The aim of this study is to identify risk factors for prolonged operative duration in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) for patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA).

A retrospective chart review of electronic medical records was conducted to identify patients who underwent shoulder arthroplasty for GHOA by one of six surgeons across two academic institutions between 2017 and 2023. Multivariate linear regression was used to identify factors associated with operative duration.

In total, 513 patients underwent primary ATSA, and 528 underwent primary RTSA. The mean operating room (OR) time was significantly longer in patients undergoing ATSA (183.5 ± 39.5 minutes) compared to those undergoing RTSA (150.5 ± 33.4 minutes). For ATSA, older patient age, male sex, increased body mass index, lower Charlson comorbidity index (CCI), increased preoperative retroversion, increased preoperative inclination, and a glenoid Walch classification of B2 or B3 were significant predictors of OR time. For RTSA, younger patient age, lower CCI, and increased preoperative retroversion were significant predictors of OR time.

ATSA has a significantly longer mean OR time than RTSA for the treatment of isolated GHOA. Preoperative demographic and radiographic data can be used to predict operative duration.

Although both anatomic (ATSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) have been popularized as a means of treating individuals with degenerative shoulder conditions, the indications for each can vary widely among providers. Although surgeons with differing fellowship training commonly perform these procedures, it is not understood how fellowship training influences choice of implant.

A national database was queried to identify surgeons performing ATSA and rTSA. For all surgeons who performed more than 10 cases between 2010 and 2022, fellowship data were individually collected via an online search. For each fellowship group, rates of ATSA and rTSA were identified using International Classification of Diseases procedural codes. Those who underwent revision arthroplasty and those with a history of fracture, infection, or malignancy were excluded. Primary outcome measures included the proportion of primary and revision ATSAs and rTSAs by fellowship in addition to the rate of rTSA performed for a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

A total of 131,974 patients met the inclusion criteria and were retained for this study. The proportion of rTSAs increased from 50.1% of all primary shoulder arthroplasty cases in 2011 to 72.0% in 2022. After adjusting for age and comorbidities, Sports Medicine fellowship-trained (Sports) surgeons opted for primary rTSA over ATSA at a significantly higher rate than Shoulder and Elbow fellowship-trained (Shoulder) surgeons and surgeons who completed another type of fellowship or no fellowship (Other). Sports surgeons also chose rTSA more frequently for the diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis than Shoulder surgeons. Surgeons in the Other cohort were more likely to perform primary ATSA rather than rTSA in comparison with surgeons in the Shoulder and Sports cohorts. Sports surgeons were responsible for the greatest increase in the percentage of all shoulder arthroplasty procedures from 2010 to 2022 (28.4%-40.4%), whereas the Other group decreased by a comparable amount (45.9%-32.4%) over the same period.

Surgeons who have completed a Sports Medicine fellowship choose rTSA over ATSA at a higher rate than Shoulder and Elbow surgeons, both for all indications and for a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Those who have no fellowship training or fellowship training outside of Sports Medicine and Shoulder and Elbow surgery have the highest percentage of ATSAs in their arthroplasty practice. Revision ATSA and revision rTSA represent a larger percentage of overall case volume for Shoulder and Elbow surgeons.

It is still unclear whether reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has advantages over traditional hemiarthroplasty (HA) and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA) in the treatment of complex shoulder joint diseases. Therefore, this study aims to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of RTSA in the treatment of complex shoulder joint diseases and further determine whether it is necessary to expand the indications of RTSA.

We conducted a systematic search of studies published between January 1, 2012 and May 31, 2023 in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The experimental group included patients who underwent primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), while the control group consisted of patients who underwent primary hemiarthroplasty (HA) or anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA). The minimum follow-up period was 1 year, and a random-effects model was utilized for data synthesis.

A total of 45 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compare to HA, RTSA showed significant advantages in postoperative ASES scores (p = 0.004), forward flexion (p < 0.0001), and abduction (p < 0.0001). Compare to ATSA, RTSA showed significantly lower postoperative Constant scores (p = 0.004), ASES scores (p = 0.001), SST scores (p < 0.0001), forward flexion (p < 0.0001), abduction (p = 0.011), internal rotation (p < 0.0001), and external rotation (p < 0.0001). Further meta regression analysis was conducted, considering factors such as region, age, gender ratio, and follow-up time, excluding the influence of relevant factors. Overall, RTSA did not demonstrate advantages in postoperative functional scores and range of motion. In terms of complication and revision rates, RTSA had lower rates compared to HA and ATSA, except for the complication rate, where there was no significant difference between RTSA and ATSA (p = 0.521), but statistically significant differences were observed in other measures.

RTSA demonstrates better clinical efficacy compared to HA but is inferior to ATSA. It can be considered for expanding treatment options for elderly patients with 3 or 4-part proximal humeral fractures, but it is not suitable for treating end-stage shoulder arthritis and humeral head necrosis. Overall, the decision to use RTSA should be carefully evaluated based on the extent of the patient's rotator cuff injury.

The optimal management of primary glenohumeral arthritis (GHOA) in the elderly is an ongoing topic of debate. The purpose of this study was to compare functional outcomes and complications in patients aged 75 years or older treated with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for primary GHOA with an intact rotator cuff.

A retrospective study was performed on a prospectively maintained database which was queried for patients 75 years of age or older who underwent TSA or RSA for primary GHOA with an intact rotator cuff at a single institution between 2012 and 2021 with minimum 2-year follow-up. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs), including Visual Analog Scale for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, and Subjective Shoulder Value, as well as active range of motion including forward flexion, external rotation, internal rotation, were collected preoperatively and postoperatively. Complications, reoperations, and satisfaction were also recorded. The percentage of patients achieving clinically significant improvement was evaluated with the minimally clinical important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptomatic state for each PRO.

One-hundred and 4 patients were available for analysis, including 67 TSA patients and 37 RSAs with a mean follow-up of 39.4 months. Preoperative baseline characteristics, PROs, and range of motion were similar between groups. RSA was more commonly performed for eccentric glenoid wear (Walch B2/B3, 62% vs. 22%; P < .001). While clinical outcomes improved comparably in both groups, the TSA cohort showed significantly greater improvement in external rotation (36° vs. 26°; P = .013). Both cohorts had low revision (3% for TSA vs. 0% for RSA) and complication (7% for TSA vs. 5% for RSA; P = .677) rates. Satisfaction was similar in both groups (93% for TSA vs. 92% for RSA; P = .900). Clinically significant improvement was comparable between groups based on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (minimally clinical important difference, 93% for TSA vs. 100% for RSA; substantial clinical benefit, 82% vs. 95%; patient acceptable symptomatic state, 67% vs. 78%; P > .05).

In this retrospective small sample size comparison study, TSA and RSA provide similar short-term clinical outcomes for patients 75 years and older with primary GHOA and an intact rotator cuff. Complication and revision rates are comparably low at short-term follow-up. Our data suggests that advanced age alone should not be used as a decision-making tool for TSA vs. RSA in the setting of primary GHOA with an intact rotator cuff.

The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is defined as the smallest meaningful change in a health domain that a patient would identify as important. Thus, an improvement that exceeds the MCID can be used to define a successful treatment for the individual patient.

To quantify the rate of clinical improvement following anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

Patients were treated with the Global Unite total shoulder platform arthroplasty between March 2017 and February 2019 at Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Denmark. The patients were evaluated preoperatively and 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, and 24 months postoperatively using the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder index (WOOS), Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) and Constant-Murley Score (CMS). The rate of clinically relevant improvement was defined as the proportion of patients who had an improvement 24 months postoperatively that exceeded the MCID. Based on previous literature, MCID for WOOS, OSS, and CMS were defined as 12.3, 4.3, and 12.8 respectively.

Forty-nine patients with a Global Unite total shoulder platform arthroplasty were included for the final analysis. Mean age at the time of surgery was 66 years (range 49.0-79.0, SD: 8.3) and 65% were women. One patient was revised within the two years follow-up. The mean improvement from the preoperative assessment to the two-year follow-up was 46.1 points [95% confidence interval (95%CI): 39.7-53.3, P < 0.005] for WOOS, 18.2 points (95%CI: 15.5-21.0, P < 0.005) for OSS and 37.8 points (95%CI: 31.5-44.0, P < 0.005) for CMS. Two years postoperatively, 41 patients (87%) had an improvement in WOOS that exceeded the MCID, 45 patients (94%) had an improvement in OSS that exceeded the MCID, and 42 patients (88%) had an improvement in CMS that exceeded the MCID.

Based on three shoulder-specific outcome measures we find that approximately 90% of patients has a clinically relevant improvement. This is a clear message when informing patients about their prognosis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis compared the revision rates, complications, and outcomes in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) and reverse TSA (rTSA) performed for primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis in patients aged over 70 years without a full-thickness rotator cuff tear.

We performed a systematic literature search identifying comparative studies meeting the above patient criteria and published from January 2010 to May 2022 from 3 databases: MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. We performed the systematic review in accordance with PRISMA guidelines and the study was prospectively registered on PROSPERO.

From the 1798 studies identified from the initial literature search, 4 met our inclusion criteria. Two thousand seven hundred thirty-one shoulder arthroplasties (1472 aTSA and 1259 rTSA) were evaluated with a minimum follow up of 2 years. A statistically significant lower revision rate was observed in rTSA compared to aTSA (odds ratio [OR] 0.50, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.30, 0.84, p < .05). No significant difference was noted between aTSA and rTSA in overall complication rate (OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.34, 2.86, p = .97) while aTSA displayed a statistically significant improved postoperative Constant-Murley score [aTSA: 80(75; 82), rTSA: 68(66; 76.5), p < .001].

Higher revision rates were identified following aTSA in our study population, although admittedly this is within retrospective studies. aTSA displayed equal functional results and postoperative complications compared to rTSA in patients over 70 without a full-thickness rotator cuff tear. Given these similar results a shoulder surgeon must carefully consider each patient individually prior to deciding the optimal form of arthroplasty to offer.

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), initially indicated for cuff tear arthropathy, is increasingly used to treat elderly patients with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) and an intact rotator cuff. This is often done to avoid revision surgery in elderly patients for rotator cuff failure with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) despite traditionally good outcomes of TSA. We sought to determine whether there was a difference in outcomes in patients aged ≥70 years who received RTSA vs. TSA for GHOA.

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from a US integrated health care system's shoulder arthroplasty registry. Patients aged ≥70 years who underwent primary shoulder arthroplasty for GHOA with an intact rotator cuff were included (2012-2021). RTSA was compared with TSA. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate all-cause revision risk during follow-up, whereas multivariable logistic regression was used to evaluate 90-day emergency department (ED) visits and 90-day readmissions.

The final study sample comprised 685 RTSA patients and 3106 TSA patients. The mean age was 75.8 years (standard deviation, 4.6 years), and 43.4% of patients were men. After accounting for confounders, we observed no significant difference in all-cause revision risk for RTSA vs. TSA (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.39-1.58). The most common reason for revision following RTSA was glenoid component loosening (40.0%). Over half of revisions following TSA were for rotator cuff tear (54.0%). No difference based on procedure type was observed in the likelihood of 90-day ED visits (odds ratio, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.71-1.26) and 90-day readmissions (odds ratio, 1.32; 95% CI, 0.83-2.09).

RTSA and TSA for GHOA with an intact rotator cuff in patients aged ≥70 years had a similar revision risk, as well as a similar likelihood of 90-day ED visits and readmissions. Although revision risk was similar, the most common causes of revision were different, with rotator cuff tears in TSA patients and glenoid component loosening in RTSA patients.

Both anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) reliably improve pain and function for a variety of indications. However, there remain concerns about these procedures among elderly patients due to their general health, the potential for lesser functional gain, and the possible need for revision at an even older age. The purpose of this review is to compare the clinical outcomes, radiographic outcomes, and complications of ATSA and RTSA among patients older than 70 years.

A systematic review was performed using searches of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases. The inclusion criteria were studies with patients older than 70 years who were treated with a primary ATSA or RTSA and clinical results reported at a minimum of 2 years. All indications for primary RTSA except for tumor were included. Outcomes of interest included patient-reported outcomes (PROs), range of motion, patient satisfaction, radiographic changes, complication and revision rates, and implant survival.

A total of 24 studies met the inclusion criteria. At a mean follow-up of 3.4 years for ATSA and 3.1 years for RTSA, there were significant improvements in pain, range of motion, and PROs for both prostheses. Patients who underwent ATSA generally had better motion and functional outcomes compared to those who underwent RTSA, though these comparisons were made across different indications for arthroplasty. The satisfaction rate was 90.9% after ATSA and 90.8% after RTSA. Furthermore, 10.2% of ATSA patients and 9.9% of RTSA patients experienced a surgical complication, whereas 2.3% of ATSA and 2.2% of RTSA patients underwent a revision. Secondary rotator cuff tear was the most common complication after ATSA, occurring in 3.7% of patients, but only 1.1% of patients required revision surgery. Both ATSA and RTSA implant survivorship was reported to range from 93.1% to 98.9% at 5- and 8-year follow-up, respectively. Patient mortality was estimated to be 19.3% with a mean time to death of 6.1 years.

Elderly patients with primary osteoarthritis and an intact rotator cuff can have predictable pain relief, restoration of functional range of motion, and significant improvement in PROs after ATSA with low complication rates. Secondary rotator cuff failure and revision arthroplasty occur infrequently at early to mid-term follow-up. Although elderly patients who underwent ATSA generally had better functional outcomes compared to those who underwent RTSA for differing indications, patient satisfaction after both procedures were similar.

The purpose of this study was to compare the medium-term results for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty by humeral component stem length. We hypothesize that the newer stemless implants may have comparable results to short-stem and conventional stemmed implants.

The 12 most used anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty implants on the New Zealand Joint Registry were included in the study. Implants were categorized by stem length-conventional, short, and stemless. The primary outcome was revision up to 7 years postsurgery. Secondary outcomes included revision cause, implant survival, and early functional outcomes as evaluated by the Oxford Shoulder Score. Analysis was stratified by age and surgeon volume to control for potential confounding.

A total of 3952 patients (conventional, 3114; short, 360; stemless, 478) were included in the study. No significant difference in revision rate per 100 component-years was found between stemless, short-stem, and conventional stemmed implants (revision rate per 100 component-years: conventional, 1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89-1.14]; short, 0.54 [95% CI 0.25-1.03]; stemless, 0.99 [95% CI 0.51-1.74]). This finding was irrespective of patient age or surgeon volume. There were no cases of humeral loosening up to 7 years' follow-up and no cases of intraoperative humeral fracture in the stemless group. Functional outcomes at 6 months postsurgery suggested better outcomes in the stemless group compared with the conventional stem group (mean Oxford Shoulder Score: conventional, 39.4; stemless, 40.7; P value = .023).

The medium-term survival of stemless implants for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty appears comparable to short-stem and conventional stemmed implants. Further follow-up is required to understand the long-term survivorship and functional outcomes between these groups.