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. 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.Aims
Patients and Methods
We describe the use of a protocol of irrigation and debridement
(I&
D) with retention of the implant for the treatment of periprosthetic
infection of a total elbow arthroplasty (TEA). This may be an attractive
alternative to staged re-implantation. Between 1990 and 2010, 23 consecutive patients were treated in
this way. Three were lost to follow-up leaving 20 patients (21 TEAs)
in the study. There were six men and 14 women. Their mean age was
58 years (23 to 76). The protocol involved: component unlinking,
irrigation and debridement (I&
D), and the introduction of antibiotic
laden cement beads; organism-specific intravenous antibiotics; repeat
I&
D and re-linkage of the implant if appropriate; long-term
oral antibiotic therapy. Aims
Patients and Methods
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). 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).Aims
Methods
Medium-term results of the Discovery elbow replacement
are presented. We reviewed 51 consecutive primary Discovery total
elbow replacements (TERs) implanted in 48 patients. The mean age
of the patients was 69.2 years (49 to 92), there were 19 males and
32 females (37%:63%) The mean follow-up was 40.6 months (24 to 69).
A total of six patients were lost to follow-up. Statistically significant
improvements in range movement and Oxford Elbow Score were found
(p <
0.001). Radiolucent lines were much more common in, and
aseptic loosening was exclusive to, the humeral component. Kaplan–Meier
survivorship at five years was 92.2% (95% CI 74.5% to 96.4%) for
aseptic loosening. In four TERs, periprosthetic infection occurred
resulting in failure. A statistically significant association between
infection and increased BMI was found (p = 0.0268). Triceps failure
was more frequent after the Mayo surgical approach and TER performed
after previous trauma surgery. No failures of the implant were noted. Our comparison shows that the Discovery has early clinical results
that are similar to other semi-constrained TERs. We found continued
radiological surveillance with particular focus on humeral lucency
is warranted and has not previously been reported. Despite advances
in the design of total elbow replacement prostheses, rates of complication
remain high. Cite this article:
