Bindi, Victoria E.

Aims Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) after prior rotator cuff repair (RCR) is commonly performed for recurrence of pain and arthritic progression; however, the influence of prior RCR timing and technique on outcomes of RSA has not been adequately explored. Our primary aim was to evaluate the relationship between the postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, whether prior RCR was performed open or arthroscopic, and the time interval between RSA and prior RCR. Secondary outcomes were forward elevation (FE) and external rotation (ER). Methods A prospectively collected single-institution shoulder arthroplasty database was queried to identify patients undergoing primary RSA after prior RCR between 2004 and 2022 for non-tumour and non-fracture indications with minimum two-year follow-up. We evaluated the relationship between the postoperative ASES score, FE, and ER stratified by prior RCR approach (open vs arthroscopic) and time between RSA and RCR. Multivariable analysis was used to adjust for potential confounders. Results We included 104 RSAs (99 patients) with a mean 8.8 years (SD 7.3) after RCR and a mean age of 68 years (SD 8.3). Prior RCR was performed arthroscopically in 40 RSAs (38%). Mean follow-up was 4.8 years (SD 2.8). On multivariable analysis, arthroscopic RCR was independently associated with a 13-point greater postoperative ASES score (p = 0.008), 14° greater forward elevation (p = 0.011), and 8° greater external rotation (p = 0.018) compared with open RCR. A ten-year increase in time between RCR and RSA was associated with a seven-point greater postoperative ASES score (p = 0.029) and 5° greater external rotation (p = 0.015). Conclusion A greater time interval between prior RCR and RSA, as well as arthroscopic techniques, is associated with improved outcomes after primary RSA in patients with prior RCR. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2026;108-B(7):928–935.

Background: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is increasingly used in the treatment of proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) with reliable clinical improvement. Lateralized RSA implants have conferred superior outcomes compared with the original Grammont design in patients with nontraumatic indications. However, in the setting of a PHF, lateralized components can place increased tension across the tuberosity fracture site and potentially compromise tuberosity healing and outcomes. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to determine the effect of implant design on clinical outcomes after RSA for PHFs. Methods: A systematic review was performed per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane were queried for clinical studies on RSA performed for PHFs that reported implant manufacturer details. Our primary outcomes included postoperative external rotation (ER), forward elevation (FE), abduction, Constant score, rate of greater tuberosity (GT) healing, and the incidence of complications compared between medialized vs. lateralized global implant design. Results: Globally lateralized RSA cohorts (478 RSAs total with cumulative lateral offset achieved through humeral or glenoid lateralization or both humeral and glenoid lateralization) were found to have a greater mean postoperative Constant score compared with globally medialized (medialized glenoid and medialized humerus) RSA cohorts with 1,494 total medialized RSAs (66 vs. 59, p = 0.006), but there was no significant difference regarding mean postoperative ER (30° vs. 22°, p = 0.078), FE (117° vs. 119°, p = 0.708), or abduction (103° vs. 107°, p = 0.377). On meta-regression, neither implant design nor tuberosity status significantly influenced postoperative ER, FE, abduction, or Constant score on meta-regression independent of mean follow-up and age at surgery. The rate of GT healing was greater in lateralized compared with medialized RSAs (88% vs. 72%, p < 0.001). On meta-regression, medialized RSA design was associated with a 73% lower odds of GT healing (odds ratio = 0.27, 95% confidence interval = 0.11-0.68, p = 0.007) independent of mean follow-up and age at surgery. Conclusion: Lateralized RSA implants conferred no significant functional benefit over medialized implants when used in patients with PHFs. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is increasingly used in the treatment of displaced proximal humerus fractures (PHFs) with reliable clinical improvement. However, the preferred techniques for humeral stem fixation are varied and may be influenced by patient and injury characteristics, including bone quality and fracture pattern. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to determine the effect of humeral component cementing and bone grafting on tuberosity healing rates and functional outcomes after RSA for PHFs. Methods: A systematic review was performed per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane were queried for clinical studies on RSA performed for PHFs that reported on the use of cemented humeral stems and autograft bone. The primary outcome was the rate of greater tuberosity healing between the various techniques. Secondarily, the authors compared clinical outcomes including postoperative external rotation, forward elevation, abduction, Constant score, and the incidence of complications and revision surgery. Outcomes were compared based on the use of an uncemented press-fit stem, a fully cemented stem without bone graft, or a partially cemented stem with humeral head autograft (i.e., black and tan technique). Results: Forty-eight studies reporting on 1,797 RSAs were included (mean patient age, 75 years; follow-up, 34 months; 81% female). Tuberosity healing was highest in the uncemented cohort, then the black and tan cohort, and lowest in the cemented cohort (80% vs. 70% vs. 61%, p = 0.006). No significant differences in postoperative range of motion, Constant score, complication rates, or revision rates were found. Conclusion: Uncemented fixation with a press-fit stem was associated with superior greater tuberosity healing rates; however, functional outcomes and complications did not differ among techniques. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

» Instability and dislocation after reverse shoulder arthroplasty may occur in up to 31% of patients. » Clinical risk factors for instability include younger age, male sex, increased body mass index, preoperative diagnosis of proximal humerus fracture or rotator cuff pathology, history of instability of the native shoulder or after surgery, and a medical history of Parkinson’s disease. » Patients with rheumatoid arthritis and decreased proximity to the coracoid may also be at greater risk. » In patients at a high risk of instability, surgeons should consider a more lateralized prosthesis (particularly in patients with an incompetent rotator cuff), repairing the subscapularis (particularly when using a medialized prosthesis), and upsizing the glenosphere (>40 mm in male and 38–40 mm in female patients). » While potentially useful, less evidence exists for the use of a constrained liner (particularly with a lateralized glenosphere and/or in low-demand patients) and rotating the polyethylene liner posteriorly to avoid impingement. Level of Evidence: Level V . Narrative Review. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background This study sought to characterize the tipping point values (the functional scores that patients deem dysfunctional enough to warrant surgery) for patients undergoing first revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). Methods This study was a retrospective review of a prospectively collected single-institution database of patients undergoing first revision rTSA between August 2015 and December 2019. Tipping point evaluation utilized preoperative scores including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), raw and normalized Constant, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and University of California-Los Angeles (UCLA) scores, and active range of motion including abduction, forward elevation (FE), external rotation (ER), and internal rotation score (IR) prior to elective revision rTSA. Results We included 125 revision rTSAs. Tipping points were 37.6 ASES score, 30.5 raw Constant score, 35.5 normalized Constant score, 68.1 SPADI, 3.7 SST, 13.2 UCLA score, 64° abduction, 69° FE, 23° ER, and 3.1 IR. Higher SST was found for older patients and patients with a lower body mass index. Lower abduction and FE tipping points were reported in patients undergoing revision rTSA for rotator cuff failure, unexplained pain, and implant wear. Discussion These tipping points can help surgeons counsel patients regarding when to undergo revision rTSA. Level of evidence Level III; retrospective cohort study; treatment study.

» Biomechanical studies report that thin scapular spine (SS) morphology, superiorly placed glenoid components, and increased glenoid baseplate screws contribute to increased acromial and SS strain and may increase fracture risk. » Clinical risk factors of acromial and SS fractures after reverse shoulder arthroplasty include increasing age, female sex, osteoporosis, rheumatoid arthritis, thin midsubstance acromion morphology, previous acromioplasty, and surgical indication of cuff tear arthropathy. » Clinical studies show that, in isolation, excessive humeral lengthening, humeral lateralization, and glenoid medialization may increase risk of acromial and SS fractures. » Biomechanical studies suggest that a combination of glenoid medialization and humeral lateralization (MG/LH) may reduce fracture risk, although this requires clinical correlation. » Surgeons might reduce fracture risk in patients of high-risk groups by guarding against excessively lengthening the humerus, using a MG/LH prosthesis, and targeting screws to avoid the scapular notch and base of the SS. Level of Evidence: Level V . Narrative Review. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.