Literature DB >> 34659485

Anatomic versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a mid-term follow-up comparison.

Bradley S Schoch1, Joseph J King2, Joseph Zuckerman3, Thomas W Wright2, Chris Roche4, Pierre-Henri Flurin5.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty improves pain and function with a reported reoperation rate of approximately 1% per year. With improved glenoid fixation, reverse shoulder arthroplasty implants may outperform anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. We evaluate the functional outcomes and reoperation rate of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty at a minimum eight-year follow-up or revision.
METHODS: Between 2005 and 2010, 187 shoulders (137 anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty, 50 reverse shoulder arthroplasty) were retrospectively reviewed at a mean of 8.8 years. The mean age at surgery was 67 years. Females were more commonly treated with reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Both groups had similar body mass index and comorbidities. Outcome measures evaluated included abduction, forward elevation, external rotation, internal rotation, Simple Shoulder Test, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Score, University of California Los Angeles Shoulder score, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index.
RESULTS: At follow-up, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty demonstrated greater overhead range of motion and external rotation. All patient-reported outcomes remained similar between groups. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty patients were more likely to rate shoulders as much better or better after surgery (90% versus 67%, p = 0.004). Complications were observed in 24% of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties and 8% of reverse shoulder arthroplasties (p = 0.02). Reoperation was more common in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties (23% versus 4%, p = 0.003). DISCUSSION: At mid-to-long-term follow-up, reverse shoulder arthroplasties demonstrated significantly fewer complications and reoperations than anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties. Despite similar patient-reported outcomes, reverse shoulder arthroplasty patients were more likely to be satisfied with their shoulder.
© 2020 The British Elbow & Shoulder Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Reverse shoulder arthroplasty; anatomic shoulder arthroplasty; long term; outcomes; shoulder arthroplasty; total shoulder arthroplasty

Year:  2020        PMID: 34659485      PMCID: PMC8512971          DOI: 10.1177/1758573220921150

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Shoulder Elbow        ISSN: 1758-5732


  47 in total

1.  Rotator cuff repair after shoulder replacement.

Authors:  Steven J Hattrup; Robert H Cofield; Stephen S Cha
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2006 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.019

Review 2.  Complications of Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Authors:  Kamal I Bohsali; Aaron J Bois; Michael A Wirth
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  Assessing glenosphere position: superior approach versus deltopectoral for reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  William R Aibinder; Nicholas J Clark; Bradley S Schoch; Scott P Steinmann
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 3.019

4.  Longitudinal observational study of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for irreparable rotator cuff dysfunction: results after 15 years.

Authors:  Christian Gerber; Sandro Canonica; Sabrina Catanzaro; Lukas Ernstbrunner
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2018-01-03       Impact factor: 3.019

5.  Long-Term Outcomes of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Follow-up of a Previous Study.

Authors:  Guillaume Bacle; Laurent Nové-Josserand; Pascal Garaud; Gilles Walch
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2017-03-15       Impact factor: 5.284

6.  Bilateral anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Vaqar Latif; Patrick J Denard; Allan A Young; Jean-Pierre Liotard; Gllies Walch
Journal:  Orthopedics       Date:  2012-04       Impact factor: 1.390

7.  Surgeon experience and clinical and economic outcomes for shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Jason W Hammond; William S Queale; Tae Kyun Kim; Edward G McFarland
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 5.284

8.  Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis in patients with a biconcave glenoid.

Authors:  Naoko Mizuno; Patrick J Denard; Patric Raiss; Gilles Walch
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 5.284

9.  Complication rate and implant survival for reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus total shoulder arthroplasty: results during the initial 2 years.

Authors:  Diego Villacis; Lakshmanan Sivasundaram; William C Pannell; Nathanael Heckmann; Reza Omid; George F Rick Hatch
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2016-01-18       Impact factor: 3.019

10.  Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of rotator cuff deficiency: a concise follow-up, at a minimum of five years, of a previous report.

Authors:  Derek Cuff; Rachel Clark; Derek Pupello; Mark Frankle
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2012-11-07       Impact factor: 5.284

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.