Abstract
Aims
Hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) are often the preferred forms of treatment for patients with atraumatic avascular necrosis of the humeral head when conservative treatment fails. Little has been reported about the survival of HA and TSA for this indication. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in revision rates between HA and TSA in these patients, to determine whether one of these implants has a superior survival and may be a better choice in the treatment of this condition.
Methods
Data from 280 shoulders with 159 primary HAs and 121 TSAs, which were undertaken in patients with atraumatic avascular necrosis of the humeral head between January 2014 and January 2023 from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI), were included. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression analysis were undertaken.
Results
Within four years of follow-up, a total of 15 revisions were required, involving seven HAs (4%) and eight TSAs (7%). This difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.523). Two HAs were revised because of progressive glenoid erosion, and three TSAs were revised for loosening of the glenoid component. The cumulative percentages of revision of HA and TSA were 6% and 8%, respectively (HR 1.1 (95% CI 0.5 to 2.7)).
Conclusion
We found no significant difference in short- to mid-term implant survival between the use of a HA and a TSA in the treatment of atraumatic avascular necrosis of the humeral head, without significant glenoid wear.
Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2025;107-B(1):97–102.
