Aims. Body exhaust suits or surgical helmet systems (colloquially, ‘space suits’) are frequently used in many forms of arthroplasty, with the aim of providing personal protection to surgeons and, perhaps, reducing periprosthetic joint infections, although this has not consistently been borne out in systematic reviews and registry studies. To date, no large-scale study has investigated whether this is applicable to shoulder arthroplasty. We used the New Zealand Joint Registry to assess whether the use of surgical helmet systems was associated with lower all-cause revision or revision for deep infection in primary shoulder arthroplasties. Methods. We analyzed 16,000 shoulder arthroplasties (hemiarthroplasties, anatomical, and reverse geometry prostheses) recorded on the New Zealand Joint Registry from its inception in 2000 to the present day. We assessed patient factors including age, BMI, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) grade, as well as whether or not the operation took place in a laminar flow operating theatre. Results. A total of 2,728 operations (17%) took place using surgical helmet systems. Patient cohorts were broadly similar in terms of indication for surgery (osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, fractures) and medical comorbidities (age and sex). There were 842 revisions (5% of cases) with just 98 for deep infection (0.6% of all cases or 11.6% of the revisions). There were no differences in all-cause revisions or revision for deep infection between the surgical helmet systems and conventional gowns (p = 0.893 and p = 0.911, respectively). Conclusion. We found no evidence that wearing a surgical helmet system reduces the incidence of periprosthetic joint infection in any kind of primary shoulder arthroplasty. We acknowledge the limitations of this registry study and accept that there may be other benefits in terms of personal protection, comfort, or visibility. However, given their financial and ecological footprint, they should be used judiciously in shoulder surgery. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(10):894–897

Introduction: Surgical treatment of glenohumeral joint pathologies with both hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty have shown good results. Although techniques and designs have improved, patients do undergo revision surgery. Complications like chronic instability, inadequate function of the rotator cuff, infection and early component loosening become compromising on the result of shoulder arthroplasty. Revision surgery with the reverse Delta-III prosthesis is a promising treatment modality. The goal of this study was to evaluate the outcome of revision arthroplasty with Delta-III prosthesis after failed primary shoulder arthroplasty. Material and methods: From 1996 till 2001, we retrospectively analysed 24 patients who underwent revision arthroplasty with a Delta-III-Prosthesis. Out of them 17 had been operated with a hemiarthroplasty and 7 with a total shoulder arthroplasty for different pathologies. Data assessment included pre- and postoperative subjective shoulder value and Constant score. Standard radiographs were performed at time of follow-up. Results: At average follow-up time of 39 months, patient showed a significant pre- to postoperative gain in subjective shoulder value, relative constant score, active range of motion and strength together with reduction of pain (p< 0.05). No difference was seen in the outcome, if revision arthroplasty was performed after hemiarthro-plasty or total shoulder replacement. Complications were observed in more than 30% of the cases. Conclusion: In case of failure of primary shoulder arthroplasty, revision with an inverse Delta-III prosthesis is a good treatment option. Good functional results are observed at short to mid term follow up. This outcome though is slightly compromised by a relatively high complication rate

Aim. Recent studies have indicated that the presence of P. acnes in the skin of the shoulder and around the acromion is higher than other body regions like the knee or the hip. The aim of this study was to estimate the presence of P. acnes in a real set of primary shoulder arthroplasty, after skin preparation with chlorhexidine and administration of empirical antibiotic therapy. Method. A prospective observational study involving 63 patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty was designed. In all patients two skin biopsies with a 3 mm dermal punch and one subcutaneous tissue sample after surgical incision were obtained. Skin biopsies were obtained at the most anterior part of the surgical wound in case of superior approach and at the upper part in the deltopectoral approach. All patients underwent preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis with cefazolin 2g ev and skin preparation with 2% chlorhexidine alcoholic tinted before the start of surgery twice. The aerobic cultures were incubated at 37ºC for 7 days whereas the anaerobic ones incubated for 14 days. Results. A total of 63 consecutive patients who underwent shoulder arthroplasty (58 reverse shoulder arthroplasty and 5 anatomical) were analysed. 54 women and 9 men, mean age of 73.94 (SD 6.19). The indication for arthroplasty was a secondary arthropathy cuff injury in 42 cases, primary osteoarthritis in 3, acute fracture in 9 and fracture sequelae in 9. We obtained 189 tissue cultures (126 skin cultures and 63 subcutaneous) and 4 cultures were positive (2.02%) for P. acnes in 3 different patients. A first patient (female) had both positive skin cultures, the second patient (male) only had positive the subcutaneous tissue cultures and the third patient had positive also the subcutaneous tissue culture. The first patient underwent anatomical shoulder arthroplasty whereas the second and third patients underwent reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The time to grow was 15 days in first patient and 14 days in the second and third patient (mean 14.5 days). Conclusions. In a real setting of patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty using antibiotic prophylaxis and standard preoperative skin preparation with chlorhexidine we found a low rate of positive cultures for P. acnes (2.02 %). The higher rate of P. acnes positive cultures in skin reported in previous studies may be caused by a different population study group (healthy and younger volunteers without antibiotic prophylaxis) or suboptimal culture technique (use of swaps)

Aim. To identify and quantify the reasons for failure of primary shoulder arthroplasty. Materials. Seventy-nine Revision Shoulder Arthroplasties (RSA) in 75 patients were performed between January 1990 and July 2003. Twelve patients underwent more than one revision. Five patients were lost to follow-up. The indications for PSA (38 total shoulder arthroplasties, 37 hemiarthroplasties) were trauma (22), osteoarthritis (13), rheumatoid arthritis (11), avascular necrosis (9), cuff tear arthropathy (9), traumatic arthritis (5), capsulorraphy arthropathy (4),and instability (2). Glenoid and humeral bone stock, and rotator cuff integrity were analysed and the reasons for failure of the index procedure were determined. Results. The median interval between PSA and RSA was 46 months (1 month to 22.8 years; mean 28 months). Thirty-six (58.1%) PSAs (of which 26 of 37 hemiarthroplasties (70%)) failed in the first three years. Failure of the PSA was caused by rotator cuff deficiency (24), glenoid bone erosion (19), glenoid component loosening (25), humeral bone erosion (3), infection of the implant (3) and periprosthetic fracture (1). Revision of a loose humeral component was performed in 6 cases, but 31 humeral components were revised in order to deal with glenoid or rotator cuff conditions. Conclusion. When faced with a limited surgical armamentarium or tactic, there is a predictable rate of failure of shoulder replacement involving the interaction of the failed or failing rotator cuff and the evolution of glenoid deficiency

The aim of this study was to examine the incidence of obesity in patients undergoing primary total shoulder replacement (TSR) (stemmed and reverse) for osteoarthritis (OA) in Australia compared to the incidence of obesity in the general population.

A 2017–18 cohort of 2,621 patients from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) who underwent TSR, were compared with matched controls from the Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) National Health Survey from the same period. The two groups were analysed according to BMI category, sex and age.

According to the 2017–18 National Health Survey, 35.6% of Australian adults are overweight and 31.3% are obese. Of the primary TSR cases performed, 34.2% were overweight and 28.6% were obese. The relative risk of requiring TSR for OA increased with increasing BMI category. Class-3 obese females, aged 55–64, were 8.9 times more likely to require TSR compared to normal weight counterparts. Males in the same age and BMI category were 2.5 times more likely. Class-3 obese patients underwent TSR 4 years (female) and 7 years (male) sooner than their normal weight counterparts.

Our findings suggest that the obese population is at risk for early and more frequent TSR for OA. Previous studies demonstrate that obese patients undergoing TSR also exhibit increased risks of longer operative times, higher superficial infection rates, higher periprosthetic fracture rates, significantly reduced post-operative forward flexion range and greater revision rates.

Obesity significantly increases the risk of requiring TSR. To our knowledge this is the first study to publish data pertaining to age and BMI stratification of TSR Societal efforts are vital to diminish the prevalence and burden of obesity related TSR.

There may well be reversible pathophysiology in the obese population to address prior to surgery (adipokines, leptin, NMDA receptor upregulation). Surgery occurs due to recalcitrant or increased pain despite non-op Mx.

The August 2023 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup360 looks at: Motor control or strengthening exercises for rotator cuff-related shoulder pain? A multi-arm randomized controlled trial; Does the choice of antibiotic prophylaxis influence reoperation rate in primary shoulder arthroplasty?; Common shoulder injuries in sport: grading the evidence; The use of medial support screw was associated with axillary nerve injury after plate fixation of proximal humeral fracture using a minimally invasive deltoid-splitting approach; MRI predicts outcomes of conservative treatment in patients with lateral epicondylitis; Association between surgeon volume and patient outcomes after elective shoulder arthroplasty; Arthroscopic decompression of calcific tendinitis without cuff repair; Functional outcome after nonoperative management of minimally displaced greater tuberosity fractures and predictors of poorer patient experience

Aims. The aim of this study is to evaluate the change in incidence rate of shoulder arthroplasty, indications, and surgeon volume trends associated with these procedures between January 2003 and April 2021 in the province of Nova Scotia, Canada. Methods. A total of 1,545 patients between 2005 and 2021 were analyzed. Patients operated on between 2003 and 2004 were excluded due to a lack of electronic records. Overall, 84.1% of the surgeries (n = 1,299) were performed by two fellowship-trained upper limb surgeons, with the remainder performed by one of the 14 orthopaedic surgeons working in the province. Results. Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) was the most frequent procedure (32.17%; n = 497), followed by stemmed hemiarthroplasty (SHA) (27.7%; n = 428). The most frequent indication for primary shoulder arthroplasty was degenerative osteoarthritis (58.1%; n = 882), followed by acute proximal humerus fracture in 15.11% (n = 245), and rotator cuff arthropathy in 14.18% (n = 220). The overall rate of revision was 7.7% (2.8% to 11.2%). The number of TSAs and reverse shoulder arthroplasties (RSAs) has been increasing since 2016. The amount of revision cases is proportional to the number of operations performed in the same year throughout the study period. Conclusion. The incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the Maritime Provinces has increased over the last 16 years. Revision rates are similar the those found in other large database registries. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty prevalence has increased since 2016. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2023;4(8):567–572

Aim. Cutibacterium acnes (C. acnes) is the most cultured organism implicated in periprosthetic shoulder infections. Nevertheless, the clinical significance of its persistence on the skin surface and in the deep layers during shoulder arthroplasty surgery remains still unknown. The purpose of this study was to know if the C. acnes isolate present in deep tissues at the end of a primary shoulder arthroplasty could be responsible for shoulder arthroplasty infection. Method. Prospective study including 156 patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty. In all the patients included 5 to 12 tissue samples were obtained and were specifically cultured to detect C. acnes presence. DNA was extracted from the C. acnes colonies selected with the QIAsymphony DSP Virus/Pathogen Midi Kit (Qiagen, Hilden, Germany). Libraries were prepared using Nextera XT kit (Illumina) and sequenced in an Illumina MiSeq sequencer. Sequencing files were pre-processed using The Microbial Genome Atlas pipeline. Samples that failed on QC analysis were discarded for further analysis. Isolate nucleotide distances were calculated using Genome-based distance matrix calculator from the enveomics collection. Comparative genomic analysis was performed between intra- and inter-patients’ isolates. Data analysis was performed using R 3.6.3. Results. For twenty-seven out of 156 patients (17.31%), C. acnes was present at the end of the primary surgery. Two of these patients (both male) developed a C. acnes periprosthetic shoulder infection after 6 and 4 months from the primary surgery. DNA from the C. acnes responsible for the periprosthetic infection was further analysed by whole genome sequencing (WGS). Average Nucleotide Identity (ANI) value was assessed, measuring the nucleotide-level genomic similarity between genome pairs. We found a clear ANI clustering in two major groups which corresponded, mainly, to the associated phylotype (97%–98% ANI). Moreover, when analysing both isolates that developed a periprosthetic shoulder infection, we found that all the revision-surgery isolates clustered nearer to their corresponding primary-surgery isolates (99.4% of similarity) than to the other independent bacterial isolates, supporting the causal relationship between the initial and the delayed infection. Conclusions. C. acnes present at the end of the primary surgery can be the cause of early- or delayed-periprosthetic joint infections in shoulder arthroplasty, revealing the potential route of infection. Therefore, efforts must be made in terms of antibiotic prophylaxis and skin preparation to limit infections of total shoulder arthroplasties

Aims. The aim of this study was to use national registry database information to estimate cumulative rates and relative risk of revision due to infection after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Patients and Methods. We included 17 730 primary shoulder arthroplasties recorded between 2004 and 2013 in The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) data set. With the Kaplan–Meier method, we illustrated the ten-year cumulative rates of revision due to infection and with the Cox regression model, we reported the hazard ratios as a measure of the relative risk of revision due to infection. Results. In all, 188 revisions were reported due to infection during a mean follow-up of three years and nine months. The ten-year cumulative rate of revision due to infection was 1.4% overall, but 3.1% for reverse shoulder arthroplasties and 8.0% for reverse shoulder arthroplasties in men. Reverse shoulder arthroplasties were associated with an increased risk of revision due to infection also when adjusted for sex, age, primary diagnosis, and year of surgery (relative risk 2.41 (95% confidence interval 1.26 to 5.59); p = 0.001). Conclusion. The overall incidence of revision due to infection was low. The increased risk in reverse shoulder arthroplasty must be borne in mind, especially when offering it to men. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:702–707

Glenoid bone loss is not an uncommon challenge in both primary shoulder arthroplasty surgery and revision surgery. Walch described the classification of glenoid morphology and this has led to an understanding of the expanded role for bone grafting, patient-specific implants and reverse prostheses. While bone grafting of the glenoid in conventional arthroplasty has been shown to be successful in some patients it is more routinely used in combination with reverse prostheses. More recently, augmented glenoid components have been developed for both conventional and reverse arthroplasty, though follow-up is insufficient to confirm their durability at this time

The number of shoulder arthroplasty procedures performed in the United States continues to rise. Currently, the number of procedures performed per year ranges from 55,000–80,000 and is expected to increase more than 300% in the coming years. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most serious complications associated with arthroplasty surgery, leading to poor outcomes, increased cost, and technically difficult revision surgery. The incidence of infection following primary shoulder arthroplasty has been reported between 0.7% and 4%, representing 2.9–4.6% of all complications. Prosthetic shoulder joint infections are unlike prosthetic joint infections of the hip and knee. Shoulder PJIs are primarily indolent in nature and difficult to diagnose using traditional methods that have been shown to be accurate for periprosthetic infections of the hip and knee. The majority of infected revision shoulder arthroplasties are associated with growth of Propionibacterium acnes (P. Acnes). This slow-growing, anaerobic organism requires longer than normal incubation times for culture (7–21 days), and typically demonstrates a subtle, non-specific clinical presentation that can make the presence of infection difficult to identify. In the reported literature, P. Acnes accounts for about 70% of cases with positive cultures associated with revision for treatment of a painful shoulder arthroplasty and due to the bacteria's slow growing nature and virulence profile, the rate of infection following shoulder arthroplasty may often be underestimated. A more recent and promising tool for evaluation of periprosthetic infection has been analysis of synovial fluid. Synovial fluid biomarkers have been identified as part of the innate response to pathogens, and include pro-inflammatory cytokines and anti-microbial peptides, and marker levels have shown promise for improved diagnostic efficacy in hip and knee PJI. Currently, no highly predictive clinical test for diagnosis of PJI in the shoulder exists, however, several of these synovial biomarkers have recently been analyzed for their diagnostic capacity in the setting of periprosthetic shoulder infection. Synovial fluid cytokine analysis shows the potential to improve diagnosis of infection in revision shoulder arthroplasty. This information can help to guide decision-making in the management of PJI of the shoulder, including the decision to perform a single- vs. two-stage revision surgery, and the need for post-operative antibiotics following an unexpected positive culture result after revision surgery. However, there are still challenges to broader use of these synovial biomarkers. Synovial α-defensin (Synovsure, CD Diagnostic) is the only marker currently available as a commercial test, and no point-of-care test is currently available for any of the biomarkers to allow for intraoperative decision-making. While a preoperative synovial aspirate is possible to send for α-defensin analysis currently, with results back in approximately 24 hours, dry fluid aspirations are frequent in the shoulder because of the predominance of indolent pathogens and may limit utility of the test. In summary, indolent infection associated with P. acnes is a common cause for the painful total shoulder arthroplasty. Pre-operative diagnosis of infection is difficult as a result of the poor diagnostic accuracy of traditional methods of testing. Synovial biomarker testing may ultimately improve our ability to more accurately diagnosis and treat prosthetic shoulder joint infections

The advent of modern anatomic shoulder arthroplasty occurred in the 1990's with the revelation that the humeral head dimensions had a fixed ratio between the head diameter and height. As surgeons moved from the concept of balancing soft tissue tension by using variable neck lengths for a given humeral head diameter, a flawed concept based on lower extremity reconstruction, improvements in range of motion and function were immediately observed. Long term outcome has validated this guiding principle for anatomic shoulder replacement with improved longevity of implants, improved patient and surgeon expectations and satisfaction with results. Once the ideal humeral head prosthesis is identified, and its position prepared, the surgeon must use a method to fix the position of the head that is correct in three dimensions and has the security to withstand patient activities and provide maximal longevity. Based again on lower extremity concepts, long stems were the standard of care, initially with cement, and now, almost universally without cement for a primary shoulder replacement. The incredibly low revision rates for humeral stem aseptic loosening shifted much of the attempted innovation to the challenges on the glenoid side of the reconstruction. However, glenoid problems including revision surgery, infections, periprosthetic fractures, and other complications often required the removal of the humeral stem. And, in many cases, the overall results of the procedure and the patient's long-term outcome was affected by the difficulty in removing the stem, leading surgeons to compromise the revision procedure, avoid revision surgery, or add to the overall morbidity with humeral fractures and substantial bone loss. With improved technology, including bone ingrowth methods, better matching of the proximal stem geometry to the humerus, and an understanding that the center of rotation (torque) on the humeral component is at the level of the humeral osteotomy, shorter stems and stemless humeral components were developed, now more than 10 years ago, primarily in Europe. With more than a decade of experience, our European colleagues have shown us that stemless humeral component replacement with a device that has both cortical and cancellous fixation is as effective as a stemmed device, easier to implant as well as revise when needed. The short-term results of the cancellous fixation stemless devices are acceptable, but longer follow-up is needed. Currently, the most widely used humeral components in the USA are short stem components, although the recent FDA approval of numerous stemless devices has initiated a shift from short stems to stemless devices. The truth is, short stem devices have a firm position in the USA surgeons' armamentarium today due to regulatory restrictions. A decade ago, without a predicate on the market, it was not conceivable that a stemless device that was already gaining popularity in Europe would be able to get 510K approval, and therefore would require a lengthy and expensive FDA IDE process. However, shorter stems had already been approved in the USA, as long as the stem length was 7 centimeters, matching the market predicate. Now, in 2018, based on evidence and outcomes, stemless humeral components should be the first choice when treating primary osteoarthritis of the glenohumeral joint. Short stem or longer stem devices should be reserved for those cases where stemless fixation is not possible, which is less than 10% of patients with primary OA of the shoulder

Shoulder arthroplasty is increasing and can lead to excellent results for the proper indicators. We will review cases of primary shoulder arthroplasty as well as complex cases. Furthermore we will present complications of shoulder arthroplasty and how they are successfully managed

Introduction. Humeral radiolucent lines after anatomic TSA (aTSA) have been well described; however, little clinical consequences have been attributed to them. The recent emergence of shorter humeral stems has demonstrated higher incidences of humeral radiolucencies than has been reported historically with standard length components. This large scale database analysis quantifies and compares the clinical outcomes of aTSAs with and without radiolucent humeral lines using one specific prosthesis to determine their impact on clinical outcomes. Methodology. This is a multicenter, retrospective, case controlled radiographic and clinical review. Preoperative and postoperative data was analyzed from 671 aTSA patients with a minimum of 2 years followup. 538 of these 671 aTSA patients had full radiographic followup (80.2%) and were included in this study; these patients had an average followup of 45.3 months). 459 patients had noncemented humeral stems; whereas, 79 patients had cemented humeral stems. Radiographs were reviewed at latest follow up for humeral radiolucent lines based on the technique described by Gruen et al. Patients were evaluated and scored pre-operatively and at latest follow-up using the SST, UCLA, ASES, Constant, and SPADI scoring metrics; ROM was also recorded. A Student's two-tailed, unpaired t-test was used to identify differences in pre-operative, post-operative, and improvement in results, where p<0.05 denoted a significant difference. Results. All patients demonstrated significant improvements in pain and function following treatment with the primary shoulder arthroplasty. 14 patients (8 female, avg: 65.6 yrs; 6 male, avg: 61.7 yrs) were observed to have radiolucent lines around the humeral component (2.6%). The rate of humeral radiolucent lines was observed to be significantly higher in patients with cemented (7.6%) vs. noncemented (1.7%) humeral stems (p = 0.0025). Pre-operatively, no difference was noted in any clinical metric score between patients with or without radiolucent humeral lines. (Figure 1) However post-operatively, patients with radiolucent humeral lines had significantly worse ASES (p=0.0087), UCLA (p=0.0371), SST (p=0.0341), and SPADI (p=0.0051) scores (Figure 2) and significantly lower improvements in outcomes according to ASES (p=0.0120) and SPADI (p=0.0247) scores (Figure 3), relative to patients without radiolucent humeral lines. Additionally, radiolucent lines had a more profound effect on cemented stems (as compared to noncemented stems), where cemented stems with radiolucent humeral liners were associated with significantly lower post-operative outcomes and significantly lower improvements in outcomes. Finally, patients with humeral radiolucent lines had a significantly higher complication rate (21.4% vs 4.6%, p = 0.004) as compared to the complication rate of patients without radiolucent humeral lines. Conclusions. The study demonstrated a relatively low incidence of humeral radiolucent lines with anatomic TSA. Cemented stems were associated with a significantly higher rate of humeral radiolucent lines as compared to noncemented stems. Patients whose shoulders had radiolucent humeral lines were associated with significantly lower clinical outcomes and significantly less active ROM as compared to those without radiolucent lines. This diminished outcome was more pronounced with cemented humeral stems. Additional and longer term clinical followup is necessary to confirm the results of this study

Purpose. Glenoid version has been correlated with tears within the rotator cuff. Cuff tear arthropathy is an evolution of multiple unhealed tendons ultimately resulting in pseudoparalysis. Although several factors are critical to allow tendon healing, we have observed that there is less glenoid version in patients with cuff tear arthropathy. This was compared to those with osteoarthritis where rotator cuff tears are uncommon. We hypothesize that patients undergoing inverse prosthesis generally have a near neutral glenoid. Method. A single surgeons practice (JPW) was retrospectively reviewed for all cuff tear arthropathy and osteoarthritis patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty. (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN). Glenoid version was measured by 2 fellowship trained shoulder surgeons. Inter and intra-class correlation was measured. Results. The axial CT scans of 84 patients (cuff tear arthropathy and osteoarthritis) were evaluated. Inter and intra-class correlation was excellent (0.96, 0.97). Glenoid version was between 4.1 +/− 3.6 and 16.5 +/− 8.6 degrees for cuff tear arthropathy and osteoarthritis, respectively (p < 0.0001). Conclusion. Our observation of near neutral glenoid version in patients with cuff tear arthropathy has not been reported in the literature. The anatomical version of the glenoid may be a risk factor in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair. This may predispose certain individuals to cuff tear arthropathy compared to those with increased retroversion

The February 2024 Shoulder & Elbow Roundup³⁶⁰ looks at: Does indomethacin prevent heterotopic ossification following elbow fracture fixation?; Arthroscopic capsular shift in atraumatic shoulder joint instability; Ultrasound-guided lavage with corticosteroid injection versus sham; Combined surgical and exercise-based interventions following primary traumatic anterior shoulder dislocation: a systematic review and meta-analysis; Are vascularized fibula autografts a long-lasting reconstruction after intercalary resection of the humerus for primary bone tumours?; Anatomical versus reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with limited forward elevation; Tension band or plate fixation for simple displaced olecranon fractures?; Is long-term follow-up and monitoring in shoulder and elbow arthroplasty needed?

Aims

Rates of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) continue to grow. Glenoid bone loss and deformity remains a technical challenge to the surgeon and may reduce improvements in patients’ outcomes. However, there is no consensus as to the optimal surgical technique to best reconstruct these patients’ anatomy. This review aims to compare the outcomes of glenoid bone grafting versus augmented glenoid prostheses in the management of glenoid bone loss in primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) is rapidly growing across many domains, of which the medical field is no exception. AI is an umbrella term defining the practical application of algorithms to generate useful output, without the need of human cognition. Owing to the expanding volume of patient information collected, known as ‘big data’, AI is showing promise as a useful tool in healthcare research and across all aspects of patient care pathways. Practical applications in orthopaedic surgery include: diagnostics, such as fracture recognition and tumour detection; predictive models of clinical and patient-reported outcome measures, such as calculating mortality rates and length of hospital stay; and real-time rehabilitation monitoring and surgical training. However, clinicians should remain cognizant of AI’s limitations, as the development of robust reporting and validation frameworks is of paramount importance to prevent avoidable errors and biases. The aim of this review article is to provide a comprehensive understanding of AI and its subfields, as well as to delineate its existing clinical applications in trauma and orthopaedic surgery. Furthermore, this narrative review expands upon the limitations of AI and future direction.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2023;12(7):447–454.

Aims

Metal and ceramic humeral head bearing surfaces are available choices in anatomical shoulder arthroplasties. Wear studies have shown superior performance of ceramic heads, however comparison of clinical outcomes according to bearing surface in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and hemiarthroplasty (HA) is limited. This study aimed to compare the rates of revision and reoperation following metal and ceramic humeral head TSA and HA using data from the National Joint Registry (NJR), which collects data from England, Wales, Northern Ireland, Isle of Man and the States of Guernsey.

Aim: To reduce the amount of blood wastage in our unit. Method: In 72 patients, the number of blood units cross-matched and the haemoglobin/haematocrit fall were audited for primary total shoulder replacement (n=44), primary hemiarthroplasty (n=21), and revision shoulder replacement (n=7) over twelve months (January 2008 to December 2008). The amount of crossmatched blood was compared to the amount of blood transfused, pre-operative haemoglobin and fall in haemoglobin/haematocrit. Results: 23 of 44 primary total shoulder replacements and 5 of 21 hemiarthroplasties were crossmatched 55 units preoperatively. 4 of the 7 revision arthroplasties were crossmatched 7 units preoperatively. No units were transfused. 4 patients were later transfused 2 units each for symptomatic low haemoglobin at day 3–5 postoperatively from postoperatively crossmatched blood. No correlation existed between preoperative haemoglobin and number of units blood ordered. A haemoglobin reduction of ~2.5 g/dl was seen for both primary and revision surgery. There was significant correlation between low preoperative haemoglobin and need for transfusion (p< 0.05). Nearly all patients in whom blood was crossmatched rather than group and saved, belonged to one consultant. No patients had an adverse outcome due to a lack of immediately available cross-matched blood. Conclusion: A large amount of blood was crossmatched and no units used in primary and revision shoulder replacement surgery. We recommend group and save only in primary shoulder arthroplasty and crossmatch of 2 units for revision shoulder surgery. Providing pre-operative haemoglobin is > 11.5 g/dl, group and save is safe even for revision shoulder arthroplasty. Wastage of blood could be reduced to zero in our unit. We recommend regular audit as a tool to ensure compliance with guidelines, and for clinical governance purposes ensuring guidelines remain best practice