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.
We assessed the long-term results of 58 Souter-Strathclyde total elbow replacements in 49 patients with rheumatoid arthritis. The mean length of follow-up was 9.5 years (0.7 to 16.7). The mean pre-operative Mayo Elbow Performance Score was 30 (15 to 80) and at final follow-up was 82 (60 to 95). A total of 13 elbows (22.4%) were revised, ten (17.2%) for aseptic loosening, one (1.7%) for instability, one (1.7%) for secondary loosening after fracture, and one elbow (1.7%) was removed because of deep infection. The Kaplan-Meier survival rate was 70% and 53% at ten and 16 years, respectively. Failure of the ulnar component was found to be the main problem in relation to the loosening. Anterior transposition of the ulnar nerve had no influence on ulnar nerve paresthaesiae in these patients.
Between 1993 and 2002, 58 GSB III total elbow replacements were implanted in 45 patients with rheumatoid arthritis by the same surgeon. At the most recent follow-up, five patients had died (five elbows) and six (nine elbows) had been lost to follow-up, leaving 44 total elbow replacements in 34 patients available for clinical and radiological review at a mean follow-up of 74 months (25 to 143). There were 26 women and eight men with a mean age at operation of 55.7 years (24 to 77). At the latest follow-up, 31 excellent (70%), six good (14%), three fair (7%) and four poor (9%) results were noted according to the Mayo elbow performance score. Five humeral (11%) and one ulnar (2%) component were loose according to radiological criteria (type III or type IV). Of the 44 prostheses, two (5%) had been revised, one for type-IV humeral loosening after follow-up for ten years and one for fracture of the ulnar component. Seven elbows had post-operative dysfunction of the ulnar nerve, which was transient in five and permanent in two. Despite an increased incidence of loosening with time, the GSB III prosthesis has given favourable mid-term results in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.