Schoch, Bradley S.

Background The increasing incidence of reverse total shoulder arthroplasties (RTSA) has led to an increase in revision surgery. We aimed to compare patients undergoing re-revision RTSA to a matched cohort undergoing first-revision RTSA. Methods A retrospective review of all revision RTSAs was performed at a single institution. Sixteen shoulders that underwent re-revision RTSA were matched 1:3 to shoulders that underwent revision RTSA with a minimum two-year follow-up. Outcome scores including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder Score (ASES), Short-Form 12 (SF-12), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores, range of motion (ROM), and improvement from preoperative to postoperative outcomes after re-revision RTSA were assessed. Additionally, postoperative outcomes after re-revision RTSA were compared to patients that underwent first revision RTSA and subsequently compared to the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) values for the outcome scores and ROM measurements assessed. Results Sixteen shoulders that underwent re-revision RTSA and 78 revision RTSAs met the final inclusion criteria to be included in this study. Significant improvement from preoperative to postoperative re-revision RTSA was seen in the ASES score (p = 0.046), SPADI score (p = 0.044), SST (p = 0.008), abduction (p = 0.016), and elevation (p = 0.025), but not the SF-12 score (p = 0.396), external rotation (p = 0.449), or internal rotation (p = 0.451). Outcomes after revision RTSA were found to be superior to outcomes after re-revision RTSA for all outcome scores (ASES p = 0.029, SF-12 p = 0.018, SPADI p = 0.003) except the SST score (p = 0.080) and all ROM measures (p > 0.05 for all). Internal rotation was equivalent postoperatively between both groups. From preoperative to postoperative re-revision RTSA, the mean improvement exceeded the MCID for the SST score, abduction, forward elevation, and external rotation. When comparing postoperative revision RTSA to postoperative re-revision RTSA, the mean difference between revision and re-revision RTSA exceeded the MCID for the SPADI score and external rotation. The complication rate was 19% in shoulders undergoing first revision and 41% in shoulders undergoing re-revision RTSA. Conclusion Patients undergoing re-revision RTSA receive improvement in clinical outcomes, but do not achieve outcomes comparable to those achieved after first revision RTSA.

Background: In smaller studies, allograft-prosthetic composite (APC) has been used for proximal humerus bone loss with some success, although with notable complication risk. This systematic review and meta-analysis sought to describe outcomes and complications after proximal humerus APC and how major APC complications are defined in the literature. 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 articles on APC for proximal humeral bone loss secondary to tumor, fracture, or failed arthroplasty. Primary outcomes included postoperative range of motion, outcome scores (Musculoskeletal Tumor Society [MSTS], Simple Shoulder Test [SST], American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES], Constant, visual analog scale [VAS], and subjective shoulder value [SSV]), and complication incidence. We also described individual study definitions of APC malunion/nonunion, methods of postoperative evaluation, malunion/nonunion rates, allograft fracture/fragmentation rates, and mean union time, when available. Secondarily, we compared hemiarthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Results: Sixteen articles including 375 shoulders were evaluated (average age: 49 years, follow-up: 54 months). Fifty-seven percent of procedures were performed for tumors, 1% for proximal humerus trauma sequelae, and 42% for revision arthroplasty. Average postoperative forward elevation was 82° (69-94°), abduction 60° (30-90°), and external rotation 23° (17-28°). Average MSTS score was 82% (77%-87%), SST score 5.3 (4.5-6.1), ASES score 64 (54-74), Constant score 44 (38-50), VAS score 2.2 (1.7-2.7), and SSV 51 (45-58). There was a 51% complication rate with an 18% nonallograft surgical complication rate, 26% APC nonunion/malunion/resorption rate, and 10% APC fracture/fragmentation rate. Fifteen percent of nonunited APCs underwent secondary bone grafting; 3% required a new allograft; and overall revision rate was 12%. APC nonunion/malunion was defined in 2 of 16, malunion/nonunion rates in 14 of 16, fracture/fragmentation rates in 6 of 16, and mean union time (7 months) in 4 of 16 studies. Conclusion: APC reconstruction of the proximal humerus remains a treatment option, albeit with substantial complication rates. In addition, there is a need for APC literature to report institutional definitions of nonunion/malunion, postoperative evaluation, and time to union for a more standardized evaluation. Level of Evidence: Level IV ; systematic review. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: Latissimus dorsi transfer (LDT) has been purported to restore motion in patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) who have preoperative combined loss of forward elevation (FE) and external rotation (ER). This systematic review summarizes the available evidence for the functional outcomes and complications after RSA with LDT. Furthermore, the effect of implant design and whether a concomitant teres major transfer (TMT) was performed were studied. Methods: A systematic review was performed per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We queried PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify articles reporting on LDT with RSA to restore ER. Our primary outcomes were ER, FE, Constant score, and complication incidence. Secondarily, we reported postoperative internal rotation (IR) and compared ER, FE, and Constant score based on lateralized versus medialized global implant design and whether concomitant TMT was performed. Results: Nineteen studies were evaluated; functional outcomes were assessed in 16 articles reporting on 258 RSAs (123 LDT, 135 LDT-TMT). Surgical indication was most commonly cuff tear arthropathy and massive irreparable cuff tear. Mean ER was −12° preoperatively and 25° postoperatively, FE was 72° preoperatively and 141° postoperatively. Mean postoperative Constant score was 65. Of 138 patients (8 studies) describing IR, only 25% reported a mean postoperative IR ≥L3. Subanalysis comparing lateralized versus medialized implants and whether TMT was concomitantly performed demonstrated no significant difference in postoperative ER, FE, and Constant score, nor preoperative to postoperative improvement in ER and FE. The complication rate was 14.1% (of 291 shoulders from 16 studies), including tear in the tendon transfer (n = 3), revision tendon repair (n = 1), nerve-related complication (n = 9), and dislocation (n = 9). Conclusions: RSA with LDT is a reliable option to restore motion, with a comparable complication rate with standard RSA. The use of medialized versus lateralized implants and whether the TM was concomitantly transferred may not influence clinical outcomes. Level of Evidence: Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Abstract: Scapulothoracic arthrodesis has been proposed for the treatment of painful scapular winging in patients with facioscapulohumeral muscular dystrophy. It was introduced to improve shoulder function. Several methods of fixation have been proposed to obtain the union of the scapula to the ribs. These include plates, screws, cables, or wires with or without bone grafting. The purpose of this manuscript is to describe the surgical technique of scapulothoracic arthrodesis using plate and cerclage suture tapes. Level of Evidence: Level IV, treatment study (case series).

» Benzoyl peroxide (BPO) 5% has been shown to reduce Cutibacterium acnes load on the skin. BPO 5% with miconazole nitrate (MN) 2% may be beneficial, whereas BPO 5% with clindamycin cream 1% to 1.2% does not seem to have additive effects when compared with BPO 5% alone. Chlorhexidine gluconate solutions reduce the total bacterial load on the skin, but do not seem to have a significant effect on C. acnes . » ChloraPrep seems to be the best surgical skin preparation to decrease overall positive skin cultures. Preincisional hydrogen peroxide 3% application has been shown to be a cost-effective practice to inhibit growth of C. acnes . Vancomycin powder before deltopectoral interval closure has antimicrobial effects against C. acnes and is a cost-effective practice. Finally, Bactisure surgical lavage is protective against the formation of biofilms. » IV cefazolin has been shown to be more effective for shoulder arthroplasty infection prophylaxis than antibiotic alternatives such as vancomycin. Thus, patients with a questionable history of penicillin allergy should undergo additional testing. » For shoulder surgery infection prophylaxis, we recommend the use of BPO 5% cream for 5 days preoperatively with chlorhexidine wipes the night before and the morning of surgery. IV cefazolin should be administered perioperatively, and patients with a questionable history of penicillin allergy should be tested. Surgeons should consider preincisional application of hydrogen peroxide 3% for 5 minutes, followed by standard ChloraPrep preparation. Normal saline should be used for preclosure lavage. Finally, application of vancomycin powder deep to the deltopectoral interval closure should be considered.

Background Optimal glenosphere positioning in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) remains highly debated. We aimed to characterize the association between the prosthesis scapular neck angle (PSNA) and postoperative range of motion (ROM) and clinical outcome scores. Methods A retrospective review of 284 RSAs using a single design with minimum 2-year follow-up was performed. Glenosphere tilt was measured postoperatively using PSNA. ROM and functional outcome scores were assessed preoperatively and at latest follow-up. The PSNA was dichotomized to inferior or superior groups (>90° vs ≤ 90°, respectively) and stratified into quartiles; ROM and outcome score measures were compared between groups controlling for inferior glenosphere overhang. Results No range of PSNA was consistently associated with superior ROM, clinical outcome scores, or rates of complications including scapular notching. However, greater preoperative to postoperative improvement in active FE was found for superiorly (PSNA ≤ 90°) versus inferiorly tilted glenospheres (37° ± 33° vs 53° ± 35°, P = 0.005) and the greater improvement in active FE (57° ± 35°, P = 0.004) was further isolated to the first quartile (mean 85.1° ± 3.5°). Discussion A lack of variation in clinical outcomes based on PSNA suggests negligible short-term (median follow-up 3.1 years) clinical significance when glenosphere tilt falls within the distribution of this cohort (mean 92.6° ± 6.2°).

Background: The application of orthobiologics at the time of arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (RCR) has received an increasing amount of clinical interest despite a relative scarcity of human clinical studies on their efficacy. Purpose: To utilize a national administrative database to determine the association of bone marrow aspirate concentrate (BMAC) and platelet-rich plasma (PRP) applied at the time of RCR with revision surgery rates. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: The Mariner data set from the PearlDiver patient records repository was utilized to identify patients undergoing RCR using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) code 29827. Patients receiving BMAC or PRP at the time of RCR were then identified using CPT coding. For comparison purposes, a matched cohort was created consisting of patients who underwent RCR without biologic augmentation in a 5:1 fashion for each biologic separately. Cases were matched according to age, sex, tobacco use, biceps tenodesis, distal clavicle excision, and subacromial decompression. All groups were then queried for revision RCR or conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Revision rates were compared utilizing a multivariate binomial logistic regression analysis. Adjusted odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs were calculated. Results: A total of 760 patients who underwent biologic augmentation during RCR were identified, including 646 patients in the PRP group and 114 patients in the BMAC group. They were compared with 3800 matched controls without documented biologic application at the time of surgery. Compared with matched controls, patients who received BMAC at the time of surgery experienced a significantly lower incidence of revision surgery at 2 years (OR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.82; P = .015). There was no significant difference in revision rates between PRP and matched controls (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.62-1.23; P = .183). Conclusion: The application of BMAC at the time of RCR was associated with a significant decrease in the incidence of revision surgery. There was no apparent effect of PRP on the incidence of revision surgery after primary RCR. Higher-level clinical studies considering surgical factors are needed to more clearly define the role of biologic adjuvants in RCR.

Case: We present a case of a 71-year-old woman with history of left-sided shoulder arthritis who underwent standard total shoulder arthroplasty using a novel hybrid glenoid component. After 3 years, she sustained traumatic dissociation of the interface between the polyethylene face and central titanium post, a unique failure mechanism of the hybrid glenoid component. This was successfully corrected through conversation to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Follow-up after 2 years demonstrated marked improvement in pain and function. Conclusion: Hybrid glenoid components present a unique failure mechanism as compared to traditional glenoid loosening and can be effectively corrected with RSA.

Background Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty improves pain and function with a reported reoperation rate of approximately 1% per year. With improved glenoid fixation, reverse shoulder arthroplasty implants may outperform anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. We evaluate the functional outcomes and reoperation rate of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty at a minimum eight-year follow-up or revision. Methods Between 2005 and 2010, 187 shoulders (137 anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty, 50 reverse shoulder arthroplasty) were retrospectively reviewed at a mean of 8.8 years. The mean age at surgery was 67 years. Females were more commonly treated with reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Both groups had similar body mass index and comorbidities. Outcome measures evaluated included abduction, forward elevation, external rotation, internal rotation, Simple Shoulder Test, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Score, University of California Los Angeles Shoulder score, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index. Results At follow-up, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty demonstrated greater overhead range of motion and external rotation. All patient-reported outcomes remained similar between groups. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty patients were more likely to rate shoulders as much better or better after surgery (90% versus 67%, p = 0.004). Complications were observed in 24% of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties and 8% of reverse shoulder arthroplasties (p = 0.02). Reoperation was more common in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties (23% versus 4%, p = 0.003). Discussion At mid-to-long-term follow-up, reverse shoulder arthroplasties demonstrated significantly fewer complications and reoperations than anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties. Despite similar patient-reported outcomes, reverse shoulder arthroplasty patients were more likely to be satisfied with their shoulder.

Background: It remains unclear whether results differ between a Latarjet procedure performed after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair and one performed as the primary operation. Purpose: To compare the postoperative outcomes of the Latarjet procedure when performed as primary surgery and as revision for a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair. Study Design: Cohort study; Level of evidence, 3. Methods: A multicenter retrospective comparative case-cohort analysis was performed for all patients undergoing a Latarjet procedure for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Patients were separated into 2 groups depending on if the Latarjet procedure was performed after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair (group 1) or as the first operation (group 2). Outcome measures included recurrent instability, reoperation rates, complications, pain, Walch-Duplay scores, and Simple Shoulder Test. Results: A total of 308 patients were eligible for participation in the study; 72 (23.4%) did not answer and were considered lost to follow-up, leaving 236 patients available for analysis. Mean follow-up was 3.4 ± 0.8 years. There were 20 patients in group 1 and 216 in group 2. Despite similar rates of recurrent instability (5.0% in group 1 vs 2.3% in group 2; P = .5) and revision surgery (0% in group 1 vs 6.5% in group 2; P = .3), group 1 demonstrated significantly worse pain scores (2.56 ± 2.7 vs 1.2 ± 1.7; P = .01) and patient-reported outcomes (Walch-Duplay: 52 ± 25.1 vs 72.2 ± 25.0; P = .0007; Simple Shoulder Test: 9.3 ± 2.4 vs 10.7 ± 1.9; P = .001) when compared with those patients undergoing primary Latarjet procedures. Conclusion: Functional outcome scores and postoperative pain are significantly worse in patients undergoing a Latarjet procedure after a failed arthroscopic Bankart repair when compared with patients undergoing primary Latarjet. The assumption that a failed a Bankart repair can be revised by a Latarjet with a similar result to a primary Latarjet appears to be incorrect. Surgeons should consider these findings when deciding on the optimal surgical procedure for recurrent shoulder instability.