In Australia nearly two-thirds of arthroplasty procedures are performed in the private setting, which is disproportionate to the dimensioning 43.5% of the population with private health cover. The rapid growth of shoulder arthroplasty surgery will be absorbed by both private and public sectors. This study aimed to assess the influence of healthcare setting on elective shoulder arthroplasty outcomes, defined by revision rate, and functional measures. Data was collected on all primary procedures performed from 2004 – 2019 within a regional area of Victoria, Australia. Patients were categorised into private or public settings. Trauma cases for acute proximal humerus fractures were excluded. The primary outcome of revision surgery was recorded as a cumulative percentage, and survival analysis conducted to calculate a hazard ratio (HR). Functional outcomes were measured through range-of-motion (ROM) and multiple validated patient-reported-outcome-measures (PROMs). 458 patients were identified in the study: 290 private and 168 public. There was no difference in the revision rate (3.8% private, 4.8% public), with an adjusted HR of 1.25 (p=0.66) for public compared to private. Baseline and post-operative functional measures were significantly greater in the private setting for ROMs and PROMs analysis, in particular post-operative QuickDASH (15.9±14.7 to 32.7±23.5; p<0.001) and Oxford Shoulder Score (42.6±6.3 to 35.7±11.2; p<0.001). However, there was no significant difference for any of the functional measures in the amount of change from baseline to 12-months between settings. Although healthcare setting does not appear to influence revision rate for shoulder arthroplasty, clear differences were demonstrated for functional measures both pre and post operatively. This may be attributed to factors such as access to perioperative rehabilitation and should be an area to target future investigations

Shoulder replacement surgery is a well-established orthopaedic procedure designed to significantly enhance patients’ quality of life. However, the prevailing preoperative admission practices within our tertiary shoulder surgery unit involve a two-stage group and save testing process, necessitating an admission on the evening before surgery. This protocol may unnecessarily prolong hospital stays without yielding substantial clinical benefits. The principal aim of our study is to assess the necessity of conducting two preoperative group and save blood tests and to evaluate the requirement for blood transfusions in shoulder arthroplasty surgeries. A secondary objective is to reduce hospital stay durations and the associated admission costs for patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty. We conducted a retrospective observational study covering the period from 1st January 2023 to 31st August 2023, collecting data from shoulder arthroplasty procedures across three hospitals within the Aneurin Bevan University Health Board. Our analysis included 21 total shoulder replacement cases and 13 reverse shoulder replacement cases. Notably, none of the patients required postoperative blood transfusions. The mean haemoglobin drop observed was 14 g/L for total shoulder replacements and 15 g/L for reverse shoulder replacements. The mean elective admission duration was 2.4 nights for total shoulder replacements and 2 nights for reverse shoulder replacements. Our data indicated that hospital stays were extended by one night primarily due to the preoperative group and save blood tests. In light of these findings, we propose a more streamlined admission process for elective shoulder replacement surgery, eliminating the need for the evening-before-surgery group and save testing. Hospital admissions in these units incur a cost of approximately £500 per night, while the group and save blood tests cost around £30 each. This revised admission procedure is expected to optimise the use of healthcare resources and improve patient satisfaction without compromising clinical care

Complications such as implant loosening, infection, periprosthetic fracture or instability may lead to revision arthroplasty procedures. There is limited literature comparing single-stage and two-stage revision shoulder arthroplasty. This study aims to compare clinical outcomes and cost benefit between single-stage and two-stage revision procedures. Thirty-one revision procedures (mean age 72+/-7, 15 males and 16 females) performed between 2016 and 2021 were included (27 revision RSA, 2 revision TSA, 2 failed ORIFs). Two-stage procedures were carried out 4-6 weeks apart. Single-stage procedures included debridement, implant removal and washout, followed by re-prep, re-drape and reconstruction with new instrumentations. Clinical parameters including length of stay, VAS, patient satisfaction was recorded preoperatively and at mean 12-months follow up. Cost benefit analysis were performed. Seven revisions were two-stage procedures and 24 were single-stage procedures. There were 5 infections in the two-stage group vs 14 in the single-stage group. We noted two cases of unstable RSA and 8 other causes for single-stage revision. Majority of the revisions were complex procedures requiring significant glenoid and/or humeral allografts and tendon transfers to compensate for soft tissue loss. No custom implants were used in our series. Hospital stay was reduced from 41+/-29 days for 2-stage procedures to 16+/-13 days for single-stage (p<0.05). VAS improved from 9+/-1 to 2+/-4 for two-stage procedures and from 5+/-3 to 1+/-2 for single-stages. The average total cost of hospital and patient was reduced by two-thirds. Patient satisfaction in the single-stage group was 43% which was comparable to the two-stage group. All infections were successfully treated with no recurrence of infection in our cohort of 31 patients. There was no instability postoperatively. 3 patients had postoperative neural symptoms which resolved within 6 months. Single-stage procedures for revision shoulder arthroplasty significantly decrease hospital stay, improve patients’ satisfaction, and reduced surgical costs

Aims. To report the rate of early revision (within two years) after shoulder arthroplasty and identify any patient, disease or prosthesis factors that may be associated with these early failures. Methods. The AOA National Joint Replacement Registry has recorded 7113 shoulder arthroplasty procedures up to December 2009. Data recorded includes diagnosis, patient demographics and prosthesis details. The main outcome of this analysis was the time to first revision of all primary shoulder arthroplasty recorded by the Registry. The cumulative per cent revision (CPR) of shoulder arthroplasty procedures was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazard models were used to test significance between groups. Results. The CPR (95% CI) at two years for all diagnosis was 5.2 (3.1, 8.7) for hemi-resurfacing arthroplasty, 4.0 (2.9, 5.6) for hemiarthroplasty, 4.1 (3.1, 5.3) for conventional total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and 4.0 (3.0, 5.2) for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (reverse TSA). Neither patient age nor sex were shown to affect the rate of revision for conventional and reverse TSA performed for osteoarthritis. The use of an uncemented conventional TSR performed for osteoarthritis is associated with a higher rate of revision when compared with cemented TSR (HR 4.71 (1.43, 15.45)) and hybrid TSR using a cemented glenoid component (HR 2.48 (1.45, 4.24)). Both the Univers 3D conventional total shoulder replacement prosthesis (adjusted HR 3.8 (1.52, 9.50) p< 0.01) and the SMR/SMR reverse total shoulder replacement (adjusted HR 2.0 (1.15, 3.28) p=0.01) were prosthesis identified by the Registry as having a significantly higher rate of revision compared to all other prosthesis in the same class. Conclusions. The Registry has identified an increased early rate of revision with the use of uncemented convention TSR. Two types of prosthesis were identified as having a higher than anticipated rate of revision compared to all other prosthesis in the same class

There remains to be substantial debate on the best treatment of the infected shoulder arthroplasty. Infection after shoulder arthroplasty is an uncommon but devastating complication with a reported incidence from 0 to 4%. The most common organism responsible for infection following rotator cuff surgery, instability surgery, ORIF proximal humerus fractures, and shoulder arthroplasty is Prop. Acnes. A thorough history is important because many patients have a history of difficulty with wound healing or drainage. Prop. Acnes typically does not start to grow until day 5, therefore it is critical to keep cultures a minimum of 10 to 14 days. Diagnosis can be difficult, particularly among patients undergoing revision surgery. The majority of patients with a low grade infection do not have overt signs of infection such as erythema or sinus tracts. Preoperative lab values as well as intraoperative pathology have been shown to be unreliable in predicting who will have positive cultures at the time of revision surgery. There are a number of options for treating a patient with a post-operative infection. Critical variables include the timing of infection, status of the host, the specific organism, status of implant fixation, and the status of the rotator cuff and deltoid. One of the most frequently employed options for treating the infected shoulder arthroplasty is two-stage re-implantation. However, the rate of complications with this technique as well as residual infection remains high

In reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), a high complication rate is noted in the international literature (24.7%), and limited local literature is available. The complications in our developing health system, with high HIV, tuberculosis and metabolic syndrome prevalence may be different from that in developed health systems where the literature largely emanates from. The aim of this study is to describe the complications and complication rate following RSA in a South African cohort. An analytical, cross-sectional study was done where all patients’ who received RSA over an 11 year period at a tertiary hospital were evaluated. One-hundred-and-twenty-six primary RSA patients met the inclusion criteria and a detailed retrospective evaluation of their demographics, clinical variables and complication associated with their shoulder arthroplasty were assessed. All fracture, revision and tumour resection arthroplasties were excluded, and a minimum of 6 months follow up was required. A primary RSA complication rate of 19.0% (24/126) was noted, with the most complications occurring after 90 days at 54.2% (13/24). Instability was the predominant delayed complication at 61.5% (8/13) and sepsis being the most common in the early days at 45.5% (5/11). Haematoma formation, hardware failure and axillary nerve injury were also noted at 4.2% each (1/24). Keeping in mind the immense difference in socioeconomical status and patient demographics in a third world country the RSA complication rate in this study correlates with the known international consensus. This also proves that RSA is still a suitable option for rotator cuff arthropathy and glenohumeral osteoarthritis even in an economically constrained environment like South Africa

Patient perceptions regarding the functional outcomes and return to sports after shoulder replacement are often pessimistic, with many patients presenting for shoulder replacement surgery after months or years of avoiding the procedure so they could continue to live the current life they have, despite the increasing pain and dysfunction. Less common, but becoming more frequent, patients present with expectations that they will be able to return to all activities including heavy resistance training, cross-fit, rock climbing, and other strenuous overhead sports. In the past, little information has been available regarding the activities of shoulder arthroplasty patients after surgery. Typically, the boundaries have been set by the surgeon, with many patients cautioned or even prohibited from overhead sports, weight training, or heavy work responsibilities. A typical set of guidelines may include no repetitive overhead sports, except for recreational swimming, and no lifting over 20 pounds. Golf, jogging, hiking and other activities are allowed. The origin of these restricted guidelines and expectations is unknown, but many believe that since the results of shoulder replacements are less favorable in younger patients, it may be due to the overuse or abuse of the shoulder joint that is more typical at a younger age. Others have suggested that common sense prevails and that an artificial joint made of metal and plastic has a finite number of total movements and tolerance to resistance activities, and therefore keeping these activities at a minimum would extend the longevity of the artificial joint. None of these concepts are backed up by evidence-based literature, essentially reflecting the personal bias of the surgeons who care for patients with these problems. Despite all of the sophisticated research, scoring scales, outcome measures, and value-based metrics, the only outcome that really matters is whether the patient can return back to their normal way of life, at home, at work, during sport, or any activity that is important to them. Recent studies of patients who have had joint replacement surgery have revealed that our patients who participated in sports and work activities before surgery have a strong predilection to returning to those activities after successful shoulder replacement. The most common sports that shoulder arthroplasty patients enjoy including golf, swimming, tennis, but may also include many other choices including fitness activities, rowing, skiing, basketball, and softball. As expected, the return to these sports is less for reverse shoulder arthroplasty patients vs. anatomic shoulder arthroplasty patients. In a systematic review, more than 90% of anatomic shoulder replacement patients returned to sport, while 75% of reverse shoulder arthroplasty patients returned to some sporting activity. This may reflect the constraints of the reverse prosthesis, or, quite possibly reflect the typically older age and more sedentary lifestyle of patients who are indicated for reverse shoulder arthroplasty. In addition, if the patient had a preoperative expectation of return to recreational and sports activities as part of their normal way of life, their final results demonstrated better overall outcomes. Shoulder arthroplasty surgeons should be concerned about the outcomes desired by our patients, and the results that provide true value to their lives. We are now more aware of the activities that they are going to return to, whether we recommend restrictions or not

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty is becoming a frequent treatment of choice for patients with shoulder disorders. Complication rates after reverse shoulder arthroplasty may be three-fold that of conventional total shoulder arthroplasty especially in high risk patient populations and diagnoses like revision arthroplasty, fracture sequelae, and severe glenoid bone loss. Complications include component malposition, stiffness, neurological injury, infection, dislocation or instability, acromial or scapular spine fractures, scapular notching, and loosening of implants. Recognition of preoperative risk factors and appropriate 3D planning are essential in optimizing patient outcome and intraoperative success. Failure of reverse shoulder arthroplasty is a significant challenge requiring appropriate diagnosis of the failure mode. The most common neurological injuries involve the brachial plexus and the axillary nerve due to traction, manipulation of the arm, aberrant retractor placement, or relative lengthening of the arm. Intraoperative fractures are relatively uncommon but include the greater tuberosity, acromion, and glenoid. Tuberosity fracture can be repaired intraoperatively with suture techniques, glenoid fractures may be insignificant rim fractures or jeopardise baseplate fixation and require abandoning RSA until glenoid fracture ORIF heals and then a second stage RSA. Periprosthetic infection after RSA ranges from 1 to 10% and may be higher in revision cases and frequently is Propionibacterium acnes and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Dislocation was one of the most common complications after RSA approximately 5% but with increased surgeon experience and prosthetic design, dislocation rates are approaching 1–2%. An anterosuperior deltoid splitting approach has been associated with increased stability as well as subscapularis repair after RSA. Scapular notching is the most common complication after RSA. Notching may be caused by direct mechanical impingement of the humerosocket polyethylene on the scapular neck and from osteolysis from polyethylene wear. Sirveaux classified scapular notching based on the defect size as it erodes behind the baseplate towards the central post. Acromial fractures are infrequent but more common is severely eroded acromions from CTA, with osteoporosis, with excessive lengthening, and with superior baseplate screws that penetrate the scapular spine and create a stress riser. Nonoperative care is the mainstay of acromial and scapular spine fractures. Recognizing preoperative risk factors and understanding component positioning and design is essential to maximizing successful outcomes

Scapular notching is a common problem following reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). This is due to impingement between the humeral polyethylene cup and scapular neck in adduction and external rotation. Various glenoid component strategies have been described to combat scapular notching and enhance impingement-free range of motion (ROM). There is limited data available detailing optimal glenosphere position in RSA with an onlay configuration. The purpose of this study was to determine which glenosphere configurations would maximise impingement free ROM using an onlay RSA prosthesis. A three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) scan of a shoulder with Walch A1, Favard E0 glenoid morphology was segmented using validated software. An onlay RSA prosthesis was implanted and a computer model simulated external rotation and adduction motion of the virtual RSA prosthesis. Four glenosphere parameters were tested; diameter (36mm, 41mm), lateralization (0mm, 3mm, 6mm), inferior tilt (neutral, 5 degrees, 10 degrees), and inferior eccentric positioning (0.5mm, 1.5mm. 2.5mm, 3.5mm, 4.5mm). Eighty-four combinations were simulated. For each simulation, the humeral neck-shaft angle was 147 degrees and retroversion was 30 degrees. The largest increase in impingement-free range of motion resulted from increasing inferior eccentric positioning, gaining 15.0 degrees for external rotation and 18.8 degrees for adduction. Glenosphere lateralization increased external rotation motion by 13. 6 degrees and adduction by 4.3 degrees. Implanting larger diameter glenospheres increased external rotation and adduction by 9.4 and 10.1 degrees respectively. Glenosphere tilt had a negligible effect on impingement-free ROM. Maximizing inferior glenosphere eccentricity, lateralizing the glenosphere, and implanting larger glenosphere diameters improves impingement-free range of motion, in particular external rotation, of an onlay RSA prosthesis. Surgeons’ awareness of these trends can help optimize glenoid component position to maximise impingement-free ROM for RSA. Further studies are required to validate these findings in the context of scapulothoracic motion and soft tissue constraints

Introduction. Clinical decision support tools are software that match the input characteristics of an individual patient to an established knowledge base to create patient-specific assessments that support and better inform individualized healthcare decisions. Clinical decision support tools can facilitate better evidence-based care and offer the potential for improved treatment quality and selection, shared decision making, while also standardizing patient expectations. Methods. Predict+ is a novel, clinical decision support tool that leverages clinical data from the Exactech Equinoxe shoulder clinical outcomes database, which is composed of >11,000 shoulder arthroplasty patients using one specific implant type from more than 30 different clinical sites using standardized forms. Predict+ utilizes multiple coordinated and locked supervised machine learning algorithms to make patient-specific predictions of 7 outcome measures at multiple postoperative timepoints (from 3 months to 7 years after surgery) using as few as 19 preoperative inputs. Predict+ algorithms predictive accuracy for the 7 clinical outcome measures for each of aTSA and rTSA were quantified using the mean absolute error and the area under the receiver operating curve (AUROC). Results. Predict+ was released in November 2020 and is currently in limited launch in the US and select international markets. Predict+ utilizes an interactive graphical user interface to facilitate efficient entry of the preoperative inputs to generate personalized predictions of 7 clinical outcome measures achieved with aTSA and rTSA. Predict+ outputs a simple, patient-friendly graphical overview of preoperative status and a personalized 2-year outcome summary of aTSA and rTSA predictions for all 7 outcome measures to aid in the preoperative patient consultation process. Additionally, Predict+ outputs a detailed line-graph view of a patient's preoperative status and their personalized aTSA, rTSA, and aTSA vs. rTSA predicted outcomes for the 7 outcome measures at 6 postoperative timepoints. For each line-graph, the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) patient-satisfaction improvement thresholds are displayed to aid the surgeon in assessing improvement potential for aTSA and rTSA and also relative to an average age and gender matched patient. The initial clinical experience of Predict+ has been positive. Input of the preoperative patient data is efficient and generally completed in <5 minutes. However, continued workflow improvements are necessary to limit the occurrence of responder fatigue. The graphical user interface is intuitive and facilitated a rapid assessment of expected patient outcomes. We have not found the use of this tool to be disruptive of our clinic's workflow. Ultimately, this tool has positively shifted the preoperative consultation towards discussion of clinical outcomes data, and that has been helpful to guide a patient's understanding of what can be realistically achieved with shoulder arthroplasty. Discussion and Conclusions. Predict+ aims to improve a surgeon's ability to preoperatively counsel patients electing to undergo shoulder arthroplasty. We are hopeful this innovative tool will help align surgeon and patient expectations and ultimately improve patient satisfaction with this elective procedure. Future research is required, but our initial experience demonstrates the positive potential of this predictive tool

Successfully treatment of acute shoulder arthroplasty infections strongly depends on the timing of treatment. The objective of this study is to determine the normalization curve of C-reactive protein (CRP) after shoulder arthroplasty. Prospective study including 63 patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty (46 reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) and 17 total shoulder (TSA)). Mean age 74.1 years old. 25 cuff deficient shoulders, 14 acute fractures, 19 primary gleno-humeral arthritis and 5 fracture sequel were included. Blood samples to determine CRP were obtained before surgery the day of surgery, 24 and 48 hours after surgery and then 6, 8 and 14 days after surgery (data of blood samples was determined based on a previous limited study). Co-morbidities that could interfere CRP were also recorded. Normal value of CRP before surgery (mean 1.28) slightly increases 24 hours after surgery (mean 3.92), reach maximum value at 48 hours after surgery (mean 6.91) and then slowly decreases to normalize at 14 days (6th day mean 3.80, 8th day 2.33 and 14th day 1.08). Normalization curve is not affected by age, diagnosis or type of arthroplasty. CRP after shoulder arthroplasty reaches maximum value at 48h and then slowly decreases to become normal at 14 days. Any deviation from this normalization curve may help in diagnosis and early treatment of acute shoulder arthroplasty infections

Introduction. The use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is becoming increasingly common in the treatment of rotator cuff arthropathy. Standard RSA technique involves medialising the centre of rotation (COR) maximising the deltoid lever arm and compensating for rotator cuff deficiency. However reported complications include scapular notching, prosthetic loosening and loss of shoulder contour. As a result the use of Bony Increased Offset Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty (BIO-RSA) has been gaining in popularity. The BIO-RSA is reported to avoid these complications by lateralising the COR using a modified base plate, longer central post and augmentation with cancellous bone graft harvested from the patients humeral head. Objectives. This study aims to compare the outcome in terms of analgesic effect, function and satisfaction, in patients treated with standard RSA and BIO-RSA. Methods. All cases were performed in a single centre by one of two upper limb consultant orthopaedic surgeons over a consecutive 2-year period. At time of listing for operation, the decision as to whether to undertake a bony-increased offset reverse total shoulder was made. Standard deltopectoral approach was performed. Standard and Bony increased offset Tournier reverse was the implant of choice (BIO-RSA). All patients underwent a standardised rehabilitation programme. Standard follow up was clinical review with radiographs at 2 weeks, 6weeks and 3months. Retrospective data was collected using case notes on patient reported stausfaction and oxford shoulder score, analgesia requirement at final follow up, and final range of movement. Results. A total of 60 patients (65 shoulders) were treated with reverse total shoulder replacements (RSA) within a 2-year period in a single centre for chronic complex shoulder conditions. Mean age at time of intervention was 74.1years (49.3 – 88.7). Mean follow up was 7.1 months (3.4 – 24). Average time to discharge 16.1 months (3.4 – 37.4). 43 patients currently under review. Of the 65 shoulders, 40 underwent BIO-RSA procedures. Indications for surgery were predominantly rotator cuff arthropathy (N=36). Other indications included severe osteoarthritis (N=1) and complex proximal humeral fracture (N=3). The remaining 25 patients treated with standard RSA were similar in terms of indication and basic demographics. In terms of range of movement, outcomes between the two groups were broadly similar. Patients receiving BIO-RSA demonstrated mean active forward flexion of 92.2° (70–120°) and abduction 93.3° (80–120°). The RSA group had mean forward flexion 90.5° (50–130°) and mean abduction 88.6° (40–160°). Both groups had excellent analgesic effect with 92% in each either being completely pain free or requiring only occasional analgesia. The majority of patients were either very satisfied or satisfied with the outcome of the surgery. Mean Oxford shoulder score for the BIO-RSA group was 4.9 (0–13) preoperatively and 43.7 (36–48) postoperatively. The mean RSA pre-operative score was 7.9 (0–19) and postoperatively 40.2(32–48). In total three patients experienced complications; 1 haematoma (BIO-RSA), 1 brachial plexus contusion (BIO-RSA) and 1 deep infection (RSA). Conclusion. If grafting is necessary, the use of BIO-RSA within this centre seems to have comparable results to those undergoing standard RSA. Early results also suggest the Bio-RSA allows earlier improvement and conserves a larger bone stock. These early result are encouraging however a further study with longer follow-up is required

We compared the rate of revision of two classes of primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty, stemmed (aTSA) and stemless (sTSA) undertaken with cemented all polyethylene glenoid components. A large national arthroplasty registry identified two cohort groups for comparison, aTSA and sTSA between 1. st. January 2011 and 31. st. December 2020. A sub-analysis from 1 January 2017 captured additional patient demographics. The cumulative percentage revision (CPR) was determined using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HR) from Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age and gender. Of the 7,533 aTSA procedures, the CPR at 8 years was 5.3% and for 2,567 sTSA procedures was 4.0%. There was no difference in the risk of revision between study groups (p=0.128). There was an increased risk of revision for aTSA and sTSA undertaken with humeral head sizes <44mm (p=0.006 and p=0.002 respectively). Low mean surgeon volume (MSV) (<10 cases per annum) was a revision risk for aTSA (p=0.033) but not sTSA (p=0.926). For primary diagnosis osteoarthritis since 2017, low MSV was associated with an increased revision risk for aTSA vs sTSA in the first year (p=0.048). Conversely, low MSV was associated with a decreased revision risk for sTSA in the first 6 months (p<0.001). Predominantly aTSA was revised for loosening (28.8%) and sTSA for instability/dislocation (40.6%). Revision risk of aTSA and sTSA was associated with humeral head size and mean surgeon volume but not patient characteristics. Inexperienced shoulder arthroplasty surgeons experience lower early revision rates with sTSA in the setting of osteoarthritis. Revision of aTSA and sTSA occurred for differing reasons

The age spectrum for patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty is broadening. Many younger patients now demonstrate shoulder pathology precluding non-arthroplasty reconstruction. The senior population is living longer and “younger”. Therefore, the demands of this patient population to participate in an active lifestyle are growing. Patients with osteoarthritis, cuff tear arthropathy, post-traumatic arthropathy, avascular necrosis, and even forms of inflammatory arthropathy present seeking not only return to simple activities of daily living but the ability to participate in aerobic recreational activities and even work activities which can stretch the limits of shoulder arthroplasty in the physiologic environment of the shoulder. This presentation will provide an overview of patient demands, concerns and activity level following shoulder arthroplasty. We will provide a prospective of allowable, recommended and discouraged activities depending on the underlying source of pathology in the type of arthroplasty implants employed. An overview of our four phases of rehabilitation protocol will be presented focusing on phase four, “work in sports hardening”

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is commonly used to treat patients with rotator cuff tear arthropathy. Loosening of the glenoid component remains one of the principal modes of failure and is the main complication leading to revision. For optimal RSA implant osseointegration to occur, the micromotion between the baseplate and the bone must not exceed a threshold of 150 µm. Excess micromotion contributes to glenoid loosening. This study assessed the effects of various factors on glenoid baseplate micromotion for primary fixation of RSA. A half-fractional factorial experiment design (2k-1) was used to assess four factors: central element type (central peg or screw), central element cortical engagement according to length (13.5 or 23.5 mm), anterior-posterior (A-P) peripheral screw type (nonlocking or locking), and bone surrogate density (10 or 25 pounds per cubic foot [pcf]). This created eight unique conditions, each repeated five times for 40 total runs. Glenoid baseplates were implanted into high- or low-density Sawbones™ rigid polyurethane (PU) foam blocks and cyclically loaded at 60 degrees for 1000 cycles (500 N compressive force range) using a custom designed loading apparatus. Micromotion at the four peripheral screw positions was recorded using linear variable displacement transducers (LVDTs). Maximum micromotion was quantified as the displacement range at the implant-PU interface, averaged over the last 10 cycles of loading. Baseplates with short central elements that lacked cortical bone engagement generated 373% greater maximum micromotion at all peripheral screw positions compared to those with long central elements (p < 0.001). Central peg fixation generated 360% greater maximum micromotion than central screw fixation (p < 0.001). No significant effects were observed when varying A-P peripheral screw type or bone surrogate density. There were significant interactions between central element length and type (p < 0.001). An interaction existed between central element type and level of cortical engagement. A central screw and a long central element that engaged cortical bone reduced RSA baseplate micromotion. These findings serve to inform surgical decision-making regarding baseplate fixation elements to minimize the risk of glenoid loosening and thus, the need for revision surgery

While the definition of “stiffness” after shoulder arthroplasty remains controversial, loss of range of motion in the post-arthroplasty setting can be a disabling functional complication. Fortunately, the incidence of post-operative loss of both active and passive range of motion is relatively less common following shoulder replacement procedures. Certain pre-operative diagnoses (proximal humeral fracture, capsulorraphy arthropathy, revision arthroplasty) are associated with post-operative soft tissue contractures. Certain medical comorbidities (diabetes, inflammatory arthropathy) are associated with periarticular capsular adhesions at the intracellular level. Management of the “stiff” shoulder arthroplasty must account for several confounding variables: . Appropriateness of diagnosis leading to arthroplasty. Humeral and glenoid implants (size, version, hemi vs TSA vs RSA). Bone variables (fracture, bone loss/erosion). Soft tissue variables (rotator cuff, glenohumeral capsule). Patient comorbidities. Techniques for management include soft tissue contracture release (manipulation, arthroscopic, open) and component revision

Shoulder arthroplasty has experienced exponential growth in the past 10–15 years, largely due to improvements in anatomical design, increased application of technology to address various clinical pathology, and improved access to experienced shoulder surgeons. Glenohumeral arthritis has historically been the most common indication for a shoulder replacement, and glenoid wear has been the main concern with regards to longevity of the prosthesis. Attempts to improve glenoid components involve alterations in peg or keel configuration, as well as the introduction of metal backed constructs. Early experience with metal backed components led to very poor results with often catastrophic loosening and destruction of glenoid bone. Proximal humerus fractures are another common indication for a shoulder arthroplasty, and in these cases, tuberosity fixation and healing are the challenge precluding a consistently successful result. More recently, base plate fixation in the setting of a reverse shoulder arthroplasty has come to the forefront as a significant factor. Trabecular metal technology has emerged as a compelling method of enabling powerful bone ingrowth to the surfaces of arthroplasty components. Trabecular metal is composed of tantalum. It is used to form a carbon scaffold which has a modulus between that of cancellous and cortical bone, thus has some flexibility when made into an independent construct. Vapor deposition onto arthroplasty surfaces provides a bone ingrowth surface. There is interest in utilizing trabecular metal for glenoid and tuberosity fixation in particular. Trabecular metal proximal coated stems provide an ingrowth surface for tuberosity fixation in the setting of proximal humerus fractures. Long term results are still pending. Because the metal is much less stiff then other metals, trabecular metal has recently been used along the back of polyethylene glenoids. The original design had a problem with fracture at the base of the pegs. A redesigned component instituting a cruciate design was implemented, and is currently available on a limited release basis with promising early results. The use of trabecular metal on the deep surface of the reverse arthroplasty baseplate and the proximal aspect of the reverse stem has led to successful fixation, allowing cementless fixation of both the humeral and glenoid components. Learning objectives of this presentation include:. Understand the mechanical characteristics of trabecular metal and its bone ingrowth characteristics. Familiarize with currently available prosthetics incorporating trabecular metal technology. Case presentations utilizing trabecular metal coated components

Abstract. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is being increasingly used for complex, displaced fractures of the proximal humerus. The main goal of the current study was to evaluate the functional and radiographic results after primary RSA of three or four-part fractures of the proximal humerus in elderly patients. Between 2012 and 2020, 70 consecutive patients with a recent three- or four-part fracture of the proximal humerus were treated with an RSA. There were 41 women and 29 men, with a mean age of 76 years. The dominant arm was involved in 42 patients (60%). All surgeries were carried out within 21 days. Displaced three-part fracture sustained in 16 patients, 24 had fracture dislocation and 30 sustained a four-part fracture of the proximal humerus. Patients were followed up for a mean of 26 months. The mean postoperative OSS at the end of the follow-up period was 32.4. The mean DASH score was 44.3. Tuberosity non-union occurred in 18 patients (12.6%), malunion in 7 patients (4.9%), heterotopic ossification in 4 patients (2.8%) and scapular notching in one patient. Anatomical reconstruction was achieved in 25 patients (17.5%), the influence of greater tuberosity healing on shoulder function could not be demonstrated. Heterotopic ossification seems to affect OSS and QDASH, we found statistically significant relation between HO and clinical outcomes. Patients with heterotopic ossification had significantly lower postoperative scores on DASH and OSS (P = .0527). Despite expecting good functional outcome with low complication rate after RSA, the functional outcome was irrespective of healing of the tuberosities

Introduction. Reverse shoulder Arthroplasty is a successful treatment for gleno-humeral osteoarthritis. However, components loosening and painful prostheses, related to components wrong positioning, are still a problem for those patients who underwent this kind of surgery. Several new technology has been developed the improve the implant positioning. CT-based intraoperative navigation system is a suitable technology that allow the surgeon to prepare the implant site exactly as planned with preoperative software. Method. Thirty reverse shoulder prostheses were performed at Modena Polyclinic using GPS CT-based intraoperative navigation system (Exactech, Gainsville, Florida). Walch classification was used to assess glenoid type. Planned version and inclination of the glenoid component, planned seating, final version and inclination of the reamer were recorded. Intraoperative and perioperative complication were recorded. Planned positioning was conducted aiming to the maximum seating, avoiding retroversion >10° and superior inclination. Results. Eight patients were male, 22 were female. Mean age was 75 years old (range 58–87). 4 glenoid were type B3, four were B2, 10 cases were B1, 12 case were A1/A2. Posterior or superior augment was used in 15 cases. Mean planned seating was 93%. Mean preoperative version was -7.5±6.9°; Mean planned version was -2±2.8°; Mean intraoperative measured version was -1.9±2.8°; no statistical difference was found between planned and intraoperative version (p=0.16). Mean preoperative inclination was 1.8±6.°; Mean planned inclination was -2.2±2.4°; Mean intraoperative measured inclination was -2.1.9±2.3°; no statistical difference was found between planned and intraoperative version or inclination (respectively p=0.16 and p=0.32). Mean surgical time was 71 minute (range 51–82). Three cases of coracoid ruptures were reported, 1 failure of the system occurred. Discussion. GPS navigation system allows the surgeon to prepare the implant site as planned on Preoperative software in Reverse shoulder arthroplasty, with no statistical difference between planned orientation and intraoperative measured orientation. That means that even in the most difficult cases the surgeon is able to find a good positioning (93% seating)and to replicate it in the operative room. Only one failure of the system occurred, because too much time was passed between CT scan and surgery (9 months). Three coracoid fractures occurred in the first 10 cases: these could be addressed to a lack of confidence with the double lateralization of this prosthesis which increase tensioning on the coracoid and a lack of confidence in tracker positioning, which should be made as proximal as it is possible. Finally, the system needs several improvements to be considered a breakthrough technology, such as humeral component positioning and final control of the implant, but by now is a useful way to improve our surgery, especially in difficult cases

Hypothesis. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty has good mid-term results for rotator cuff deficient arthritic conditions. Methods and Analysis. 103 reverse shoulder arthroplasties were performed in 91 patients from January 2003 to September 2009. Twelve patients had bilateral reverse shoulder arthroplasties. Results. Average clinical follow-up was 13 months (range 3-72 months). There were 38% left and 62% right shoulders. Sixty-eight percent were women and 32% were men. The average age was 72 years (range 47-88 years). Indications included: rotator cuff arthropathies (79%), failed previous hemiarthroplasties and total shoulder arthroplasties (9%), rheumatoid arthritis (5%). Fractures accounted for 7% of cases, including acute 4-part fractures in the elderly, revision of fractures with deficient cuffs, malunion and nonunion cases with deficient cuffs. There was a significant improvement in quality of life. The Constant Score increased by an average of 46 points. 62 radiographs were reviewed. 75% of these showed notching of the inferior glenoid, 53% had notching of the posterior glenoid, 10 % had heterotrophic ossification inferior to the glenoid, and 40% had an inferior glenoid spur. Complications included: 2 dislocations, 1 massive heterotrophic ossification, 3 deep infections, 1 loose glenoid related to a fall, 3 acromial fractures, and 3 scapula spine fractures (all trauma related). Conclusion. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty is a good salvage procedure for cuff deficient arthritic conditions. Clinical mid-term results are good, but notching inferiorly and posteriorly may lead to deterioration over time. Fractures of the scapula appear to originate from either the superior or posterior screws which act as stress risers and an external rotation force of the greater tuberosity against the spine of the scapula in a fall may contribute to these fractures