Aims. The objective of this study was to compare simulated range of motion (ROM) for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) with and without adjustment for scapulothoracic orientation in a global reference system. We hypothesized that values for simulated ROM in preoperative planning software with and without adjustment for scapulothoracic orientation would be significantly different. Methods. A statistical shape model of the entire humerus and scapula was fitted into ten shoulder CT scans randomly selected from 162 patients who underwent rTSA. Six shoulder surgeons independently planned a rTSA in each model using prototype development software with the ability to adjust for scapulothoracic orientation, the starting position of the humerus, as well as kinematic planes in a global reference system simulating previously described posture types A, B, and C. ROM with and without posture adjustment was calculated and compared in all movement planes. Results. All movement planes showed significant differences when comparing protocols with and without adjustment for posture. The largest mean difference was seen in external rotation, being 62° (SD 16°) without adjustment compared to 25° (SD 9°) with posture adjustment (p < 0.001), with the highest mean difference being 49° (SD 15°) in type C. Mean extension was 57° (SD 18°) without adjustment versus 24° (SD 11°) with adjustment (p < 0.001) and the highest mean difference of 47° (SD 18°) in type C. Mean abducted internal rotation was 69° (SD 11°) without adjustment versus 31° (SD 6°) with posture adjustment (p < 0.001), showing the highest mean difference of 51° (SD 11°) in type C. Conclusion. The present study demonstrates that accounting for scapulothoracic orientation has a significant impact on simulated ROM for rTSA in all motion planes, specifically rendering vastly lower values for external rotation, extension, and high internal rotation. The substantial differences observed in this study warrant a critical re-evaluation of all previously published studies that examined component choice and placement for optimized ROM in rTSA using conventional preoperative planning software. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(11):1284–1292

Aims. Scapular notching is thought to have an adverse effect on the outcome of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). However, the matter is still controversial. The aim of this study was to determine the clinical impact of scapular notching on outcomes after RTSA. Methods. Three electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Database, and EMBASE) were searched for studies which evaluated the influence of scapular notching on clinical outcome after RTSA. The quality of each study was assessed. Functional outcome scores (the Constant-Murley scores (CMS), and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores), and postoperative range of movement (forward flexion (FF), abduction, and external rotation (ER)) were extracted and subjected to meta-analysis. Effect sizes were expressed as weighted mean differences (WMD). Results. In all, 11 studies (two level III and nine level IV) were included in the meta-analysis. All analyzed variables indicated that scapular notching has a negative effect on the outcome of RTSA . Statistical significance was found for the CMS (WMD –3.11; 95% confidence interval (CI) –4.98 to –1.23), the ASES score (WMD –6.50; 95% CI –10.80 to –2.19), FF (WMD –6.3°; 95% CI –9.9° to –2.6°), and abduction (WMD –9.4°; 95% CI –17.8° to –1.0°), but not for ER (WMD –0.6°; 95% CI –3.7° to 2.5°). Conclusion. The current literature suggests that patients with scapular notching after RTSA have significantly worse results when evaluated by the CMS, ASES score, and range of movement in flexion and abduction. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(11):1438–1445

Aims

This study aimed to determine the minimal detectable change (MDC), minimal clinically important difference (MCID), and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) under distribution- and anchor-based methods for the Mayo Elbow Performance Index (MEPI) and range of movement (ROM) after open elbow arthrolysis (OEA). We also assessed the proportion of patients who achieved MCID and SCB; and identified the factors associated with achieving MCID.