Aims. Patients with a failed reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have limited salvage options. The aim of this study was to determine the outcome of revision RSA when used as a salvage procedure for a failed primary RSA. Patients and Methods. We reviewed all revision RSAs performed for a failed primary RSA between 2006 and 2012, excluding patients with a follow-up of less than two years. A total of 27 revision RSAs were included in the study. The mean age of the patients at the time of revision was 70 years (58 to 82). Of the 27 patients, 14 (52% were female). The mean follow-up was 4.4 years (2 to 10). Results. Six patients (22%) developed complications requiring further revision surgery, at a mean of 1.7 years (0.1 to 5.3) postoperatively. The indication for further revision was dislocation in two, glenoid loosening in one, fracture of the humeral component in one, disassociation of the glenosphere in one, and infection in one. The five-year survival free of further revision was 85%. Five additional RSAs developed complications that did not need surgery, including dislocation in three and periprosthetic fracture in two. Overall, patients who did not require further revision had excellent pain relief, and significant improvements in elevation and external rotation of the shoulder (p < 0.01). The mean postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and simple shoulder test (SST) scores were 66 and 7, respectively. Radiological results were available in 26 patients (96.3%) at a mean of 4.3 years (1.5 to 9.5). At the most recent follow-up, six patients (23%) had glenoid lucency, which were classified as grade III or higher in three (12%). Smokers had a significantly increased risk of glenoid lucency (p < 0.01). Conclusion. Revision RSA, when used to salvage a failed primary RSA, can be a successful procedure. At intermediate follow-up, survival rates are reasonable, but dislocation and glenoid lucency remain a concern, particularly in smokers. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:1493–98

We report our experience with glenohumeral arthrodesis as a salvage procedure for epilepsy-related recurrent shoulder instability. A total of six patients with epilepsy underwent shoulder fusion for recurrent instability and were followed up for a mean of 39 months (12 to 79). The mean age at the time of surgery was 31 years (22 to 38). Arthrodesis was performed after a mean of four previous stabilisation attempts (0 to 11) in all but one patient in whom the procedure was used as a primary treatment. All patients achieved bony union, with a mean time to fusion of 2.8 months (2 to 7). There were no cases of re-dislocation. One revision was undertaken for loosening of the metalwork, and then healed satisfactorily. An increase was noted in the mean subjective shoulder value, which improved from 37 (5 to 50) pre-operatively to 42 (20 to 70) post-operatively although it decreased in two patients. The mean Oxford shoulder instability score improved from 13 pre-operatively (7 to 21) to 24 post-operatively (13 to 36). In our series, glenohumeral arthrodesis eliminated recurrent instability and improved functional outcome. Fusion surgery should therefore be considered in this patient population. However, since the majority of patients are young and active, they should be comprehensively counselled pre-operatively given the functional deficit that results from the procedure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:1525–9

Failed internal fixation of a fracture of the proximal humerus produces many challenges with limited surgical options. The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical outcomes after the use of a reverse shoulder arthroplasty under these circumstances. Between 2007 and 2012, 19 patients (15 women and four men, mean age 66 years; 52 to 82) with failed internal fixation after a proximal humeral fracture, underwent implant removal and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The mean follow-up was 36 months (25 to 60). The mean American Shoulder and Elbow Score improved from 27.8 to 50.1 (p = 0.019). The mean Simple Shoulder Test score improved from 0.7 to 3.2 (p = 0.020), and the mean visual analogue scale for pain improved from 6.8 to 4.3 (p = 0.012). Mean forward flexion improved from 58.7° to 101.1° (p < 0.001), mean abduction from 58.7° to 89.1° (p = 0.012), mean external rotation from 10.7° to 23.1° (p = 0.043) and mean internal rotation from buttocks to L4 (p = 0.034). A major complication was recorded in five patients (26%) (one intra-operative fracture, loosening of the humeral component in two and two peri-prosthetic fractures). A total of 15 patients (79%) rated their outcome as excellent or good, one (5%) as satisfactory, and three (16%) as unsatisfactory. . An improvement in outcomes and pain can be expected when performing a RSA as a salvage procedure after failed internal fixation of a fracture of the proximal humerus. Patients should be cautioned about the possibility for major complications following this technically demanding procedure. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2015;97-B:967–72

Rotator cuff pathology is the main cause of shoulder pain and dysfunction in older adults. When a rotator cuff tear involves the subscapularis tendon, the symptoms are usually more severe and the prognosis after surgery must be guarded. Isolated subscapularis tears represent 18% of all rotator cuff tears and arthroscopic repair is a good alternative primary treatment. However, when the tendon is deemed irreparable, tendon transfers are the only option for younger or high-functioning patients. The aim of this review is to describe the indications, biomechanical principles, and outcomes which have been reported for tendon transfers, which are available for the treatment of irreparable subscapularis tears.

The best tendon to be transferred remains controversial. Pectoralis major transfer was described more than 30 years ago to treat patients with failed surgery for instability of the shoulder. It has subsequently been used extensively to manage irreparable subscapularis tendon tears in many clinical settings. Although pectoralis major reproduces the position and orientation of the subscapularis in the coronal plane, its position in the axial plane – anterior to the rib cage – is clearly different and does not allow it to function as an ideal transfer. Consistent relief of pain and moderate recovery of strength and function have been reported following the use of this transfer. In an attempt to improve on these results, latissimus dorsi tendon transfer was proposed as an alternative and the technique has evolved from an open to an arthroscopic procedure. Satisfactory relief of pain and improvements in functional shoulder scores have recently been reported following its use. Both pectoralis minor and upper trapezius transfers have also been used in these patients, but the outcomes that have been reported do not support their widespread use.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(9):970–977.

Aims

Heterotopic ossification (HO) is a potentially devastating complication of the surgical treatment of a proximal humeral fracture. The literature on the rate and risk factors for the development of HO under these circumstances is lacking. The aim of this study was to determine the incidence and risk factors for the development of HO in these patients.

Aims

The aim of this study was to report the outcomes of different treatment options for glenoid loosening following reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) at a minimum follow-up of two years.

Aims

Glenoid bone loss can be a challenging problem when revising a shoulder arthroplasty. Precise pre-operative planning based on plain radiographs or CT scans is essential. We have investigated a new radiological classification system to describe the degree of medialisation of the bony glenoid and that will indicate the amount of bone potentially available for supporting a glenoid component. It depends on the relationship between the most medial part of the articular surface of the glenoid with the base of the coracoid process and the spinoglenoid notch: it classifies the degree of bone loss into three types.

It also attempts to predict the type of glenoid reconstruction that may be possible (impaction bone grafting, structural grafting or simple non-augmented arthroplasty) and gives guidance about whether a pre-operative CT scan is indicated.