Streubel, Philipp N.

Background: Total elbow arthroplasty is commonly considered for elderly patients with comminuted distal humeral fractures. Satisfactory short-term outcomes have been reported, but long-term outcomes are unknown. Our purpose was to assess the long-term outcomes of total elbow arthroplasty after distal humeral fracture and to determine differences between elbows with or without inflammatory arthritis at the time of fracture. Methods: Forty-four total elbow arthroplasties were performed after distal humeral fracture; those patients were followed for a minimum of 10 years and were evaluated with regard to pain, motion, Mayo Elbow Performance Scores, complications, and reoperations. The outcomes in elbows with and without inflammatory arthritis were compared. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed. Results: Total elbow arthroplasty provided good pain relief and motion; the mean visual analog scale for pain was 0.6, the mean flexion was 123°, and the mean loss of extension was 24°. The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 90.5 points, with 3 patients scoring <75 points. Five elbows (11%) developed deep infection, treated surgically with component retention (3 acute) or resection (2 chronic). Implant revision or resection was performed in 8 elbows (18%): 3 for infections (1 reimplantation and 2 resections), 3 for ulnar loosening (associated with periprosthetic fracture in 1), and 2 for ulnar component fractures. Additional periprosthetic fractures were observed in 5 elbows. The survival rates for elbows with rheumatoid arthritis were 85% at 5 years and 76% at 10 years, and the survival rates for elbows without rheumatoid arthritis were 92% at both 5 and 10 years. The most relevant risk factor for revision was male sex (hazard ratio, 12.6 [95% confidence interval, 1.7 to 93.6]). Conclusions: Selective use of total elbow arthroplasty to treat fractures of the distal part of the humerus for infirm, less active older patients and patients with inflammatory arthritis has acceptable longevity in surviving patients, but at the cost of a number of major complications. Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level IV . See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Background: This study investigated whether axillary nerve (AN) distance to the inferior border of the humeral head and inferior glenoid would change while placing the glenohumeral joint in different degrees of external rotation and abduction. Methods: A standard deltopectoral approach was performed on 10 fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens. The distance between AN and the inferior border of the humeral head and inferior glenoid while placing the shoulder in 0°, 45°, and 90° of external rotation or abduction was measured. Continuous variables for changes in AN position were compared with paired 2-tailed Student t test. Results: The mean distance between the AN and the humeral head with the shoulder in 0°, 45°, and 90° of external rotation and 0° of abduction was 13.77 mm (SD 4.31), 13.99 mm (SD 4.12), and 16.28 mm (SD 5.40), respectively. The mean distance between the AN and glenoid with the shoulder in 0°, 45°, and 90° of external rotation was 16.33 mm (SD 3.60), 15.60 mm (SD 4.19), and 16.43 (SD 5.35), respectively. The mean distance between the AN and the humeral head with the shoulder in 0°, 45°, and 90° of abduction and 0° of external rotation was 13.76 mm (SD 4.31), 10.68 mm (SD 4.19), and 3.81 mm (SD 3.08), respectively. The mean distance between the AN and glenoid with the shoulder in 0°, 45°, and 90° of abduction was 16.33 mm (SD 3.60), 17.66 mm (SD 5.80), and 12.44 mm (SD 5.57), respectively. Conclusions: The AN position relative to the inferior aspect of the glenohumeral joint does not significantly change despite position of external rotation. Increasing shoulder abduction over 45° decreases the distance from the glenohumeral joint to the AN and should be avoided.

Short uncemented humeral stems can preserve humeral bone stock and facilitate revision surgery but may be prone to malalignment or loosening, especially when used in reverse total shoulder replacement (TSR). We undertook a retrospective review of 44 patients with a mean age of 76 years (59 to 92) who underwent primary reverse TSR with a short uncemented humeral stem. There were 29 females. The indications for joint replacement included cuff tear associated arthropathy (33), avascular necrosis (six), post-traumatic arthritis (two), and inflammatory arthritis (three). At a mean follow-up of 27 months (24 to 40), pain was rated as mild or none in 43 shoulders (97.7%). The mean active elevation improved from 54° (sd 20°) to 142° (sd 25°) and the mean active external rotation from 14° (sd 13°) to 45° (sd 9°). The outcome, as assessed by the modified Neer score, was excellent in 27 (61.3%), satisfactory in 15 (34.1%), and unsatisfactory in two shoulders (4.5%). Stems were well-positioned, without evidence of significant valgus or varus malalignment in 42 TSRs (95.5%). There was no radiological evidence of loosening of the humeral stem in any patient; 13 TSRs (29.5%) had evidence of proximal humeral remodelling and scapular notching was noted in three (6.8%). Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:526–9.

We assessed the clinical results, radiographic outcomes and complications of patients undergoing total shoulder replacement (TSR) for osteoarthritis with concurrent repair of a full-thickness rotator cuff tear. Between 1996 and 2010, 45 of 932 patients (4.8%) undergoing TSR for osteoarthritis underwent rotator cuff repair. The final study group comprised 33 patients with a mean follow-up of 4.7 years (3 months to 13 years). Tears were classified into small (10), medium (14), large (9) or massive (0). On a scale of 1 to 5, pain decreased from a mean of 4.7 to 1.7 (p = < 0.0001), the mean forward elevation improved from 99° to 139° (p = < 0.0001), and the mean external rotation improved from 20° (0° to 75°) to 49° (20° to 80°) (p = < 0.0001). The improvement in elevation was greater in those with a small tear (p = 0.03). Radiographic evidence of instability developed in six patients with medium or large tears, indicating lack of rotator cuff healing. In all, six glenoid components, including one with instability, were radiologically at risk of loosening. Complications were noted in five patients, all with medium or large tears; four of these had symptomatic instability and one sustained a late peri-prosthetic fracture. Four patients (12%) required further surgery, three with instability and one with a peri-prosthetic humeral fracture.Consideration should be given to performing rotator cuff repair for stable shoulders during anatomical TSR, but reverse replacement should be considered for older, less active patients with larger tears.Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:224–8.