Joseph N Liu1, Michael E Steinhaus2, Grant H Garcia2, Brenda Chang3, Kara Fields3, David M Dines4, Russell F Warren4, Lawrence V Gulotta4. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY, USA. LiuJ@hss.edu. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 East 70th Street, New York, NY, USA. 3. Healthcare Research Institute, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA. 4. Sports Medicine and Shoulder Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: With increasing incidence and indications for shoulder arthroplasty, there is an increasing emphasis on the ability to return to sports. The main goal of this study was to determine the rate of return to sport after shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed to perform this systematic review and meta-analysis. A search was performed on MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. The quality of the included studies was evaluated according to the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies checklist. The main judgement outcome was the rate of return to sports activity after shoulder arthroplasty and the level of play upon return (identical or higher/lower level). RESULTS: Thirteen studies were reviewed, including 944 patients (506 athletes), treated with shoulder arthroplasty at an average follow-up of 5.1 years (range, 0.5-12.6 years). The most common sports were swimming (n = 169), golf (n = 144), fitness sports (n = 71), and tennis (n = 63). The overall rate of return to sport was 85.1% (95% CI, 76.5-92.3%), including 72.3% (95% CI, 60.6-82.8%) returning to an equivalent or improved level of play, after 1-36 months. Patients undergoing anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty returned at a significantly higher rate (92.6%) compared to hemiarthroplasty (71.1%, p = 0.02) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (74.9%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Most patients are able to return to one or more sports following shoulder arthroplasty, with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty having the highest rate of return. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
PURPOSE: With increasing incidence and indications for shoulder arthroplasty, there is an increasing emphasis on the ability to return to sports. The main goal of this study was to determine the rate of return to sport after shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed to perform this systematic review and meta-analysis. A search was performed on MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library. The quality of the included studies was evaluated according to the Methodological Index for Nonrandomized Studies checklist. The main judgement outcome was the rate of return to sports activity after shoulder arthroplasty and the level of play upon return (identical or higher/lower level). RESULTS: Thirteen studies were reviewed, including 944 patients (506 athletes), treated with shoulder arthroplasty at an average follow-up of 5.1 years (range, 0.5-12.6 years). The most common sports were swimming (n = 169), golf (n = 144), fitness sports (n = 71), and tennis (n = 63). The overall rate of return to sport was 85.1% (95% CI, 76.5-92.3%), including 72.3% (95% CI, 60.6-82.8%) returning to an equivalent or improved level of play, after 1-36 months. Patients undergoing anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty returned at a significantly higher rate (92.6%) compared to hemiarthroplasty (71.1%, p = 0.02) or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (74.9%, p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: Most patients are able to return to one or more sports following shoulder arthroplasty, with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty having the highest rate of return. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Entities:
Keywords:
Meta-analysis; Return to sport; Reverse total shoulder replacement; Shoulder arthroplasty; Shoulder hemiarthroplasty; Systematic review; Total shoulder replacement
Authors: Grant H Garcia; Samuel A Taylor; Brian J DePalma; Gregory T Mahony; Brian M Grawe; Joseph Nguyen; Joshua S Dines; David M Dines; Russell F Warren; Edward V Craig; Lawrence V Gulotta Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2015-08-27 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Katrin Schumann; Matthias P Flury; Hans-Kaspar Schwyzer; Beat R Simmen; Susann Drerup; Joerg Goldhahn Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2010-07-08 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Grant H Garcia; Joseph N Liu; Gregory T Mahony; Alec Sinatro; Hao-Hua Wu; Edward V Craig; Russell F Warren; David M Dines; Lawrence V Gulotta Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Grant H Garcia; Gregory T Mahony; Peter D Fabricant; Hao-Hua Wu; David M Dines; Russell F Warren; Edward V Craig; Lawrence V Gulotta Journal: Am J Sports Med Date: 2015-12-09 Impact factor: 6.202
Authors: Stephen G Thon; Adam J Seidl; Jonathan T Bravman; Eric C McCarty; Felix H Savoie; Rachel M Frank Journal: Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med Date: 2020-02
Authors: Jennifer Tangtiphaiboontana; Kristin C Mara; Andrew R Jensen; Christopher L Camp; Mark E Morrey; Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2021-06-10
Authors: Sandeep Mannava; Marilee P Horan; Salvatore J Frangiamore; Zaamin B Hussain; Erik M Fritz; Jonathan A Godin; Jonas Pogorzelski; Peter J Millett Journal: Orthop J Sports Med Date: 2018-07-05