Literature DB >> 29482959

Risk factors for failing to achieve improvement after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

Gregory T Mahony1, Brian C Werner2, Brenda Chang3, Brian M Grawe4, Samuel A Taylor1, Edward V Craig1, Russell F Warren1, David M Dines1, Lawrence V Gulotta1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) successfully improves pain and function, not all patients improve clinically. This study was conducted to determine patient-related factors for failure to achieve improvement after primary TSA for osteoarthritis at 2 years postoperatively.
METHODS: This prospective study reviewed an institutional shoulder registry for consecutive patients who underwent primary TSA for osteoarthritis from 2007 to 2013 with baseline and 2-year postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form scores. A failed outcome was defined as (1) a failure to reach the ASES minimal clinically important difference of 16.1 points or (2) revision surgery within 2 years of the index procedure, or both. Univariate and multivariable analyses of clinical and demographic patient factors were performed using logistic regression.
RESULTS: Of 459 arthroplasties that met inclusion criteria, 411 were deemed successful by the aforementioned criteria, and 48 (10.5%) failed to achieve a desirable outcome. Clinical risk factors associated with failure included previous surgery to the shoulder (P = .047), presence of a torn rotator cuff (P = .025), and presence of diabetes (P = .036), after adjusting for age, sex, race, and body mass index. A higher preoperative ASES score at baseline was associated with failure (P < .001).
CONCLUSION: Previous shoulder surgery, a rotator cuff tear requiring repair during TSA, presence of diabetes, surgery on the nondominant arm, and a higher baseline ASES score were associated with a higher risk of failing to achieve improvement after anatomic TSA.
Copyright © 2017 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ASES score; MCID; Total shoulder arthoplasty; glenohumeral arthritis; poor improvement; postoperative outcomes; risk factors; satisfaction

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29482959     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.12.018

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg        ISSN: 1058-2746            Impact factor:   3.019


  10 in total

Review 1.  Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Biomechanics and Indications.

Authors:  Caitlin M Rugg; Monica J Coughlan; Drew A Lansdown
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2019-12

2.  [Interpretation of 2020 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) on the Management of Glenohumeral Joint Osteoarthritis Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline].

Authors:  Xianxiang Xiang
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2021-11-15

3.  Substantial Inconsistency and Variability Exists Among Minimum Clinically Important Differences for Shoulder Arthroplasty Outcomes: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  David A Kolin; Michael A Moverman; Nicholas R Pagani; Richard N Puzzitiello; Jeremy Dubin; Mariano E Menendez; Andrew Jawa; Jacob M Kirsch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-03-17       Impact factor: 4.755

4.  Preoperative indications for total shoulder arthroplasty predict adverse postoperative complications.

Authors:  Brandon E Lung; Shrey Kanjiya; Michael Bisogno; David E Komatsu; Edward D Wang
Journal:  JSES Open Access       Date:  2019-06-14

5.  Patient-reported outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a comparative risk factor analysis of improved versus unimproved cases.

Authors:  Moby Parsons; Howard D Routman; Christopher P Roche; Richard J Friedman
Journal:  JSES Open Access       Date:  2019-09-13

6.  Comparison of survivorship and performance of a platform shoulder system in anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Pierre Henri Flurin; Carl Tams; Ryan W Simovitch; Christopher Knudsen; Christopher Roche; Thomas W Wright; Joseph Zuckerman; Bradley S Schoch
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-07-27

7.  Associations of preoperative patient mental health status and sociodemographic and clinical characteristics with baseline pain, function, and satisfaction in patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Sambit Sahoo; Kathleen A Derwin; Alexander Zajichek; Vahid Entezari; Peter B Imrey; Joseph P Iannotti; Eric T Ricchetti
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2020-08-26       Impact factor: 3.019

8.  Preoperative parameters that predict postoperative patient-reported outcome measures and range of motion with anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Richard J Friedman; Josef Eichinger; Bradley Schoch; Thomas Wright; Joseph Zuckerman; Pierre-Henri Flurin; Charlotte Bolch; Chris Roche
Journal:  JSES Open Access       Date:  2019-11-18

9.  Defining the tipping point for primary shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Bradley S Schoch; Joseph J King; Thomas W Wright; Marie Vigan; Jean David Werthel
Journal:  JSES Open Access       Date:  2019-11-18

10.  Do glenoid retroversion and humeral subluxation affect outcomes following total shoulder arthroplasty?

Authors:  C Benjamin Ma; Weiyuan Xiao; Madeleine Salesky; Edward Cheung; Alan L Zhang; Brian T Feeley; Drew A Lansdown
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-05-07
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.