The outcome of an anatomical shoulder replacement
depends on an intact rotator cuff. In 1981 Grammont designed a novel
large-head reverse shoulder replacement for patients with cuff deficiency.
Such has been the success of this replacement that it has led to
a rapid expansion of the indications. We performed a systematic
review of the literature to evaluate the functional outcome of each
indication for the reverse shoulder replacement. Secondary outcome
measures of range of movement, pain scores and complication rates
are also presented.
The combination of an irreparable tear of the rotator cuff and destructive arthritis of the shoulder joint may cause severe pain, disability and loss of independence in the aged. Standard anatomical shoulder replacements depend on a functioning rotator cuff, and hence may fail in the presence of tears in the cuff. Many designs of non-anatomical constrained or semi-constrained prostheses have been developed for cuff tear arthropathy, but have proved unsatisfactory and were abandoned. The DePuy Delta III reverse prosthesis, designed by Grammont, medialises and stabilises the centre of rotation of the shoulder joint and has shown early promise. This study evaluated the mid-term clinical and radiological results of this arthroplasty in a consecutive series of 50 shoulders in 43 patients with a painful pseudoparalysis due to an irreparable cuff tear and destructive arthritis, performed over a period of seven years by a single surgeon. A follow-up of 98% was achieved, with a mean duration of 39 months (8 to 81). The mean age of the patients at the time of surgery was 81 years (59 to 95). The female to male ratio was 5:1. During the seven years, six patients died of natural causes. The clinical outcome was assessed using the American Shoulder and Elbow score, the Oxford Shoulder Score and the Short-form 36 score. A radiological review was performed using the Sirveaux score for scapular notching. The mean American Shoulder and Elbow score was 19 (95% confidence interval (CI) 14 to 23) pre-operatively, and 65 (95% CI 48 to 82) (paired The mean maximum elevation improved from 55° pre-operatively to 105° at final follow-up. There were seven complications during the whole series, although only four patients required further surgery.
There is little information about the management
of peri-prosthetic fracture of the humerus after total shoulder replacement
(TSR). This is a retrospective review of 22 patients who underwent
a revision of their original shoulder replacement for peri-prosthetic
fracture of the humerus with bone loss and/or loose components.
There were 20 women and two men with a mean age of 75 years (61
to 90) and a mean follow-up 42 months (12 to 91): 16 of these had
undergone a previous revision TSR. Of the 22 patients, 12 were treated
with a long-stemmed humeral component that bypassed the fracture.
All their fractures united after a mean of 27 weeks (13 to 94).
Eight patients underwent resection of the proximal humerus with
endoprosthetic replacement to the level of the fracture. Two patients
were managed with a clam-shell prosthesis that retained the original
components. The mean Oxford shoulder score (OSS) of the original
TSRs before peri-prosthetic fracture was 33 (14 to 48). The mean
OSS after revision for fracture was 25 (9 to 31). Kaplan-Meier survival
using re-intervention for any reason as the endpoint was 91% (95%
confidence interval (CI) 68 to 98) and 60% (95% CI 30 to 80) at
one and five years, respectively. There were two revisions for dislocation of the humeral head,
one open reduction for modular humeral component dissociation, one
internal fixation for nonunion, one trimming of a prominent screw
and one re-cementation for aseptic loosening complicated by infection,
ultimately requiring excision arthroplasty. Two patients sustained
nerve palsies. Revision TSR after a peri-prosthetic humeral fracture associated
with bone loss and/or loose components is a salvage procedure that
can provide a stable platform for elbow and hand function. Good
rates of union can be achieved using a stem that bypasses the fracture.
There is a high rate of complications and function is not as good as
with the original replacement.