There are theoretical and practical advantages to modular rather than monoblock designs of prostheses for shoulder arthroplasty, but there are no reported studies which specifically compare the clinical and radiological results of their use. We have compared the results of unconstrained total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis using both types of implant. The monoblock design was used between 1992 and 1995 and the modular design after 1995. Both had cemented all-polyethylene glenoids, the monoblock with matched and the modular with mismatched radii of curvature. There were 34 consecutive shoulders in each group with a mean follow-up of 6.1 years in the first and 5.2 years in the second. There were no significant differences in improvement of pain scores, active elevation, external rotation, internal rotation, patient satisfaction, or the Neer ratings between the two groups. Two of 28 glenoid components in the first group and six of 30 in the second met the criteria for being radiologically at risk for loosening (p = 0.25). There were no significant differences in clinical outcome or radiological changes between the first- and second-generation designs of implant for shoulder arthroplasty

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

The Motec cementless modular metal-on-metal ball-and-socket wrist arthroplasty was implanted in 16 wrists with scaphoid nonunion advanced collapse (SNAC; grades 3 or 4) and 14 wrists with scapholunate advanced collapse (SLAC) in 30 patients (20 men) with severe (grades 3 or 4) post-traumatic osteoarthritis of the wrist. The mean age of the patients was 52 years (31 to 71). All prostheses integrated well radiologically. At a mean follow-up of 3.2 years (1.1 to 6.1) no luxation or implant breakage occurred. Two wrists were converted to an arthrodesis for persistent pain. Loosening occurred in one further wrist at five years post-operatively. The remainder demonstrated close bone–implant contact. The clinical results were good, with markedly decreased Disabilities of the Arm Shoulder and Hand (DASH) and pain scores, and increased movement and grip strength. No patient used analgesics and most had returned to work. Good short-term function was achieved using this wrist arthroplasty in a high-demand group of patients with post-traumatic osteoarthritis

The Acclaim total elbow replacement is a modular system which allows implantation in both unlinked and linked modes. The results of the use of this implant in primary total elbow replacement in 36 patients, operated on between July 2000 and August 2002, are presented at a mean follow-up of 36 months (24 to 49). Only one patient did not have good relief of pain, but all had improved movement and function. No implant showed clinical or radiological loosening, although one had a lucent area in three of seven humeral zones. The short-term results of the Acclaim total elbow replacement are encouraging. However, 11 patients (30.5%) suffered an intra-operative fracture of the humeral condyle. This did not affect the outcome, or the requirement for further surgery, except in one case where the fracture failed to unite. This problem has hopefully been addressed by redesigning the humeral resection guide. Other complications included three cases of ulnar neuropathy (8.3%) and one of deep infection (2.8%)

The results of proximal humeral replacement following trauma are substantially worse than for osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. The stable reattachment of the lesser and greater tuberosity fragments to the rotator cuff and the restoration of shoulder biomechanics are difficult. In 1992 we developed a prosthesis designed to improve fixation of the tuberosity fragments in comminuted fractures of the proximal humerus. The implant enables fixation of the fragments to the shaft of the prosthesis and the diaphyseal fragment using screws, washers and a special toothed plate. Between 1992 and 2003 we used this technique in 50 of 76 patients referred to our institution for shoulder reconstruction after trauma. In the remaining 26, reconstruction with a prosthesis and nonabsorbable sutures was performed, as the tuberosity fragments were too small and too severely damaged to allow the use of screws and the toothed plate.

The Constant score two years post-operatively was a mean of 12 points better in the acute trauma group and 11 points better in the late post-traumatic group than in the classical suture group.

We recommend this technique in patients where the tuberosity fragments are large enough to allow fixation with screws, washers and a toothed plate.

There are no long-term published results on the survival of a third-generation cemented total shoulder replacement. We describe a clinical and radiological study of the Aequalis total shoulder replacement for a minimum of ten years. Between September 1996 and May 1998, 39 consecutive patients underwent a primary cemented total shoulder replacement using this prosthesis. Data were collected prospectively on all patients each year, for a minimum of ten years, or until death or failure of the prosthesis. At a follow-up of at least ten years, 12 patients had died with the prosthesis intact and two had emigrated, leaving 25 available for clinical review. Of these, 13 had rheumatoid arthritis and 12 osteoarthritis. One refused radiological review leaving 24 with fresh radiographs.

Survivorship at ten years was 100% for the humeral component and 92% for the glenoid component. The incidence of lucent lines was low. No humeral component was thought to be at risk and only two glenoid components. The osteoarthritic group gained a mean 65° in forward flexion and their Constant score improved by a mean 41.4 points (13 to 55). The rheumatoid group gained a mean of 24° in flexion and their Constant score improved by 29.4 points. This difference may have been due to failure of the rotator cuff in 75% of the patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Thus a third-generation total shoulder replacement gives an excellent result in patients with osteoarthritis and an intact rotator cuff. Patients with rheumatoid arthritis have a 75% risk of failure of the rotator cuff at ten years.

We assessed the short- to mid-term survival of metallic press-fit radial head prostheses in patients with radial head fractures and acute traumatic instability of the elbow.

The medical records of 42 patients (16 males, 26 females) with a mean age of 56 years (23 to 85) with acute unstable elbow injuries, including a fracture of the radial head requiring metallic replacement of the radial head, were reviewed retrospectively. Survival of the prosthesis was assessed from the radiographs of 37 patients after a mean follow-up of 50 months (12 to 107). The functional results of 31 patients were assessed using range-of-movement, Mayo elbow performance score (MEPS), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score and the RAND 36-item health survey.

At the most recent follow-up 25 prostheses were still well fixed, nine had been removed because of loosening, and three remained implanted but were loose. The mean time from implantation to loosening was 11 months (2 to 24). Radiolucent lines that developed around the prosthesis before removal were mild in three patients, moderate in one and severe in five. Range of movement parameters and mass grip strength were significantly lower in the affected elbow than in the unaffected side. The mean MEPS score was 86 (40 to 100) and the mean DASH score was 23 (0 to 81). According to RAND-36 scores, patients had more pain and lower physical function scores than normal population values.

Loosening of press-fit radial head prostheses is common, occurs early, often leads to severe osteolysis of the proximal radius, and commonly requires removal of the prosthesis.

We reviewed 20 patients who had undergone a Coonrad-Morrey total elbow arthroplasty after resection of a primary or metastatic tumour from the elbow or distal humerus between 1980 and 2002. Eighteen patients underwent reconstruction for palliative treatment with restoration of function after intralesional surgery and two after excision of a primary bone tumour. The mean follow-up was 30 months (1 to 192).

Five patients (25%) were alive at the final follow-up; 14 (70%) had died of their disease and one of unrelated causes. Local control was achieved in 15 patients (75%). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance Score improved from 22 (5 to 45) to 75 points (55 to 95). Four reconstructions (20%) failed and required revision. Seven patients (35%) had early complications, the most frequent being nerve injury (25%). There were no infections or wound complications although 18 patients (90%) had radiotherapy, chemotherapy or both.

The Coonrad-Morrey total elbow arthroplasty provides good relief from pain and a good functional outcome after resection of tumours of the elbow. The rates of complications involving local recurrence of tumour (25%) and nerve injury (25%) are of concern.

Mason type III fractures of the radial head are treated by open reduction and internal fixation, resection or prosthetic joint replacement. When internal fixation is performed, fixation of the radial head to the shaft is difficult and implant-related complications are common. Furthermore, problems of devascularisation of the radial head can result from fixation of the plate to the radial neck.

In a small retrospective study, the treatment of Mason type III fractures with fixation of the radial neck in 13 cases (group 2) was compared with 12 cases where no fixation was performed (group 1). The mean clinical and radiological follow-up was four years (1 to 9). The Broberg-Morrey index showed excellent results in both groups. Degenerative radiological changes were seen more frequently in group 2, and removal of the implant was necessary in seven of 13 cases.

Post-operative evaluation of these two different techniques revealed similar ranges of movement and functional scores. We propose that anatomical reconstruction of the radial head without metalwork fixation to the neck is preferable, and the outcome is the same as that achieved with the conventional technique. In addition degenerative changes of the elbow joint may develop less frequently, and implant removal is not necessary.

Total shoulder replacement is a successful procedure for degenerative or some inflammatory diseases of the shoulder. However, fixation of the glenoid seems to be the main weakness with a high rate of loosening. The results using all-polyethylene components have been better than those using metal-backed components. We describe our experience with 35 consecutive total shoulder replacements using a new metal-backed glenoid component with a mean follow-up of 75.4 months (48 to 154).

Our implant differs from others because of its mechanism of fixation. It has a convex metal-backed bone interface and the main stabilising factor is a large hollow central peg. The patients were evaulated with standard radiographs and with the Constant Score, the Simple Shoulder Test and a visual analogue scale. All the scores improved and there was no loosening, no polyethylene-glenoid disassembly and no other implant-related complications.

We conclude that a metal-backed glenoid component is a good option in total shoulder replacement with no worse results than of those using a cemented all-polyethylene prosthesis.

We retrospectively reviewed 11 consecutive patients with an infected reverse shoulder prosthesis. Patients were assessed clinically and radiologically, and standard laboratory tests were carried out. Peroperative samples showed Propionbacterium acnes in seven, coagulase-negative Staphylococcus in five, methicillin-resistant staphylococcus aureus in one and Escherichia coli in one. Two multibacterial and nine monobacterial infections were seen. Post-operatively, patients were treated with intravenous cefazolin for at least three days and in all antibiotic therapy was given for at least three months. Severe pain (3 of 11) or severe limitation of function (3 of 11) are not necessarily seen. A fistula was present in eight, but function was not affected. All but one patient were considered free of infection after one-stage revision at a median follow-up of 24 months, and without antibiotic treatment for a minimum of six months. One patient had a persistent infection despite a second staged revision, but is now free of infection with a spacer. Complications included posterior dislocation in one, haematoma in one and a clavicular fracture in one. At the most recent follow-up the median post-operative Constant-Murley score was 55, 6% adjusted for age, gender and dominance.

A one-stage revision arthroplasty reduces the cost and duration of treatment. It is reliable in eradicating infection and good functional outcomes can be achieved.

There is little information available at present regarding the mechanisms of failure of modern metallic radial head implants. Between 1998 and 2008, 44 consecutive patients (47 elbows) underwent removal of a failed metallic radial head replacement. In 13 patients (13 elbows) the initial operation had been undertaken within one week of a fracture of the radial head, at one to six weeks in seven patients (seven elbows) and more than six weeks (mean of 2.5 years (2 to 65 months)) in 22 patients (25 elbows). In the remaining two elbows the replacement was inserted for non-traumatic reasons. The most common indication for further surgery was painful loosening (31 elbows). Revision was undertaken for stiffness in 18 elbows, instability in nine, and deep infection in two. There were signs of over-lengthening of the radius in 11 elbows. Degenerative changes were found in all but one. Only three loose implants had been fixed with cement. Instability was not identified in any of the bipolar implants.

In a prospective study between 2000 and 2005, 22 patients with primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder had a total shoulder arthroplasty with a standard five-pegged glenoid component, 12 with non-offset humeral head and ten with offset humeral head components. Over a period of 24 months the relative movement of the glenoid component with respect to the scapula was measured using radiostereometric analysis.

Nine glenoids needed reaming for erosion. There was a significant increase in rotation about all three axes with time (p < 0.001), the largest occurring about the longitudinal axis (anteversion-retroversion), with mean values of 3.8° and 1.9° for the non-offset and offset humeral head eroded subgroups, respectively. There was also a significant difference in rotation about the anteversion-retroversion axis (p = 0.01) and the varus-valgus (p < 0.001) z-axis between the two groups. The offset humeral head group reached a plateau at early follow-up with rotation about the z-axis, whereas the mean of the non-offset humeral head group at 24 months was three times greater than that of the offset group accounting for the highly significant difference between them.

We reviewed the outcome of 28 patients who had been treated using the Aequalis fracture prosthesis for an acute fracture of the proximal humerus at a mean follow-up of 39.3 months (24 to 63). The mean age of the patients at the time of the fracture was 66.3 years (38 to 80). The mean Constant score was 68.2 (37 to 84) for the operated shoulder, which represented 89.5% of the mean score for the uninjured side (p < 0.001). The quality of the reconstruction as shown on the immediate post-operative radiographs was categorised into three types, anatomical, acceptable, and unacceptable, depending on the position of the tuberosities relative to the prosthetic head and the humeral shaft. Anatomical reconstruction was associated with a higher mean Constant score as well as higher mean values of anterior forward elevation, abduction and external rotation than the other types, but the differences were not statistically significant (p > 0.231).

A total of 18 patients had active anterior elevation ≥150°. Their mean active abduction and external rotation were 163.6° and 31.3°, respectively. In seven of the 28 patients, the mean active anterior elevation, abduction and external rotation were 130.7°, 129.2° and 22.8°, respectively. In all, 12 patients were very satisfied with the results, 12 were satisfied, two were dissatisfied and two were disappointed; 26 reported no or only mild pain while only two had moderate pain. In five patients proximal migration of the humeral head was shown on the anteroposterior radiographs of the shoulder. No evidence of loosening was found in any prosthesis.

Our aim in this prospective study was to evaluate the outcome of total shoulder replacement in the treatment of young and middle-aged active patients with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis. We reviewed 21 patients (21 shoulders) with a mean age of 55 years (37 to 60). The mean follow-up was seven years (5 to 9). The same anatomical, third-generation, cemented implant had been used in all patients. All the patients were evaluated radiologically and clinically using the Constant and Murley score.

No patients required revision. In one a tear of the supraspinatus tendon occurred. Overall, 20 patients (95%) were either very satisfied (n = 18) or satisfied (n = 2) with the outcome. Significant differences (p < 0.0001) were found for all categories of the Constant and Murley score pre- and post-operatively. The mean Constant and Murley score increased from 24.1 points (10 to 45) to 64.5 points (39 to 93), and the relative score from 30.4% (11% to 50%) to 83% (54% to 116%). No clinical or radiological signs of loosening of the implant were seen.

For young and middle-aged patients with osteoarthritis, third-generation total shoulder replacement is a viable method of treatment with a low rate of complications and excellent results in the mid-term.

Between 1976 and 2004, 38 revision arthroplasties (35 patients) were performed for aseptic loosening of the humeral component. The mean interval from primary arthroplasty to revision was 7.1 years (0.4 to 16.6). A total of 35 shoulders (32 patients) were available for review at a mean follow-up of seven years (2 to 19.3).

Pre-operatively, 34 patients (97%) had moderate or severe pain; at final follow-up, 29 (83%) had no or only mild pain (p < 0.0001). The mean active abduction improved from 88° to 107° (p < 0.01); and the mean external rotation from 37° to 46° (p = 0.27). Excellent or satisfactory results were achieved in 25 patients (71%) according to the modified Neer rating system. Humeral components were cemented in 29, with ingrowth implants used in nine cases. There were 19 of standard length and 17 were longer (two were custom replacements and are not included). Bone grafting was required for defects in 11 humeri. Only two glenoid components were left unrevised. Intra-operative complications included cement extrusion in eight cases, fracture of the shaft of the humerus is two and of the tuberosity in four. There were four re-operations, one for recurrent humeral loosening, with 89% survival free of re-operations at ten years.

Revision surgery for aseptic loosening of the humeral component provides reliable pain relief and modest improvement of movement, although there is a substantial risk of intra-operative complications. Revision to a total shoulder replacement gives better results than to a hemiarthroplasty.

Excision is not a suitable treatment for all comminuted fractures of the radial head. In elbows where instability can be predicted, a replacement arthroplasty of the radial head is more effective. The aim of this paper was to present the medium-term results of the Judet floating radial head prosthesis.

This operation was performed on 14 patients between 1992 and 2003, of whom 12 were reviewed at a mean follow-up of five years and three months (1 to 12 years). The outcome was assessed using the Mayo elbow performance score and a modified Disability of Arm Shoulder Hand (DASH) questionnaire. There were six excellent results, four good, one fair and one poor, as graded by the Mayo score. The mean DASH score was 23.9/100 (0 to 65.8/100). The only significant complication occurred in one patient who developed a severe complex regional pain syndrome. There were no patients with secondary instability of the elbow, implant loosening, cubitus valgus, osteoporosis of the capitellum, or pain in the forearm and wrist. Our experience, combined with that of other authors using this device, has encouraged us to continue using the Judet prosthesis in comminuted fractures of the elbow where instability is a potential problem.

We report the use of the reverse shoulder prosthesis in the revision of a failed shoulder hemiarthroplasty in 19 shoulders in 18 patients (7 men, 11 women) with severe pain and loss of function. The primary procedure had been undertaken for glenohumeral arthritis associated with severe rotator cuff deficiency.

Statistically significant improvements were seen in pain and functional outcome. After a mean follow-up of 44 months (24 to 89), mean forward flexion improved by 26.4° and mean abduction improved by 35°. There were six prosthesis-related complications in six shoulders (32%), five of which had severe bone loss of the glenoid, proximal humerus or both. Three shoulders (16%) had non-prosthesis related complications.

The use of the reverse shoulder prosthesis provides improvement in pain and function for patients with failure of a hemiarthroplasty for glenohumeral arthritis and rotator cuff deficiency. However, high rates of complications were associated with glenoid and proximal humeral bone loss.

We reviewed 39 patients with displaced three- and four-part fractures of the humerus. In 21 patients (group A) we had used an anatomical prosthesis for the humeral head and in 18 (group B) an implant designed for fractures.

When followed up at a mean of 29.3 months after surgery the overall Constant score was 51.9 points; in group A it was 51.5 and in group B 52.4 points. The subjective satisfaction of the patients was assessed using a numerical rating scale and was similar in both groups. In group A complete healing of the tuberosities was found in 29% and 50% in group B. Partial integration was seen in 29% of group A and in only one patient in group B, while resorption was noted in 43% of group A and 44% of group B. The functional outcome was significantly better in patients with complete or partial healing of the tuberosities (p = 0.022). The specific trauma prosthesis did not lead to better healing of the tuberosities. The difference in clinical outcome obtained by the two designs did not reach statistical significance.

We have undertaken a prospective clinical and radiological analysis of 124 shoulder arthroplasties (113 patients) carried out for osteoarthritis. The clinical results showed improvement in the absolute Constant score and the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score of 22 and 43, respectively. Both were statistically significant (p < 0.001). There was no significant difference in the scores after hemiarthroplasty and total arthroplasty in those patients with an intact rotator cuff.

When revision was used as the end-point for survival at ten years, survival of 86%, or 90% if glenoid components made of Hylamer sterilised in air were omitted, was obtained in primary osteoarthritis. The most common cause for revision in the hemiarthroplasty group was glenoid pain at a mean of 1.5 years; in the total arthroplasty group it was loosening of the glenoid at a mean of 4.5 years. Analysis of pre-operative factors showed that the risk of gross loosening of the glenoid increased threefold when there was evidence of erosion of the glenoid at operation. Shoulder arthroplasty should not be delayed once symptomatic osteoarthritis has been established and should be undertaken before failure of the cuff or erosion of the glenoid are present.

Replacement of the shoulder in juvenile idiopathic arthritis is not often performed and there have been no published series to date.

We present nine glenohumeral hemiarthroplasties in eight patients with systemic or polyarticular juvenile idiopathic arthritis. The mean follow-up was six years (59 to 89 months). The mean age at the time of surgery was 32 years. Surgery took place at a mean of 27 years after diagnosis. The results indicated excellent relief from pain. There was restoration of useful function which deteriorated with time, in part because of progression of the systemic disease in this severely affected group. No patient has required revision to date and there has been no radiological evidence of loosening or osteolysis around the implants.

We discuss the pathoanatomical challenges unique to this group. There was very little space for a prosthetic joint and, in some cases, bony deformity and the small size necessitated the use of custom-made implants.