Search

The purpose of this study was to determine the relationship between admission source and postoperative length of stay (LOS), index admission hospital charges, and discharge disposition, in patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty.The New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) was used to identify all patients that underwent elective shoulder arthroplasty from 1994 through 2015. Patients were grouped into institutionalized (INS) versus non-institutionalized (n-INS) groups based on admission source. The two groups were compared regarding demographics, Charleston comorbidity index (CCI), postoperative blood transfusion requirement, LOS, and total charges.A total of 33,248 patients were identified (32,875 n-INS, 373 INS). Patientsin the INS cohort were significantly older (71.9 versus 68.1 years) and had a higher CCI (1.3 vs. 0.7). The mean LOS in the INS group was nearly 1 week longer(9.5 days vs. 2.8 days) and had a significantly higher postoperative blood transfusion rate (37.5% vs. 9.2%, odds ratio: 5.9). The mean total hospital charges in the INS group were also significantly higher ($63,988 vs. $36,826).Institutionalized patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty have a protracted postoperative hospital course and this ultimately resulted in poorer outcomes and increased resource utilization.

The Latarjet-Patte procedure has a long and storied history that predates shoulder arthroscopy, but its popularity has increased over the past two decades as a treatment for anterior glenohumeral instability with bone loss. Transfer of the coracoid process and conjoint tendon to the anteroinferior glenoid creates a triple-blocking effect that is both static and dynamic, lending it biomechanical superiority over alternative bone block techniques. Patients undergoing the Latarjet-Patte procedure have low rates of recurrent instability compared to arthroscopic soft-tissue stabilization procedures, particularly in the setting of glenoid- and humeral-sided bone loss. A number of technical innovations have been developed in recent years to improve the efficacy of this procedure and to reduce its potential complications, although their associated learning curves and potential for widespread adoption remain unclear. In this article, we review the history, indications, outcomes, and future of this surgical technique.

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) in the young adult remains a challenging clinical problem to treat. These difficulties stem from the high physical demands and expectations of this patient population, limited longevity of existing treatment modalities, and need for a future revision surgery after primary surgical intervention. Given the heterogeneous etiology, clinical presentation, and radiographic findings, a thorough understanding of the pathology, patient expectations, and outcomes of existing treatment options available is necessary to deliver a treatment that is tailored to individual needs of the patient. None of the available treatment options have shown to alter the natural history of GHOA. Nonsurgical modalities continue to be the first line treatment but there is no consensus if one treatment is more effective than the other. Surgical options include shoulder preserving and shoulder replacing procedures and are usually considered after the nonsurgical options become ineffective in controlling a patient's symptoms. Total shoulder arthroplasty provides predictable pain relief and improvement of function but is limited by the longevity of the implant. Despite the growing research, there continues to be search for a long lasting, durable treatment option that would compete with a young adult's lifetime.

The biomechanical concepts underlying total shoulder arthroplasty including differences between the anatomic total and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) are reviewed. The concept of lateralization and its implications on outcomes after RTSA is explained through a historical perspective. Finally, how lateralization can be achieved via different components of an RTSA construct, as well as the potential disadvantages or trade-offs that must be considered when lateralizing in reverse shoulder arthroplasty, are discussed.

We sought to identify the influence of shoulder arthroplasty (SA) type (primary anatomic, primary reverse, revision) and indication (fracture, arthritis) on the risk of postoperative packed red blood cell transfusion (pRBCT) and intravenous fluid bolus (IVFB).Patients who underwent SA from 2013 through 2016 at our institution were categorized into four groups: primary anatomic (pTSA; N = 298), primary reverse (pRTSA; N = 292), revision (RevSA; N = 133), and shoulder arthroplasty for fracture (SAF; N = 58). Basic demographics, intraoperative metrics, preoperative lab values, and postoperative interventions (pRBCT and IVFB) were retrieved from electronic records.There were 781 SAs, of which 176 cases involved at least one postoperative intervention: pRBCT (6.3%) or IVFB (18.8%). Compared to pTSA, the odds of pRBCT in pRTSA, revSA, and SAF were: 3.0 (95% CI 0.9-10.0), 3.4 (95% CI 0.9-2.7), and 8.6 (95% CI 2.2-32.9), respectively. Independent risk factors for pRBCT included increasing age (p = 0.003), underweight body mass index (p = 0.019), Charlson Comorbidity Index ≥ 3 (p = 0.002), inpatient discharge to higher level of care (p = 0.011), estimated blood loss (p = 0.003), and preoperative hemoglobin (p ≤ 0.001). Also, compared to pTSA, the odds for IVFB in pRTSA, revSA, and SAF were: 2.8 (95% CI 1.7-4.6), 2.2 (95% CI 1.2-4.0), and 4.7 (95% CI 2.2-9.9), respectively. Other independent risk factors for IVFB included female sex (0.002), CCI ≥ 3 (p = 0.017), and operative time (p = 0.047).Shoulder arthroplasty for fracture is an independent risk factor for higher risk of postoperative pRBCT and IVFB.