rcRSA (91.8, P = .021), but was similar to TSA (90.5, P = .073). Similar ROM was achieved in forward flexion, external rotation, and internal rotation at final follow-up between +rcRSA and -rcRSA, but TSA had greater external rotation (44° vs. 38°, P = .041) and internal rotation (6.5° vs. 5.0°, P = .001) compared with +rcRSA. There were no differences in complication rates. DISCUSSION: At short-term follow-up, preservation of the rotator cuff in RSA demonstrated similarly excellent outcomes and low complication rates compared with RSA with a deficient rotator cuff and TSA, except for slightly lower internal and external rotation compared with TSA. Although multiple factors deserve consideration when choosing between RSA and TSA, RSA with preservation of the posterosuperior cuff is a viable treatment option for glenohumeral osteoarthritis, particularly in patients with severe glenoid deformity or those at risk for future rotator cuff insufficiency.

Results after primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty with and without subscapularis repair: a prospective-randomized trial.

INTRODUCTION: Indications for reverse shoulder arthroplasties (rTSA) have increased since their development by Paul Grammont in 1985. Prosthesis design was enhanced over time, but the management of the tendon of the M. subscapularis (SSC-tendon) in primary rTSA is still a controversial subject with regard to perform a refixation or not. METHODS: 50 patients were randomized in a refixation group (A) and a non-refixation-group (B) of the SSC-tendon in a double-blinded fashion. SSC-function was assessed at baseline before surgery, such as 3 and 12 months after surgery. Constant-Murley-Shoulder Score (CS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score (ASES), strength, range of motion (ROM), and pain on numeric rating scale (NRS) were measured in all examinations. An ultrasound examination of the shoulder was performed for evaluation of subscapularis tendon integrity at 3 and 12 month follow-up visits. Pain was evaluated on NRS via phone 5 days after surgery. Surgery was performed by a single experienced senior surgeon in all patients. RESULTS: Patients with a refixation of the SSC-tendon and primary rTSA had improved internal rotation [40° (20°-60°) vs. 32° (20°-45°); p = 0.03] at 12 months of follow-up. Additionally, the A-group had increased CS [74 (13-90) vs. 69.5 (40-79); p = 0.029] 1 year after surgery. Results were strengthened by subgroup analysis of successful refixation in ultrasound examination vs. no refixation. No differences were seen in ASES and NRS 1 year after rTSA. CONCLUSION: SSC-tendon repair in rTSA improves CS and internal rotation 12 months after surgery.