We present six patients with chronic dislocation of the elbow who were treated by primary semiconstrained total elbow arthroplasty. All were women with a mean age of 65 years (51 to 76), the mean interval between dislocation and surgery was 17 weeks (5 to 52) and the mean follow-up 58 months (24 to 123).

The most dramatic improvement was in function. The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon score was 5.2 times better (p < 0.001) and the mean total range of movement increased from 33° to 121° (p < 0.001) after operation. Three patients developed wear of polyethylene. One required revision for a periprosthetic fracture, and another required a bushing exchange.

Primary semiconstrained elbow arthroplasty provides significant, predictable functional improvement. Potential solutions for wear of polyethylene include a different operative technique or design of implant. Despite the high incidence of such wear, total elbow arthroplasty should be considered as a viable treatment option for chronic dislocation of the elbow in elderly patients.

We studied retrospectively the results of revision arthroplasty of the elbow using a linked Coonrad-Morrey implant in 23 patients (24 elbows) after a mean follow-up period of 55 months. According to the Mayo Elbow Performance Score, 19 elbows were satisfactory, nine were excellent and ten good. The median total score had improved from 35 points (20 to 75) before the primary arthroplasty to 85 points (40 to 100) at the latest follow-up. There was a marked relief of pain, but the range of movement showed no overall improvement. Two patients had a second revision because of infection and two for aseptic loosening. The estimated five-year survival rate of the prosthesis was 83.1% (95% confidence interval 61.1 to 93.3). Revision elbow arthroplasty using the Coonrad-Morrey implant provided satisfactory results but with complications occurring in 13 cases

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

The Souter-Strathclyde prosthesis was used in 52 revisions of total elbow replacements (TERs) between August 1986 and May 1997. Of these, 50, carried out in 45 patients, were prospectively followed for a mean of 53 months (14 to 139). The procedure produced reliable relief of pain, and the range of movement was preserved. There was a considerable incidence of adverse events associated with revision (30%), and 12 further procedures have been required. Nonetheless, a revision is the preferred salvage procedure for failed primary arthroplasty in the absence of sepsis

We performed 88 primary ball-and-socket arthroplasties of the trapeziometacarpal joint in 84 patients (69 women and 15 men) with a mean age of 61 years (37 to 81). Cemented de la Caffinière prostheses were implanted in 43 joints from 1988 to 1991 and 45 cementless Ledoux implants were used between 1992 and 1994. Of the 61 surviving prostheses still in situ, 51 were reviewed clinically and radiologically with a mean follow-up of 25 months for the Ledoux and 63 months for the de la Caffinière implant. The survival rate for the Ledoux prosthesis was 58.9% at 16 months and for the de la Caffinière implant 66.4% at 68 months. Loosening occurred in 15% of the Ledoux stems, in 46% of the Ledoux cups, in 24% of the de la Caffinière stems and in 28% of the de la Caffinière cups. Both prostheses behaved similarly, and it is clear that a constrained ball-and-socket prosthesis is not suitable for the trapeziometacarpal joint

Between 1996 and 2008, nine patients with severe post-traumatic arthritis underwent revision of a failed interposition arthroplasty of the elbow with a further interposition procedure using an allograft of tendo Achillis at a mean of 5.6 years (0.7 to 13.1) after the initial procedure. There were eight men and one woman with a mean age of 47 years (36 to 56).

The mean follow-up was 4.7 years (2 to 8). The mean Mayo Elbow Performance score improved from 49 (15 to 65) pre-operatively to 73 (55 to 95) (p = 0.04). The mean Disability of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score was 26 (7 to 42). One patient was unavailable for clinical follow-up and one underwent total elbow replacement three months post-operatively. Of the remaining patients, one had an excellent, two had good, three fair and one a poor result. Subjectively, five of the nine patients were satisfied. Four continued manual labour.

Revision interposition arthroplasty is an option for young, active patients with severe post-traumatic arthritis who require both mobility and durability of the elbow.

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.

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.

This study was performed to review the safety and outcome of total shoulder replacements in patients who are ≥ 80 years of age. A total of 50 total shoulder replacements in 44 patients at a mean age of 82 years (80 to 89) were studied. Their health and shoulder status, the operation and post-operative course were analysed, including pain, movement, patient satisfaction, medical and surgical complications, radiographs, the need for revision surgery, and implant and patient survival. A total of 27 patients had an ASA classification of III or IV and medical abnormalities were common. Of the 13 shoulders with bony deficiency of the glenoid, nine required grafting. The duration of hospital stay was prolonged and blood transfusions were common. There were no peri-operative deaths. The mean follow-up was for 5.5 years (2 to 12). Pain was significantly reduced (p < 0.001) and movement improved in active elevation and both external and internal rotation (p < 0.001). Using the Neer scale for assessing outcome, 40 (80%) shoulders had an excellent or satisfactory result. There were medical or surgical complications in 17 cases. Four shoulders developed radiological evidence of loosened glenoid components, and three of these had a poor outcome. Three other shoulders required revision, two for instability. By the time of this review 39 of the patients had died from unrelated causes at a mean of 7.5 years (0.8 to 16.4) after surgery.

Total shoulder replacement is a relatively effective treatment in this elderly group of patients. However, there is a requirement for more intense patient care in the peri-operative period, and non-fatal medical or surgical complications are common. Most of these elderly patients will have a comfortable functional shoulder for the rest of their lives.

While frequently discussed as a standard treatment for the management of an infected shoulder replacement, there is little information on the outcome of two-stage re-implantation.

We examined the outcome of 17 consecutive patients (19 shoulders) who were treated between 1995 and 2004 with a two-stage re-implantation for the treatment of a deep-infection after shoulder replacement. All 19 shoulders were followed for a minimum of two years or until the time of further revision surgery. The mean clinical follow-up was for 35 months (24 to 80). The mean radiological follow-up was 27 months (7 to 80). There were two excellent results, four satisfactory and 13 unsatisfactory. In 12 of the 19 shoulders (63%) infection was considered to be eradicated. The mean pain score improved from 4.2 (3 to 5 (out of 5)) to 1.8 (1 to 4). The mean elevation improved from 42° (0° to 140°) to 89° (0° to 165°), mean external rotation from 30° (0° to 90°) to 43° (0° to 90°), and mean internal rotation from the sacrum to L5. There were 14 complications.

Our study suggests that two-stage re-implantation for an infected shoulder replacement is associated with a high rate of unsatisfactory results, marginal success at eradicating infection and a high complication rate.

Over a seven-year period we treated a consecutive series of 58 patients, 20 men and 38 women with a mean age of 66 years (21 to 87) who had an acute complex anterior fracture-dislocation of the proximal humerus. Two patterns of injury are proposed for study based upon a prospective assessment of the pattern of soft-tissue and bony injury and the degree of devascularisation of the humeral head. In 23 patients, the head had retained capsular attachments and arterial back-bleeding (type-I injury), whereas in 35 patients the head was devoid of significant soft-tissue attachments with no active arterial bleeding (type-II injury).

Following treatment by open reduction and internal fixation, only two of 23 patients with type-I injuries developed radiological evidence of osteonecrosis of the humeral head, compared with four of seven patients with type-II injuries.

A policy of primary treatment by open reduction and internal fixation of type-I injuries is justified, whereas most elderly patients (aged 60 years or over) with type-II injuries are best treated by hemiarthroplasty. The best treatment for younger patients (aged under 60 years) who sustain type-II injuries is controversial and an individualised approach to their management is advocated.