Search

Background: Humeral bone loss is commonly encountered during revision shoulder arthroplasty and anticipating humeral bone defects can help the revision surgeon make appropriate plans to achieve adequate fixation and stability. No validated classification system exists to characterize humeral bone loss in the setting of revision shoulder arthroplasty.Questions/purposes: The purposes of this study were (1) to create a classification system for humeral bone loss in revision shoulder arthroplasty; (2) to determine the classification system's reliability; and (3) to determine whether humeral bone loss type is associated with intraoperative humeral-related reconstruction characteristics.Methods: This was a comparative retrospective radiographic study. First, six surgeons from five centers collaborated to create a classification by consensus. Second, two surgeons from two other centers who had fellowship training in shoulder and elbow surgery, who were blinded to each other's grades and all patient details other than plain radiographs, and who were not involved in creation of the system, classified true AP, AP, and lateral (axillary and/or scapular-Y) radiographs from 108 revision (413 radiographs) from one center that were performed between November 15, 2006, and January 4, 2018. Interobserver reliability was calculated by comparing those two reviews and determining Cohen's κ. In addition, one reviewer repeated his assessments twice, 4 months apart, to determine intraobserver reliability using Cohen's κ. Third, we performed a retrospective chart study of these same revisions to determine intraoperative humeral-related reconstruction characteristics such as the use of greater tuberosity fixation, stem length, humeral bone grafting, and the use of proximal humeral replacement or total humeral replacement; at the center where these revisions were performed during that timespan, no attempt to classify bone loss was made. During that period, the general indications for greater tuberosity fixation included the absence of a stable osseous connection between the greater tuberosity and the shaft of the humerus with a tuberosity amendable to repair; the general indications for use of longer stems were inability to obtain a minimum of two cortical widths of overlap between the implant and the humeral diaphysis and/or loss of the greater tuberosity; and the general indications for proximal and total humeral replacement were bone loss that was felt to be too severe to allow reconstruction with allograft.Results: The classification system consists of three types of humeral bone loss: Type 1 is loss of the epiphysis with subtypes for loss of the calcar and loss of the greater tuberosity; Type 2 is loss of the metadiaphysis above the deltoid attachment with a subtype for cortical thinning; and Type 3 is bone loss extending below the deltoid attachment with a subtype for cortical thinning. We studied 108 revisions: 38 (35%) without bone loss, 34 (31%) Type 1, 27 (25%) Type 2, and nine (8%) Type 3. For reliability, interrater κ was 0.545 and in 71% (77 of 108) of revisions, the two raters agreed on a numeric type. Intrarater κ was 0.615 and in 77% (83 of 108) of revisions, the rater agreed with himself as to the numeric type. Stem length increased with class type (Type 1 median [range] 130 [70-210], Type 2 150 [70-210], Type 3 190 [70-240], p = 0.005). Most greater tuberosity fixation for intraoperative fracture was in Types 1 and 2 (13 of 18 compared with the five of 18 of greater tuberosity fixation that was within Types 0 and 3, p = 0.043). Most bone grafting was in Types 2 and 3 (eight of 13 compared with five of 13 of bone grafting was in Types 0 and 1, p = 0.044). Most proximal humeral and total humeral replacements were in Type 3 (three of four compared with one of four, p < 0.001).Conclusions: We developed the Proximal Humeral Arthroplasty Revision Osseous inSufficiency (PHAROS) system, which has adequate, if imperfect, reliability to classify humeral bone loss in the setting of revision shoulder arthroplasty. This classification system may be useful to anticipate the complexity of humeral reconstruction. Further validation incorporating advanced imaging and further evaluators will be necessary.Level Of Evidence: Level III, diagnostic study. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Arthroscopic Bankart repair alone cannot restore shoulder stability in patients with glenoid bone loss involving more than 20% of the glenoid surface. Coracoid transposition to prevent recurrent shoulder dislocation according to Bristow-Latarjet is an efficient but controversial procedure. Questions/purposes: We determined whether an arthroscopic Bristow-Latarjet procedure with concomitant Bankart repair (1) restored shoulder stability in this selected subgroup of patients, (2) without decreasing mobility, and (3) allowed patients to return to sports at preinjury level. We also evaluated (4) bone block positioning, healing, and arthritis and (5) risk factors for nonunion and coracoid screw pullout. Methods: Between July 2007 and August 2010, 79 patients with recurrent anterior instability and bone loss of more than 20% of the glenoid underwent arthroscopic Bristow-Latarjet-Bankart repair; nine patients (11%) were either lost before 2-year followup or had incomplete data, leaving 70 patients available at a mean of 35 months. Postoperative radiographs and CT scans were evaluated for bone block positioning, healing, and arthritis. Any postoperative dislocation or any subjective complaint of occasional to frequent subluxation was considered a failure. Physical examination included ROM in both shoulders to enable comparison and instability signs (apprehension and relocation tests). Rowe and Walch-Duplay scores were obtained at each review. Patients were asked whether they were able to return to sports at the same level and practice forced overhead sports. Potential risk factors for nonhealing were assessed. Results: At latest followup, 69 of 70 (98%) patients had a stable shoulder, external rotation with arm at the side was 9° less than the nonoperated side, and 58 (83%) returned to sports at preinjury level. On latest radiographs, 64 (91%) had no osteoarthritis, and bone block positioning was accurate, with 63 (90%) being below the equator and 65 (93%) flush to the glenoid surface. The coracoid graft healed in 51 (73%), it failed to unite in 14 (20%), and graft osteolysis was seen in five (7%). Bone block nonunion/migration did not compromise shoulder stability but was associated with persistent apprehension and less return to sports. Use of screws that were too short or overangulated, smoking, and age higher than 35 years were risk factors for nonunion. Conclusions: The arthroscopic Bristow-Latarjet procedure combined with Bankart repair for anterior instability with severe glenoid bone loss restored shoulder stability, maintained ROM, allowed return to sports at preinjury level, and had a low likelihood of arthritis. Adequate healing of the transferred coracoid process to the glenoid neck is an important factor for avoiding persistent anterior apprehension. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Arthroscopic Bankart repair and open Latarjet bone block procedure are widely considered mainstays for surgical treatment of recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The choice between these procedures depends mainly on surgeon preference or training rather than published evidence. Questions/purposes: We compared patients with recurrent posttraumatic anterior shoulder instability treated with arthroscopic Bankart or open Latarjet procedure in terms of (1) frequency and timing of recurrent instability, (2) risk factors for recurrent instability, and (3) patient-reported outcomes. Methods: In this retrospective comparative study, we paired 93 patients undergoing open Latarjet procedures with 93 patients undergoing arthroscopic Bankart repairs over the same period for posttraumatic anterior shoulder instability by one of four surgeons at the same center. Both groups were comparable except that patients in the Latarjet group had more glenoid lesions and more instability episodes preoperatively. Minimum followup was 4 years (mean, 6 years; range, 4-10 years). Patients were assessed with a questionnaire, including stability, Rowe score, and return to sports. Recurrent instability was defined as at least one episode of recurrent dislocation or subluxation. Return to sports was evaluated using a 0% to 100% scale that patients completed after recovery from surgery. Various risk factors for recurrent instability were also analyzed. Results: At latest followup, 10% (nine of 93) in the Latarjet group and 22% (20 of 93) in the Bankart group demonstrated recurrent instability (p = 0.026; odds ratio, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.17-0.91). Ten recurrences in the Bankart group (50%) occurred after 2 years, compared to only one (11%) in the Latarjet group. Reoperation rate was 6% and 7% in the Bankart and Latarjet groups, respectively. In both groups, patients younger than 20 years had higher recurrence risk (p = 0.019). In the Bankart group, independent factors predictive for recurrence were practice of competitive sports and shoulder hyperlaxity (ie, passive external rotation > 85° in the contralateral uninjured shoulder). Although return to sports was not different between groups, the mean Rowe score was higher in the Latarjet group (78 versus 68, p = 0.018). Conclusions: Patients who had the open Latarjet procedure had less recurrent instability and better Rowe scores over a mean 6-year followup. We now perform isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair for carefully selected patients, including patients with an Instability Severity Index Score of 3 or less. Level of Evidence: Level III, therapeutic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Neer modified the Bankart procedure by combining a superoinferior capsular shift with the labral reattachment. The theoretical advantages of the modification were that such a procedure would restore the patient's anatomy and also treat the repeated capsular stretching encountered in anteroinferior instability without limiting external rotation and, thereby reducing the risk of arthritis. Questions/purposes: We therefore determined: (1) the rate of recurrent instability after this modification, (2) patient function, and (3) the incidence and stage of glenohumeral osteoarthritis at greater than 2 years followup in patients with traumatic anteroinferior instability. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed all 64 patients (average age, 27 years) who had the modified Bankart procedure for recurrent dislocations (n = 39) or subluxation (n = 25) from 1991 to 1997. The labrum was reattached with suture anchors and a superoinferior capsular shift was added. We determined the rate of recurrent instability, Rowe and Walch-Duplay scores and shoulder ROM, and the presence of glenohumeral osteoarthritis (modified Samilson and Prieto classification). The minimum followup was 24 months (median, 40 months; range, 24-120 months). Results: Recurrent instability occurred in seven of the 64 patients (11%) at an average of 25 months postoperatively (range, 7 days to 6 years); in six patients the recurrence was associated with trauma; five of the six patients underwent reoperation with a Latarjet procedure. Eight additional patients (13%) presented with persistent shoulder apprehension or discomfort. The average Rowe score was 83% (range, 20-100%) and average Walch-Duplay score 83% (range, 15-100%). However, only 36 of 64 (56%) patients could return to the same sport at the same level. The loss of external rotation was 13° compared with the contralateral side. Glenohumeral osteoarthritis incidence increased from 4% preoperatively to 17% postoperatively. Conclusions: The open Bankart procedure modified by Neer provided high function scores but a relatively low rate of return to sport and high rate of recurrent instability. Our rate of recurrent instability, similar to that obtained with arthroscopic Bankart procedures, has prompted us to abandon the open procedure. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Normal function of the upper limb is seldom restored after limb-sparing surgery for tumors of the proximal humerus. The literature suggests superior shoulder function is achieved in the short term with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty compared to other techniques when performed for conditions with rotator cuff deficiency. It is unclear whether this superiority is maintained when reverse total shoulder arthroplasty is performed for tumors. Questions/purposes: When performed for tumors, we determined whether reverse total shoulder arthroplasty restores function and improves motion, the complications associated with the surgery, and whether reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with autologous grafting is associated with bone resorption. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 14 patients who had undergone reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for tumors of the proximal humerus. Four patients died, leaving nine patients for review. The surviving patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically. The minimum followup was 0.6 years (mean, 7.7 years; range, 0.6-12 years). Results: At last followup, mean active abduction was 157° and mean functional Constant-Murley score was 76%. One patient had a deep infection and one developed a loose prosthesis; both were treated with single-stage exchange. At last followup, both patients had reasonable function without evidence of infection or loosening. Radiographic graft resorption was seen in all but one patient. Conclusions: Our observations suggest, at medium-term followup, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty is a reasonable option for tumors of the proximal humerus. It has low morbidity, restores a mean active abduction of 157°, and limits the impairment of activities of daily living. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Scapular notching, prosthetic instability, limited shoulder rotation and loss of shoulder contour are associated with conventional medialized design reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Prosthetic (ie, metallic) lateralization increases torque at the baseplate-glenoid interface potentially leading to failure. Questions/purposes: We asked whether bony lateralization of reverse shoulder arthroplasty would avoid the problems caused by humeral medialization without increasing torque or shear force applied to the glenoid component. Patients and Methods: We prospectively followed 42 patients with rotator cuff deficiency treated with bony increased-offset reverse shoulder arthroplasty. A cylinder of autologous cancellous bone graft, harvested from the humeral head, was placed between the reamed glenoid surface and baseplate. Graft and baseplate fixation was achieved using a lengthened central peg (25 mm) and four screws. Patients underwent clinical, radiographic, and CT assessment at a minimum of 2 years after surgery. Results: The humeral graft incorporated completely in 98% of cases (41 of 42) and partially in one. At a mean of 28 months postoperatively, no graft resorption, glenoid loosening, or postoperative instability was observed. Inferior scapular notching occurred in 19% (eight of 42). The absolute Constant-Murley score improved from 31 to 67. Thirty-six patients (86%) were able to internally rotate sufficiently to reach their back over the sacrum. Conclusions: Grafting of the glenoid surface during reverse shoulder arthroplasty effectively creates a long-necked scapula, providing the benefits of lateralization. Bony increased-offset reverse shoulder arthroplasty is associated with low rates of inferior scapular notching, improved shoulder rotation, no prosthetic instability and improved shoulder contour. In contrast to metallic lateralization, bony lateralization has the advantage of maintaining the prosthetic center of rotation at the prosthesis-bone interface, thus minimizing torque on the glenoid component. Level of Evidence: Level IV, therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Scapular notching, erosion of the scapular neck related to impingement by the medial rim of the humeral cup during adduction, is a radiographic sign specific to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Its clinical and radiological consequences remain unclear. Questions/purposes: Therefore, we: (1) determined the incidence of notching in a large series, (2) described the natural history of notching, (3) determined whether notching is related to functional scores or (4) radiographic signs of failure, and (5) identified factors related to notch development. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 448 patients who underwent a Grammont-type RSA (461 shoulders) with a mean followup of 51 months (range, 24-206 months). RSA was implanted for cuff tear arthropathy or osteoarthritis with cuff deficiency. We assessed scapular notching using AP views standardized under fluoroscopy. Clinical assessment included Constant-Murley score and range of motion. Aside from notching, radiographic assessment included evaluation of humeral and glenoid radiolucent lines. Results: Notching occurred in 68% of cases. It appeared early, but its later evolution was variable. Notching was associated with followup, strength, passive and active elevation, humeral radiolucent lines, and glenoid lucent lines. It also correlated with a higher rate in patients with preoperative superior erosion. Conclusions: Scapular notching is frequent, generally progresses, and is associated with deterioration of some clinical parameters and radiolucent lines. We believe the preoperative pattern of glenoid erosion is of particular importance due to its influence on the surgeon's glenoid preparation and base-plate positioning. It is crucial to avoid cranial position and superior tilt. Levels of Evidence: Level IV, Therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The increased use of the reverse prosthesis over the last 10 years is due to a large series of publications using the reverse prosthesis developed by Paul Grammont. However, there is no article reporting the story of the concepts developed by Grammont. Questions/purposes: The purposes of this review are to describe the principles developed by Grammont, the chronology of development, and the biomechanical concepts and studies that led to the current design of the reverse prosthesis. Methods: We selectively reviewed literature and provide personal observations. Results: From phylogenetic observations, Grammont developed the principle of functional surgery applied to the rotator cuff tears. To increase the deltoid lever arm, he imagined two possibilities: the lateralization of the acromion, which facilitates the action of the rotator cuff, and the medialization of the center of rotation, which has been developed to respond to situations of rotator cuff deficiency. Grammont proposed the use of an acromiohumeral prosthesis, which was quickly abandoned due to problems of acromial loosening. Finally, Grammont used the principle of reverse prosthesis developed in the 1970s, but made a major change by medializing the center of rotation in a nonanatomic location. In 1985, Grammont validated the concept by an experimental study and the first model using a cemented sphere was implanted. Conclusions: The development of the modern reverse prosthesis is the result of the intellectual and experimental work conducted by Grammont and his team for 20 years. Knowledge of this history is essential to envision future developments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although a reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) can restore active elevation in the cuff deficient shoulder, it cannot restore active external rotation when both the infraspinatus and teres minor muscles are absent or atrophied. We hypothesized that a latissimus dorsi and teres major (LD/TM) transfer with a concomitant RSA would restore shoulder function and activities of daily living (ADLs). We prospectively followed 11 consecutive patients (mean age, 70 years) with a combined loss of active elevation and external rotation (shoulder pseudoparalysis and dropping arm) who underwent this procedure. All had severe cuff tear arthropathy (Hamada Stage 3, 4, or 5) and severe atrophy or fatty infiltration of infraspinatus and teres minor on preoperative MRI or CT-scan. The combined procedure was performed through a single deltopectoral approach in the same session. Postoperatively, mean active elevation increased from 70 degrees to 148 degrees (+78 degrees ) and external rotation from -18 degrees to 18 degrees (+36 degrees ). The Constant score, subjective assessment and ADLs improved. The combination of a RSA and LD/TM transfer restored both active elevation and external rotation in this selected subgroup of patients with a cuff deficient shoulder and absent or atrophied infraspinatus and teres minor. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This biographical sketch on Paul M. Grammont corresponds to the historic text, The Classic: Delta Shoulder Prosthesis for Rotator Cuff Rupture (1993), available at DOI . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A response by Pascal Boileau and colleagues to a letter to the editor about their article "Bony Increased-offset Reversed Shoulder Arthroplasty" is presented.