Lindsay Flynn1, Matthew R Patrick1, Christopher Roche2, Joseph D Zuckerman3, Pierre-Henri Flurin4, Lynn Crosby5, Richard Friedman6, Thomas W Wright1. 1. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Florida, Gainesville, USA. 2. Exactech, Inc., Gainesville, USA. 3. NYU Center for Musculoskeletal Care, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, USA. 4. Bordeaux Merignac Sport Clinic, Mérignac, France. 5. Department of Orthopaedics, Medical College of Georgia, Augusta, USA. 6. Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: No studies compare outcomes of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with more than five-year follow-up. METHODS: A multicenter prospectively collected shoulder registry was utilized to review all patients undergoing primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty or primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with a minimum five-year follow-up utilizing a single platform stem implant system. One-hundred-ninety-one patients received an anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and 139 patients received a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Patients were scored preoperatively and at latest follow-up using the simple shoulder test (SST), University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), American shoulder and elbow surgeons (ASES), Constant, and shoulder pain and disability index (SADI) scores as well as range of motion. Radiographs were evaluated for implant loosening or notching. Complications were reviewed. A Student's two-tailed, unpaired t-test identified differences in preoperative, postoperative, and pre-to-postoperative improvements. RESULTS: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty patients were significantly older than anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty patients. All patients demonstrated significant improvement in functional metric scores and range of motion following anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. There was no difference in final outcome scores between anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty patients at midterm follow-up; however, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty patients demonstrated significantly less motion. DISCUSSION: We demonstrate equivalent outcomes with five scoring metrics at mean follow-up of 71.3 ± 14.1 months. Although postoperative scores were significantly greater than preoperative scores for both anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty patients, significant differences in outcome scores between cohorts were not observed.
BACKGROUND: No studies compare outcomes of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with more than five-year follow-up. METHODS: A multicenter prospectively collected shoulder registry was utilized to review all patients undergoing primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty or primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with a minimum five-year follow-up utilizing a single platform stem implant system. One-hundred-ninety-one patients received an anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and 139 patients received a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Patients were scored preoperatively and at latest follow-up using the simple shoulder test (SST), University of California Los Angeles (UCLA), American shoulder and elbow surgeons (ASES), Constant, and shoulder pain and disability index (SADI) scores as well as range of motion. Radiographs were evaluated for implant loosening or notching. Complications were reviewed. A Student's two-tailed, unpaired t-test identified differences in preoperative, postoperative, and pre-to-postoperative improvements. RESULTS: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty patients were significantly older than anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty patients. All patients demonstrated significant improvement in functional metric scores and range of motion following anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. There was no difference in final outcome scores between anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty patients at midterm follow-up; however, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty patients demonstrated significantly less motion. DISCUSSION: We demonstrate equivalent outcomes with five scoring metrics at mean follow-up of 71.3 ± 14.1 months. Although postoperative scores were significantly greater than preoperative scores for both anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty patients, significant differences in outcome scores between cohorts were not observed.
Keywords:
radiographic evaluation; reverse total shoulder arthroplasty; rotator cuff arthropathy; shoulder osteoarthritis; shoulder range of motion; total shoulder arthroplasty
Authors: Pierre-Henri Flurin; Yann Marczuk; Martin Janout; Thomas W Wright; Joseph Zuckerman; Christopher P Roche Journal: Bull Hosp Jt Dis (2013) Date: 2013
Authors: Jonathan C Levy; Nathan G Everding; Carlos C Gil; Scott Stephens; M Russell Giveans Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2014-06-26 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Mark Frankle; Steven Siegal; Derek Pupello; Arif Saleem; Mark Mighell; Matthew Vasey Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2005-08 Impact factor: 5.284