Aims. The current evidence comparing the two most common approaches for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), the deltopectoral and anterosuperior approach, is limited. This study aims to compare the rate of loosening, instability, and implant survival between the two approaches for rTSA using data from the Dutch National Arthroplasty Registry with a minimum follow-up of five years. Methods. All patients in the registry who underwent a primary rTSA between January 2014 and December 2016 using an anterosuperior or deltopectoral approach were included, with a minimum follow-up of five years. Cox and logistic regression models were used to assess the association between the approach and the implant survival, instability, and glenoid loosening, independent of confounders. Results. In total, 3,902 rTSAs were included. A deltopectoral approach was used in 54% (2,099/3,902) and an anterosuperior approach in 46% (1,803/3,902). Overall, the mean age in the cohort was 75 years (50 to 96) and the most common indication for rTSA was cuff tear arthropathy (35%; n = 1,375), followed by osteoarthritis (29%; n = 1,126), acute fracture (13%; n = 517), post-traumatic sequelae (10%; n = 398), and an irreparable cuff rupture (5%; n = 199). The two high-volume centres performed the anterosuperior approach more often compared to the medium- and low-volume centres (p < 0.001). Of the 3,902 rTSAs, 187 were revised (5%), resulting in a five-year survival of 95.4% (95% confidence interval 94.7 to 96.0; 3,137 at risk). The most common reason for revision was a periprosthetic joint infection (35%; n = 65), followed by instability (25%; n = 46) and loosening (25%; n = 46). After correcting for relevant confounders, the revision rate for glenoid loosening, instability, and the overall implant survival did not differ significantly between the two approaches (p = 0.494, p = 0.826, and p = 0.101, respectively). Conclusion. The surgical approach used for rTSA did not influence the overall implant survival or the revision rate for instability or glenoid loosening. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2023;105-B(9):1000–1006

Aims. The aim of this study was to explore why some calcar screws are malpositioned when a proximal humeral fracture is treated by internal fixation with a locking plate, and to identify risk factors for this phenomenon. Some suggestions can be made of ways to avoid this error. Methods. We retrospectively identified all proximal humeral fractures treated in our institution between October 2016 and October 2018 using the hospital information system. The patients’ medical and radiological data were collected, and we divided potential risk factors into two groups: preoperative factors and intraoperative factors. Preoperative factors included age, sex, height, weight, body mass index, proximal humeral bone mineral density, type of fracture, the condition of the medial hinge, and medial metaphyseal head extension. Intraoperative factors included the grade of surgeon, neck-shaft angle after reduction, humeral head height, restoration of medial support, and quality of reduction. Adjusted binary logistic regression and multivariate logistic regression models were used to identify pre- and intraoperative risk factors. Area under the curve (AUC) analysis was used to evaluate the discriminative ability of the multivariable model. Results. Data from 203 patients (63 males and 140 females) with a mean age of 62 years (22 to 89) were analyzed. In 49 fractures, the calcar screw was considered to be malpositioned; in 154 it was in the optimal position. The rate of malpositioning was therefore 24% (49/203). No preoperative risk factor was found for malpositioning of the calcar screws. Only the neck-shaft angle was found to be related to the risk of screw malpositioning in a multivariate model (with an AUC of 0.72). For the fractures in which the neck-shaft angle was reduced to between 130° and 150°, 91% (133/46) of calcar screws were in the optimal position. Conclusion. The neck-shaft angle is the key factor for the appropriate positioning of calcar screws when treating a proximal humeral fracture with a locking plate. We recommend reducing the angle to between 130° and 150°. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2020;102-B(12):1629–1635

Aims

This study aimed to assess the impact of using the metal-augmented glenoid baseplate (AGB) on improving clinical and radiological outcomes, as well as reducing complications, in patients with superior glenoid wear undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA).

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.

Aims

Despite recent advances in arthroscopic rotator cuff repair, re-tear rates remain high. New methods to improve healing rates following rotator cuff repair must be sought. Our primary objective was to determine if adjunctive bone marrow stimulation with channelling five to seven days prior to arthroscopic cuff repair would lead to higher Western Ontario Rotator Cuff (WORC) scores at 24 months postoperatively compared with no channelling.

Aims

Patient-specific instrumentation has been shown to increase a surgeon’s precision and accuracy in placing the glenoid component in shoulder arthroplasty. There is, however, little available information about the use of patient-specific planning (PSP) tools for this operation. It is not known how these tools alter the decision-making patterns of shoulder surgeons. The aim of this study was to investigate whether PSP, when compared with the use of plain radiographs or select static CT images, influences the understanding of glenoid pathology and surgical planning.