Search

Long-term outcomes of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) can be compromised by glenoid loosening and failure. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short- and midterm outcomes of humeral head replacement with glenoid reaming arthroplasty (Ream and Run) for the treatment of advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis, and to identify associations between preoperative factors and outcomes.Forty-nine shoulders (mean age 60 ± 7 years) with minimum 2-year follow-up (mean 4.6 ± 1.7) were evaluated. Forty-three (87.8%) were male. Thirteen (26.5%) had previous nonarthroplasty shoulder surgery. There were 19 (38.8%) Walch type A and 30 (61.2%) type B glenoids. Pre- and postoperative shoulder motion, patient-reported outcomes (PROMs), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) were assessed. Pre- and postoperative plain radiographs were evaluated. Mixed effects models were used to investigate factors associated with outcomes.Active forward elevation and active external rotation improved from 111.7° ± 23.8° to 139.2° ± 21.1° and 13.3° ± 20.7° to 38.7° ± 14.7°, respectively (P .001). The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand questionnaire (DASH), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and visual analog scale (VAS) shoulder pain scores at the most recent follow-up were 86.6 ± 19.9, 10.1 ± 14.1, 10.5 ± 2.2, and 1.5 ± 2.3, respectively. The mean changes of PROMs were significant and exceeded the minimal clinically important difference for aTSA. The percentage maximal possible improvement for ASES, DASH, and SST were greater than 75%. Male sex (P .008) and not having prior shoulder surgery (P .04) were significantly associated with better absolute and greater change in PROMs. Age, preoperative shoulder motion, and Walch glenoid classification were not associated with PROMs. Five (10.2%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8%-18.6%) patients underwent revision for pain. Three additional patients were dissatisfied at final follow-up without undergoing revision, resulting in 16.7% (95% CI 6.1%-27.2%) of patients being dissatisfied with their outcome after their initial RnR. Mean Short Form-6 Dimensions scores improved from 0.66 ± 0.12 to 0.77 ± 0.13 and mean EuroQol-5 Dimensions scores improved from 0.68 ± 0.20 to 0.85 ± 0.17 (P .001). Improvement in HRQoL was significantly associated with nondominant arm treatment, increased age, and greater preoperative SST score. Annual medialization of the humeral head center of rotation was 0.56 ± 1.6 mm/yr. No radiographic measure was associated with long-term PROMs.Ream and Run can provide significant and clinically important improvement in PROMs and HRQoL for a high percentage of patients at short- and midterm follow-up. This procedure is an appropriate alternative to aTSA in select patients.

Interprosthetic humeral shaft fractures involving shoulder and elbow arthroplasty can be difficult to manage surgically, both due to fracture and patient characteristics. Adequate fixation can be difficult, given the intramedullary nature of the adjacent implants. Careful attention must be paid to regional anatomy, and care must be taken to not damage the radial or ulnar nerve during dissection and mobilization of the fracture, especially if scar tissue exists from multiple previous surgeries. Finally, fixation strategies must be used to gain stability in areas where there is a cement mantle or well-fixed intramedullary stem to impart the stability required for adequate healing and postoperative mobilization. Biologic augmentation is often used as well, given the relatively poor biologic environment for bone healing. We review our technique for operative fixation of a patient with a humeral shaft fracture between a cemented shoulder hemiarthroplasty and total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND Femoral anteversion can be difficult to determine intraoperatively, particularly in cases with complicated deformity. Although biplanar methodology exists for measuring femoral anteversion, the measurements are generally based on the proximal femur, without consideration for the femoral bow. METHODS We directly measured femoral version in 70 mature cadaveric femora. Using the standard Ogata-Goldsand approach, femoral version was geometrically calculated after measuring apparent neck-shaft angle and the β-angle, which is the angle between the femoral neck and proximal femoral shaft on a direct lateral view. We then used a modified β-angle, measured between the femoral neck and a line representing the entire femur. RESULTS Mean anatomic femoral anteversion was 20±11 degrees. Mean calculated femoral version using the standard Ogata-Goldsand technique was 32±13 degrees, whereas mean calculated femoral version using the modified Ogata-Goldsand technique was 22±12 degrees. Repeated measures ANOVA analysis found an overall statistically significant difference between the 3 groups (P