Biologic resurfacing of the glenoid combined with surface replacement hemiarthroplasty for relatively young patients suffering from advanced glenohumeral arthritis has the advantages of both humeral head and glenoid bone preservation. The longer term results of this procedure are reported.

Twenty two shoulders in 21 patients had a surface replacement hemiarthroplasty with resurfacing of the glenoid with the anterior capsule. At follow up one had died, and another was not contactable. The prosthesis was removed in one for deep infection, and the fourth patient had undergone revision to a total shoulder arthroplasty for ongoing pain. Therefore, 17 patients with 18 operated shoulders were available for clinical assessment. The average age of the patients was 54.8 years (35–78) at the time of surgery.

The average length of follow-up was 4.8 years (2–10.6). The average Constant Score was 71.4 points (41–95), and the sex- and age-adjusted Constant Score was 83.9%. The mean ASES score was 74.4 points (35–100). The average arc of forward flexion was 130 degrees (100–160), and external rotation was 39 degrees (20–60). On a VAS scale of 0 to 10, the average pain score at rest was 0.5 (0–3), while pain with activity was 2.4 (0–6). Sixteen of the 17 patients (94%) had a satisfactory result, and would have the operation again. Eight of the 17 patients (47%) were able to return to their previous sporting activities. Radiographic follow-up demonstrated there were 2 mild and 2 moderate cases of superior subluxation of the humeral head. There was no subsidence or signs of loosening of any humeral prosthesis. The average glenohumeral joint space was 0.13mm (0–2). Glenoid erosion was none in one case, mild in 6 cases, moderate in 6 cases, and severe in 3 shoulders.

Although the results of this procedure compare favourably with other series, the extent of glenoid erosion is concerning. A more robust tissue for interposition may give better results

A vascular necrosis of the lunate, first described by Kienböck, can be treated either conservatively or by various surgical procedures. We compared the results of 18 conservatively treated patients, all of whom had stage-2 or stage-3 disease, with those of 15 who underwent a radial shortening procedure. We evaluated pain, range of movement, grip strength and functional disability, and determined the progression of the disease by assessing radiologically carpal height, the width and flattening of the lunate, the radioscaphoid angle, the pattern of the fracture and sclerosis and cysts. The mean follow-up was for 3.6 years (1.5 to 9).

Patients treated by radial shortening had less pain and better grip strength than those managed conservatively. In some patients with stage-3 disease treated conservatively there was rapid deterioration to carpal collapse. Although radial shortening did not reverse or prevent carpal collapse, it slowed down the process in patients with stage-3 disease.

We recommend a radial shortening procedure for patients with severe pain and radiological signs of progressive carpal collapse.