Aims. A number of methods have been described to remove a well-fixed humeral implant as part of revision shoulder arthroplasty. These include the use of cortical windows and humeral osteotomies. The router bit extraction technique uses a high-speed router bit to disrupt the bone-implant interface. The implant is then struck in a retrograde fashion with a square-tip impactor and mallet. The purpose of this study was to determine the characteristics and frequency of the different techniques needed for the removal of a well-fixed humeral stem in revision shoulder arthroplasty. Patients and Methods. Between 2010 and 2018, 288 revision shoulder arthroplasty procedures requiring removal of a well-fixed humeral component were carried out at a tertiary referral centre by a single surgeon. The patient demographics, indications for surgery, and method of extraction were collected. Results. Of the 288 revisions, 284 humeral stems (98.6%) were removed using the router bit extraction technique alone. Four humeral stems (1.39%) required an additional cortical window. Humeral osteotomy was not necessary in any procedure. Most of the humeral stems removed (78.8%) were cementless. Of the four humeral stems that required a cortical window, three involved removal of a hemiarthroplasty. Two were cemented and two were cementless. Conclusion. The router bit extraction technique removed a well-fixed humeral component in a very high proportion of patients (98.6%). This method allows surgeons to avoid more invasive approaches involving a cortical window or humeral osteotomy, and their associated complications. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1280–1284

Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in revision and complication rates, functional outcomes, and radiological outcomes between cemented and press-fit humeral stems in primary anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Materials and Methods. A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted searching for studies that included patients who underwent primary anatomical TSA for primary osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. Results. There was a total of 36 studies with 927 cemented humeral stems and 1555 press-fit stems. The revision rate was 5.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.9 to 7.4) at a mean of 89 months for cemented stems, and 2.4% (95% CI 1.1 to 4.7) at a mean of 40 months for press-fit stems. A priori subgroup analysis to control for follow-up periods demonstrated similar revision rates: 2.3% (95% CI 1.1 to 4.7) for cemented stems versus 1.8% (95% CI 1.4 to 2.9) for press-fit stems. Exploratory meta-regression found that longer follow-up was a moderating variable for revision (p = 0.003). Conclusion. Cement fixation had similar revision rates when compared to press-fit stems at short- to midterm follow-up. Rotator cuff pathology was a prevalent complication in both groups but is likely not related to fixation type. Overall, with comparable revision rates, possible easier revision, and decreased operative time, humeral press-fit fixation may be an optimal choice for primary anatomical TSA in patients with sufficient bone stock. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1107–1114

Aims

Hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) are often the preferred forms of treatment for patients with atraumatic avascular necrosis of the humeral head when conservative treatment fails. Little has been reported about the survival of HA and TSA for this indication. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in revision rates between HA and TSA in these patients, to determine whether one of these implants has a superior survival and may be a better choice in the treatment of this condition.

Aims

To report early (two-year) postoperative findings from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating disease-specific quality of life (QOL), clinical, patient-reported, and radiological outcomes in patients undergoing a total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with a second-generation uncemented trabecular metal (TM) glenoid versus a cemented polyethylene glenoid (POLY) component.

Aims. To date, there is insufficient evidence available to compare the outcome of cemented and uncemented fixation of the humeral stem in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). . Methods. A systemic review comprising 41 clinical studies was performed to compare the functional outcome and rate of complications of cemented and uncemented stems in RSA. These included 1455 cemented and 329 uncemented shoulders. The clinical characteristics of the two groups were similar. Variables were compared using pooled frequency-weighted means and relative risk ratios (RR). Results. Uncemented stems had a significantly higher incidence of early humeral stem migration (p < 0.001, RR 18.1, 95% confidence interval (CI) 5.0 to 65.2) and non-progressive radiolucent lines (p < 0.001, RR 2.4, 95% CI 1.7 to 3.4), but a significantly lower incidence of post-operative fractures of the acromion compared with cemented stems (p = 0.004, RR 14.3, 95% CI 0.9 to 232.8). There was no difference in the risk of stem loosening or revision between the groups. The cemented stems had a greater relative risk of infection (RR 3.3, 95% CI 0.8 to 13.7), nerve injury (RR 5.7, 95% CI 0.7 to 41.5) and thromboembolism (RR 3.9, 95% CI 0.2 to 66.6). The functional outcome and range of movement were equivalent in the two groups. . Discussion. RSA performed with an uncemented stem gives them equivalent functional outcome and a better complication profile than with a cemented stem. The natural history and clinical relevance of early stem migration and radiolucent lines found with uncemented stems requires further long-term study. Take home message: This study demonstrates that uncemented stems have at least equivalent clinical and radiographic outcomes compared with cemented stems when used for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. . Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2016;98-B:65–74

Aims

The reasons for failure of a hemirthroplasty (HA) when used to treat a proximal humeral fracture include displaced or necrotic tuberosities, insufficient metaphyseal bone-stock, and rotator cuff tears. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is often the only remaining form of treatment in these patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcome after conversions from a failed HA to rTSA.