Shoulder replacements have evolved and current 4th generation implants allow intraoperative flexibility to perform anatomic, reverse, trauma, and revision shoulder arthroplasty. Despite high success rates with shoulder arthroplasty, complication rates high as 10–15% have been reported and progressive glenoid loosening remains a concern. To report medium term outcomes following 4th generation VAIOS® shoulder replacement. We retrospectively analysed prospectively collected data following VAIOS® shoulder arthroplasty performed by the senior author between 2014–2020. This included anatomical (TSR), reverse(rTSR), revision and trauma shoulder replacements. The primary outcome was implant survival (Kaplan-Meier analysis). Secondary outcomes were Oxford Shoulder Scores (OSS), radiological outcomes and complications.Abstract
Objectives
Methods
The incidence of reverse total shoulder replacement (rTSR) implantation is increasing globally, but apprehension exists regarding complications and associated challenges. We retrospectively analysed the senior author's series of rTSR from a tertiary centre using the VAIOS shoulder system, a modular 4th generation implant. We hypothesised that the revision rTSR cohort would have less favourable outcomes and more complications. 114 patients underwent rTSR with the VAIOS system, over 7 years. The primary outcome was implant survival. Secondary outcomes were Oxford shoulder scores (OSS), radiographic analysis (scapular notching, tuberosity osteolysis, and periprosthetic radiolucent lines) and complications.Abstract
Background/Objectives
Methods
Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA), as a primary procedure and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF) have been used to treat complex intra-articular distal humeral fractures in elderly patients. The failure rate after ORIF is high and TEA has often been used as a salvage procedure. Although satisfactory results have been reported after TEA as a primary procedure, there are no publications reporting the results of TEA after failed internal fixation (FIF). In this study we compared the results of patients that had TEA after FIF with those that had had primary arthroplasty (PA). We reviewed the results of 9 consecutive patients who had FIF with 12 patients who had PA. All the operations were performed by one surgeon using the same technique and same prosthesis. Both groups of patients were similar with respect to ages, sex, co-morbidity and hand dominance. The mean follow-up for both groups of patients was 5 years. At final review, patients who had had FIF had a mean Mayo score of 68 and a range of flexion/extension of 90 degrees, there was 1 infection and 1 case of loosening. The PA group had a mean Mayo score of 88 and a range of flexion/extension of 96 degrees, there were no cases of infection or loosening. This study shows the results of TEA are satisfactory either as a PA or after FIF, however the results after PA are significantly better than after FIF.
The aim of this study was to compare the results of physical examination and magnetic resonance arthrography (MRA) in the diagnosis of superior labrum anterior posterior (SLAP) lesions of the shoulder. A review of all patients seen in 2005–2006 with an arthroscopically confirmed SLAP lesion was undertaken (n =22). Prior to surgery all patients had been examined prospectively by an upper limb physiotherapy practitioner and had then undergone MRA. All scans were undertaken and reported upon by an experienced consultant radiologist, specialising in musculo-skeletal conditions. A combination of 4 clinical tests were used to diagnose a SLAP lesion, these being O’Brien’s, pain provocation, bicep load and the crank test. To confirm a SLAP lesion a minimum of 2 of the above tests had to be positive. The sensitivity of each test in isolation and in combination and MRA sensitivity was determined and values statistically analysed for significance. The sensitivity of each isolated test was as follows: O’Brien’s = 82%, pain provocation = 86%, bicep load = 55% and the crank test = 68%. Using a combination of 2 or more positive tests was 95% sensitive, whereas MRA had a sensitivity of 64%. Using the McNemar test there was a statistically significant assosciation between positive clinical testing and negative MRA findings in the same patient (p<
0.05). The results would suggest that it may be advantageous to use a combination of physical tests rather than 1 test in isolation when examining a patient with a suspected SLAP lesion. The study would also suggest that even in the absence of radiological findings, in patients with a relevant history and strongly positive clinical signs, arthroscopic assessment may be indicated.