Literature DB >> 16140808

A comparison of pain, strength, range of motion, and functional outcomes after hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder. A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Dianne Bryant1, Robert Litchfield, Michael Sandow, Gary M Gartsman, Gordon Guyatt, Alexandra Kirkley.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A systematic review of the literature was performed to estimate the impact of hemiarthroplasty compared with total shoulder arthroplasty on function and range of motion in patients suffering from osteoarthritis of the shoulder.
METHODS: We conducted an electronic search for relevant studies published in any language from 1966 to 2004, a manual search of the proceedings from five major orthopaedic meetings from 1995 to 2003, and a review of the reference lists from potentially relevant studies. Four randomized clinical trials, with similar eligibility criteria and surgical techniques, that compared hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder were found to be eligible. Authors from three of the four studies provided original patient data. Analysis of covariance focused on the two-year outcome and included a comparison of the aggregate University of California at Los Angeles shoulder score, four University of California at Los Angeles domain scores, and range of motion.
RESULTS: A total of 112 patients (fifty managed with hemiarthroplasty and sixty-two managed with total shoulder arthroplasty), who had a mean age of sixty-eight years, were included in this analysis. A significant moderate effect was detected in the function domain of the University of California at Los Angeles shoulder score (p < 0.001) in favor of total shoulder arthroplasty (mean [and standard deviation], 8.1 +/- 0.3) compared with hemiarthroplasty (mean, 6.6 +/- 0.3). A significant difference in the pain score was found in favor of the total shoulder arthroplasty group (p < 0.0001). However, the large degree of heterogeneity (p = 0.006, I(2) = 80.2%) among the studies decreased our confidence that total shoulder arthroplasty provides a true, consistent benefit with regard to pain. There was a significant difference in the overall change in forward elevation of 13 degrees (95% confidence interval, 0.5 degrees to 26 degrees ) in favor of the total shoulder arthroplasty group (p = 0.008).
CONCLUSIONS: At a minimum of two years of follow-up, total shoulder arthroplasty provided better functional outcome than hemiarthroplasty for patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder. Since continuous degeneration of the glenoid after hemiarthroplasty or glenoid loosening after total shoulder arthroplasty may affect the eventual outcome, longer-term (five to ten-year) results are necessary to determine whether these findings remain consistent over time.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16140808     DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02854

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am        ISSN: 0021-9355            Impact factor:   5.284


  76 in total

1.  Subscapularis release in shoulder replacement determines structural muscular changes.

Authors:  Lieven Franciscus De Wilde; Tineke De Coninck; Francis De Neve; Bart M Berghs
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2012-02-24       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 2.  [Results for endoprosthetic care in patients younger than 50 years].

Authors:  J Ziegler; M Amlang; M Bottesi; S Kirschner; W-C Witzleb; K-P Günther
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2007-04       Impact factor: 1.087

3.  Anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty in young patients with osteoarthritis: all-polyethylene versus metal-backed glenoid.

Authors:  M O Gauci; N Bonnevialle; G Moineau; M Baba; G Walch; P Boileau
Journal:  Bone Joint J       Date:  2018-04-01       Impact factor: 5.082

4.  Results of cementless humeral head resurfacing with cemented glenoid components.

Authors:  Patric Raiss; Manuela Weiter; Boris Sowa; Felix Zeifang; Markus Loew
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-09-30       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 5.  Surgical options for patients with shoulder pain.

Authors:  Salma Chaudhury; Stephen E Gwilym; Jane Moser; Andrew J Carr
Journal:  Nat Rev Rheumatol       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 20.543

6.  Arthroscopic Removal of a Polyethylene Glenoid Component in Total Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Arne J Venjakob; Frank Reichwein; Wolfgang Nebelung
Journal:  Arthrosc Tech       Date:  2015-04-06

7.  Pain and function in eight hundred and fifty nine patients comparing shoulder hemiprostheses, resurfacing prostheses, reversed total and conventional total prostheses.

Authors:  Bjørg-Tilde S Fevang; Stein H L Lygre; Glenn Bertelsen; Arne Skredderstuen; Leif I Havelin; Ove Furnes
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2012-12-11       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Difference in clinical outcome between total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse shoulder arthroplasty used in hemiarthroplasty revision surgery.

Authors:  Bas Pieter Hartel; Tjarco D Alta; Miguel E Sewnath; Willem J Willems
Journal:  Int J Shoulder Surg       Date:  2015 Jul-Sep

9.  Economic Decision Model Suggests Total Shoulder Arthroplasty is Superior to Hemiarthroplasty in Young Patients with End-stage Shoulder Arthritis.

Authors:  Suneel B Bhat; Mark Lazarus; Charles Getz; Gerald R Williams; Surena Namdari
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2016-07-25       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Shoulder arthroplasties have fewer complications than hip or knee arthroplasties in US veterans.

Authors:  Edward V Fehringer; Ted R Mikuls; Kaleb D Michaud; William G Henderson; James R O'Dell
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2009-07-21       Impact factor: 4.176

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.