Pre-operative factors affecting the indications for anatomical and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in primary osteoarthritis and outcome comparison in patients aged seventy years and older. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 44, 1131–1141 (2020).

Pre-operative factors affecting the indications for anatomical and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in primary osteoarthritis and outcome comparison in patients aged seventy years and older

Merolla, G., De Cupis, M., Walch, G. et al.
Shoulder

Background

We evaluated the pre-operative factors affecting anatomical and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA and RTSA) indications in primary osteoarthritis and compared outcomes in patients aged 70 years and older.

Methods

Fifty-eight patients received a TSA with an all-polyethylene glenoid component (APGC) or an RTSA with/without glenoid lateralization and the same curved short-stem humeral component. Active anterior and lateral elevation (AAE, ALE), internal and external rotation (IR, ER), pain, and the Constant–Murley score (CS) were recorded pre and post-operatively. Pre-operative rotator cuff (RC) fatty infiltration (FI) and modified Walch glenoid morphology were assessed. Humeral and glenoid component radiological outcomes were recorded.

Results

RTSA were older than TSA patients (p = 0.006), had lower pre-operative AAE (p < 0.001), ALE (p < 0.001), IR (p = 0.002), pain (p = 0.008) and CS (p < 0.001), and greater supraspinatus FI (p < 0.001). At a mean of 28.8 months, both implants yielded significantly different post-operative scores and similar complication rates. Both groups achieved similar post-operative AAE, ER, and IR; ALE was higher in TSA (p = 0.006); and AAE and ALE delta scores were higher in RTSA (p = 0.045 and p = 0.033, respectively). Radiolucent line rates were higher around the TSA APGC than the RTSA baseplate (p = 0.001). High-grade RC FI adversely affected mobility improvement. Humeral cortical thinning was significantly higher in TSA (p = 0.001).

Conclusion

RTSA patients were older, had poorer pre-operative active mobility, and had greater RC FI than TSA. Both devices provided good mid-term clinical and ROM improvement.


Download article