Ryan Simovitch1, Pierre-Henri Flurin2, Thomas W Wright3, Joseph D Zuckerman4, Christopher Roche5. 1. Palm Beach Orthopaedic Institute, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, USA. 2. Bordeaux-Merignac Clinic, Mérignac, France. 3. Department of Orthopaedics, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. 4. NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: joseph.zuckerman@nyumc.org. 5. Exactech, Gainesville, FL, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The impact of scapula notching on reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) clinical outcomes is controversial. The purpose of this study was to conduct a sufficiently statistically powered analysis to quantify the impact of scapular notching on midterm rTSA outcomes. METHODS: There were 324 rTSA patients with 5 years of minimum follow-up evaluated. Patients were stratified according to the presence of a scapular notch at latest follow-up; radiographs were also assessed at each time point for patients with notching to determine the time for notch grade development. A 2-tailed, unpaired t-test compared preoperative, postoperative, and preoperative to postoperative outcomes between cohorts. RESULTS: There were 324 patients having an average follow-up of 75.1 months assessed; 47 (14.5%) patients had scapular notching. For scapular notching patients, the average notching grade was 1.7 ± 0.8 (24 grade 1, 15 grade 2, and 8 grade 3). The average time to notch development was 51.4 ± 24.1 months; grade 1, grade 2, and grade 3 notches developed at 49.0 ± 22.1 months, 57.5 ± 22.6 months, and 71.6 ± 15.8 months, respectively. No preoperative differences were observed between cohorts. At latest follow-up, scapular notching patients had significantly worse outcome scores and significantly less active abduction, forward flexion, and strength. Finally, scapular notching patients had significantly more complications, revisions, and humeral radiolucent lines. CONCLUSIONS: Scapular notching patients had significantly worse clinical outcomes and less range of motion than patients without scapular notching; these differences exceeded the minimal clinically important difference threshold for several outcome metrics. Based on these results, we recommend minimizing scapular notching through patient and implant selection and technique modification.
BACKGROUND: The impact of scapula notching on reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) clinical outcomes is controversial. The purpose of this study was to conduct a sufficiently statistically powered analysis to quantify the impact of scapular notching on midterm rTSA outcomes. METHODS: There were 324 rTSA patients with 5 years of minimum follow-up evaluated. Patients were stratified according to the presence of a scapular notch at latest follow-up; radiographs were also assessed at each time point for patients with notching to determine the time for notch grade development. A 2-tailed, unpaired t-test compared preoperative, postoperative, and preoperative to postoperative outcomes between cohorts. RESULTS: There were 324 patients having an average follow-up of 75.1 months assessed; 47 (14.5%) patients had scapular notching. For scapular notching patients, the average notching grade was 1.7 ± 0.8 (24 grade 1, 15 grade 2, and 8 grade 3). The average time to notch development was 51.4 ± 24.1 months; grade 1, grade 2, and grade 3 notches developed at 49.0 ± 22.1 months, 57.5 ± 22.6 months, and 71.6 ± 15.8 months, respectively. No preoperative differences were observed between cohorts. At latest follow-up, scapular notching patients had significantly worse outcome scores and significantly less active abduction, forward flexion, and strength. Finally, scapular notching patients had significantly more complications, revisions, and humeral radiolucent lines. CONCLUSIONS: Scapular notching patients had significantly worse clinical outcomes and less range of motion than patients without scapular notching; these differences exceeded the minimal clinically important difference threshold for several outcome metrics. Based on these results, we recommend minimizing scapular notching through patient and implant selection and technique modification.
Authors: Ahmed A Elsheikh; Mohamed S Galhoum; Mohamed A Mokhtar; Margaret M Roebuck; Amanda Wood; Qi Yin; Simon P Frostick Journal: J Shoulder Elb Arthroplast Date: 2022-02-01
Authors: Sarav S Shah; Alexander M Roche; Spencer W Sullivan; Benjamin T Gaal; Stewart Dalton; Arjun Sharma; Joseph J King; Brian M Grawe; Surena Namdari; Macy Lawler; Joshua Helmkamp; Grant E Garrigues; Thomas W Wright; Bradley S Schoch; Kyle Flik; Randall J Otto; Richard Jones; Andrew Jawa; Peter McCann; Joseph Abboud; Gabe Horneff; Glen Ross; Richard Friedman; Eric T Ricchetti; Douglas Boardman; Robert Z Tashjian; Lawrence V Gulotta Journal: JSES Int Date: 2020-09-10
Authors: Francesco Ascione; Alfredo Schiavone Panni; Adriano Braile; Katia Corona; Giuseppe Toro; Nicola Capuano; Alfonso M Romano Journal: J Orthop Traumatol Date: 2021-07-08
Authors: Alexander Nilsskog Fraser; Berte Bøe; Tore Fjalestad; Jan Erik Madsen; Stephan M Röhrl Journal: Acta Orthop Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 3.717