Aims

A recent study used the RAND Corporation at University of California, Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) method to develop anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) appropriateness criteria. The purpose of our study was to determine how patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) vary based on appropriateness.

Aims

We sought to compare functional outcomes and survival between non-smokers, former smokers, and current smokers who underwent anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) in a large cohort of patients.

Aims

The aim of this study was to longitudinally compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) up to long-term follow-up, when using cemented keel, cemented peg, and hybrid cage peg glenoid components and the same humeral system.

Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in revision and complication rates, functional outcomes, and radiological outcomes between cemented and press-fit humeral stems in primary anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Materials and Methods. A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted searching for studies that included patients who underwent primary anatomical TSA for primary osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. Results. There was a total of 36 studies with 927 cemented humeral stems and 1555 press-fit stems. The revision rate was 5.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.9 to 7.4) at a mean of 89 months for cemented stems, and 2.4% (95% CI 1.1 to 4.7) at a mean of 40 months for press-fit stems. A priori subgroup analysis to control for follow-up periods demonstrated similar revision rates: 2.3% (95% CI 1.1 to 4.7) for cemented stems versus 1.8% (95% CI 1.4 to 2.9) for press-fit stems. Exploratory meta-regression found that longer follow-up was a moderating variable for revision (p = 0.003). Conclusion. Cement fixation had similar revision rates when compared to press-fit stems at short- to midterm follow-up. Rotator cuff pathology was a prevalent complication in both groups but is likely not related to fixation type. Overall, with comparable revision rates, possible easier revision, and decreased operative time, humeral press-fit fixation may be an optimal choice for primary anatomical TSA in patients with sufficient bone stock. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1107–1114

Aims . Few studies have evaluated the relationship between patients’ pre-operative expectations and the outcome of orthopaedic procedures. Our aim was to determine the effect of expectations on the outcome after primary anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). We hypothesised that patients with greater expectations would have better outcomes. . Patients and Methods. Patients undergoing primary anatomical TSA completed the Hospital for Special Surgery’s Shoulder Expectations Survey pre-operatively. The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Shoulder Activity Scale (SAS), Short-Form-36 (SF-36), and visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, fatigue, and general health scores were also collected pre-operatively and two years post-operatively. Pearson correlations were used to assess the relationship between the number of expectations and the outcomes. Differences in outcomes between those with higher and lower levels of expectations for each expectation were assessed by independent samples t-test. Multivariable linear regression analysis was used to control for potential confounding factors. Results. A total of 67 patients were evaluated two years post-operatively. Most parameters of outcome improved significantly from baseline and most patients were satisfied. A greater number of expectations was associated with a significantly greater improvement in the ASES score (p = 0.02). In the multivariable analysis, a greater number of expectations was an independent predictor of better ASES, VAS and SF-36 scores, as well as improvements in ASES and VAS pain scores (p < 0.05). Greater expectations for many specific expectation questions were significantly associated with better outcomes (p < 0.05). Conclusion. TSA is a successful procedure with significant improvements in outcome, and greater pre-operative expectations are associated with better outcomes. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2017;99-B:1190–6