Between 1978 and 1986, 59 patients received a GSB III elbow prosthesis, six of them in both elbows. Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) was the underlying cause in 51 of the patients and post-traumatic osteoarthritis (PTOA) in eight. Of these, 24 patients (28 prostheses) have since died; two, both operated on bilaterally, had had their implants for more than ten years and had already been assessed for inclusion in the long-term follow-up. Two patients, each with one elbow prosthesis, have been lost to follow-up and three males who are still living (two with PTOA, one with juvenile RA) had their prosthesis removed before ten years had elapsed. The remaining 32 patients (28 RA, 4 PTOA) with 36 GSB III elbows were examined clinically and radiologically after a mean period of 13.5 years. Pain was considerably reduced in 91.6%. Mobility was increased by 37° in those with RA and by 67° in those with PTOA. There were three cases of aseptic loosening and three of deep infection. The main complication was disassembly of the prosthetic component in nine elbows (13.8%). This last group included two patients with postoperative fractures unrelated to the operative technique and one with neuropathic arthritis. Ulnar neuritis occurred in two patients. Since 87.7% of all the GSB III prostheses implanted in this period remained in situ, our results are comparable with those for hip and knee arthroplasty

There is little information about the management of peri-prosthetic fracture of the humerus after total shoulder replacement (TSR). This is a retrospective review of 22 patients who underwent a revision of their original shoulder replacement for peri-prosthetic fracture of the humerus with bone loss and/or loose components. There were 20 women and two men with a mean age of 75 years (61 to 90) and a mean follow-up 42 months (12 to 91): 16 of these had undergone a previous revision TSR. Of the 22 patients, 12 were treated with a long-stemmed humeral component that bypassed the fracture. All their fractures united after a mean of 27 weeks (13 to 94). Eight patients underwent resection of the proximal humerus with endoprosthetic replacement to the level of the fracture. Two patients were managed with a clam-shell prosthesis that retained the original components. The mean Oxford shoulder score (OSS) of the original TSRs before peri-prosthetic fracture was 33 (14 to 48). The mean OSS after revision for fracture was 25 (9 to 31). Kaplan-Meier survival using re-intervention for any reason as the endpoint was 91% (95% confidence interval (CI) 68 to 98) and 60% (95% CI 30 to 80) at one and five years, respectively.

There were two revisions for dislocation of the humeral head, one open reduction for modular humeral component dissociation, one internal fixation for nonunion, one trimming of a prominent screw and one re-cementation for aseptic loosening complicated by infection, ultimately requiring excision arthroplasty. Two patients sustained nerve palsies.

Revision TSR after a peri-prosthetic humeral fracture associated with bone loss and/or loose components is a salvage procedure that can provide a stable platform for elbow and hand function. Good rates of union can be achieved using a stem that bypasses the fracture. There is a high rate of complications and function is not as good as with the original replacement.

We systematically reviewed all the evidence published in the English language on proximal interphalangeal joint (PIPJ) replacement, to determine its effectiveness on the function of the hand and the associated post-operative complications.

Original studies were selected if they reported clinical outcome with a minimum of one year’s follow-up. Quality was assessed using the Cowley systematic review criteria modified for finger-joint replacements. Of 319 articles identified, only five were adequately reported according to our quality criteria; there were no randomised controlled trials. PIPJ replacements had a substantial effect size on hand pain of -23.2 (95% confidence interval (CI) -27.3 to -19.1) and grip strength 1.2 (95% CI -10.7 to 13.1), and a small effect on range of movement 0.2 (95% CI -0.4 to 0.8). A dorsal approach was most successful. Post-operative loosening occurred in 10% (95% CI 3 to 30) of ceramic and 12.5% (95% CI 7 to 21) of pyrocarbon replacements. Post-operative complications occurred in 27.8% (95% CI 20 to 37).

We conclude that the effectiveness of PIPJ replacement has not been established. Small observational case studies and short-term follow-up, together with insufficient reporting of patient data, functional outcomes and complications, limit the value of current evidence.

We recommend that a defined core set of patients, surgical and outcome data for this intervention be routinely and systematically collected within the framework of a joint registry.

The aim of this study was to compare a third-generation cementing procedure for glenoid components with a new technique for cement pressurisation. In 20 pairs of scapulae, 20 keeled and 20 pegged glenoid components were implanted using either a third-generation cementing technique (group 1) or a new pressuriser (group 2). Cement penetration was measured by three-dimensional (3D) analysis of micro-CT scans. The mean 3D depth of penetration of the cement was significantly greater in group 2 (p < 0.001). The mean thickness of the cement mantle for keeled glenoids was 2.50 mm (2.0 to 3.3) in group 1 and 5.18 mm (4.4 to 6.1) in group 2, and for pegged glenoids it was 1.72 mm (0.9 to 2.3) in group 1 and 5.63 mm (3.6 to 6.4) in group 2. A cement mantle < 2 mm was detected less frequently in group 2 (p < 0.001). Using the cement pressuriser the proportion of cement mantles < 2 mm was significantly reduced compared with the third-generation cementing technique.

We compared six patients with a mean age of 70 years (49 to 80) with severe bilateral, painful glenohumeral joint destruction who underwent a single-stage bilateral total shoulder replacement, with eight patients of mean age 61 years (22 to 89) who underwent bilateral total shoulder replacement in two stages, at a mean interval of 18 months (6 to 43).

The overall function, pain and strength improved significantly in both groups. The subjective shoulder value, relative Constant score, active external rotation and the strength were improved significantly more in the single-stage group. Active elevation, abduction and overall function improved, significantly more in the single-stage group. Both the total duration of hospitalisation and the time off work per shoulder were substantially shorter in the single-stage group. The overall rate of complication was lower in the single-stage group.

Our findings indicated that single-stage bilateral total shoulder replacement yielded significantly better clinical results with shorter hospitalisation and rehabilitation than staged replacement, and was not associated with any increase in complications.

We have compared the outcome of hemiarthroplasty of the shoulder in three distinct diagnostic groups, using survival analysis as used by the United Kingdom national joint registers, patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as recommended by Darzi in the 2008 NHS review, and transition and satisfaction questions.

A total of 72 hemiarthroplasties, 19 for primary osteoarthritis (OA) with an intact rotator cuff, 22 for OA with a torn rotator cuff, and 31 for rheumatoid arthritis (RA), were followed up for between three and eight years. All the patients survived, with no revisions or dislocations and no significant radiological evidence of loosening. The mean new Oxford shoulder score (minimum/worst 0, maximum/best 48) improved significantly for all groups (p < 0.001), in the OA group with an intact rotator cuff from 21.4 to 38.8 (effect size 2.9), in the OA group with a torn rotator cuff from 13.3 to 27.2 (effect size 2.1) and in the RA group from 13.7 to 28.0 (effect size 3.1). By this assessment, and for the survival analysis, there was no significant difference between the groups. However, when ratings using the patient satisfaction questions were analysed, eight (29.6%) of the RA group were ‘disappointed’, compared with one (9.1%) of the OA group with cuff intact and one (7.7%) of the OA group with cuff torn. All patients in the OA group with cuff torn indicated that they would undergo the operation again, compared to ten (90.9%) in the OA group with cuff intact and 20 (76.9%) in the RA group.

The use of revision rates alone does not fully represent outcome after hemiarthroplasty of the shoulder. Data from PROMs provides more information about change in pain and the ability to undertake activities and perform tasks. The additional use of satisfaction ratings shows that both the rates of revision surgery and PROMs need careful interpretation in the context of patient expectations.

Our aim in this prospective study was to evaluate the outcome of total shoulder replacement in the treatment of young and middle-aged active patients with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis. We reviewed 21 patients (21 shoulders) with a mean age of 55 years (37 to 60). The mean follow-up was seven years (5 to 9). The same anatomical, third-generation, cemented implant had been used in all patients. All the patients were evaluated radiologically and clinically using the Constant and Murley score.

No patients required revision. In one a tear of the supraspinatus tendon occurred. Overall, 20 patients (95%) were either very satisfied (n = 18) or satisfied (n = 2) with the outcome. Significant differences (p < 0.0001) were found for all categories of the Constant and Murley score pre- and post-operatively. The mean Constant and Murley score increased from 24.1 points (10 to 45) to 64.5 points (39 to 93), and the relative score from 30.4% (11% to 50%) to 83% (54% to 116%). No clinical or radiological signs of loosening of the implant were seen.

For young and middle-aged patients with osteoarthritis, third-generation total shoulder replacement is a viable method of treatment with a low rate of complications and excellent results in the mid-term.

We describe the results of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty using the mark III prosthesis in patients over 80 years of age. End-stage arthritis of the shoulder is a source of significant pain and debilitating functional loss in the elderly. An arthroplasty offers good relief of pain and may allow the patient to maintain independence. The risk-benefit ratio of shoulder replacement may be felt to be too high in an elderly age group, but there is no published evidence to support this theory. We have assessed whether the procedure was as reliable and safe as previously seen in a younger cohort of patients. Between 1993 and 2003, 213 Copeland surface replacement arthroplasty procedures were performed in our unit, of which 29 (13.6%) were undertaken in patients over the age of 80. This group of patients was followed up for a mean of 4.5 years (2.1 to 9.3). Their mean age was 84.3 years (81 to 93), the mean operating time was 40 minutes (30 to 45) and the mean in-patient stay was five days (2 to 21). There were no peri-operative deaths or significant complications. The mean Constant score adjusted for age and gender, improved from 15.1% to 77%. Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty may be performed with minimal morbidity and rapid rehabilitation in the elderly.

While frequently discussed as a standard treatment for the management of an infected shoulder replacement, there is little information on the outcome of two-stage re-implantation.

We examined the outcome of 17 consecutive patients (19 shoulders) who were treated between 1995 and 2004 with a two-stage re-implantation for the treatment of a deep-infection after shoulder replacement. All 19 shoulders were followed for a minimum of two years or until the time of further revision surgery. The mean clinical follow-up was for 35 months (24 to 80). The mean radiological follow-up was 27 months (7 to 80). There were two excellent results, four satisfactory and 13 unsatisfactory. In 12 of the 19 shoulders (63%) infection was considered to be eradicated. The mean pain score improved from 4.2 (3 to 5 (out of 5)) to 1.8 (1 to 4). The mean elevation improved from 42° (0° to 140°) to 89° (0° to 165°), mean external rotation from 30° (0° to 90°) to 43° (0° to 90°), and mean internal rotation from the sacrum to L5. There were 14 complications.

Our study suggests that two-stage re-implantation for an infected shoulder replacement is associated with a high rate of unsatisfactory results, marginal success at eradicating infection and a high complication rate.

We retrospectively reviewed 21 patients (22 shoulders) who presented with deep infection after surgery to the shoulder, 17 having previously undergone hemiarthroplasty and five open repair of the rotator cuff. Nine shoulders had undergone previous surgical attempts to eradicate their infection. The diagnosis of infection was based on a combination of clinical suspicion (16 shoulders), positive frozen sections (> 5 polymorphonuclear leukocytes per high-power field) at the time of revision (15 shoulders), positive intra-operative cultures (18 shoulders) or the pre-operative radiological appearances. The patients were treated by an extensive debridement, intravenous antibiotics, and conversion to a reverse shoulder prosthesis in either a single- (10 shoulders) or a two-stage (12 shoulders) procedure.

At a mean follow-up of 43 months (25 to 66) there was no evidence of recurrent infection. All outcome measures showed statistically significant improvements. Mean abduction improved from 36.1° (sd 27.8) pre-operatively to 75.7° (sd 36.0) (p < 0.0001), the mean forward flexion from 43.1° (sd 33.5) to 79.5° (sd 43.2) (p = 0.0003), and mean external rotation from 10.2° (sd 18.7) to 25.4° (sd 23.5) (p = 0.0037). There was no statistically significant difference in any outcome between the single-stage and the two-stage group.

There are few reports in the literature of the diagnosis and treatment of the infected shoulder arthroplasty. Most deal with resection arthroplasty and two-stage exchange surgery. We present our results of one-stage exchange operation as treatment for the infected shoulder arthroplasty.

Our group comprised 16 patients (ten men, six women) with 16 infected arthroplasties. By the time of follow-up, two patients had died (mean 5.8 years), two could not be located and three had already undergone revision surgery. Nine patients were thus available for clinical examination and assessment.

The infections were largely caused by staphylococci, Propionibacterium species and streptococci. Two were early infections (within three months of surgery) and 14 were late infections. The mean follow-up was 5.8 years (13 months to 13.25 years) when the mean Constant-Murley score was 33.6 points and the mean University College of Los Angeles score 18.3 points.

Further revision was performed in three patients. One sustained a peri-prosthetic humeral fracture, another developed an acromial pseudarthrosis after transacromial surgery and the third suffered recurrent dislocations. No patient had a recurrence of infection.

A one-stage exchange procedure using antibiotic-loaded bone cement eradicated infection in all our patients and we suggest that such a procedure is at least as successful as either a resection arthroplasty or a two-stage exchange in the management of the infected shoulder arthroplasty.