Aims. Rates of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) continue to grow. Glenoid bone loss and deformity remains a technical challenge to the surgeon and may reduce improvements in patients’ outcomes. However, there is no consensus as to the optimal surgical technique to best reconstruct these patients’ anatomy. This review aims to compare the outcomes of glenoid bone grafting versus augmented glenoid prostheses in the management of glenoid bone loss in primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Methods. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated study-level data in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We performed searches of Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and PubMed from their dates of inception to January 2022. From included studies, we analyzed data for preoperative and postoperative range of motion (ROM), patient-reported functional outcomes, and complication rates. Results. A total of 13 studies (919 shoulders) were included in the analysis. The mean age of patients at initial evaluation was 72.2 years (42 to 87), with a mean follow-up time of 40.7 months (24 to 120). Nine studies with 292 rTSAs evaluated the use of bone graft and five studies with 627 rTSAs evaluated the use of augmented glenoid baseplates. One study was analyzed in both groups. Both techniques demonstrated improvement in patient-reported outcome measures and ROM assessment, with augmented prostheses outperforming bone grafting on improvements in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score. There was a higher complication rate (8.9% vs 3.5%; p < 0.001) and revision rate among the bone grafting group compared with the patients who were treated with augmented prostheses (2.4% vs 0.6%; p = 0.022). Conclusion. This review provides strong evidence that both bone graft and augmented glenoid baseplate techniques to address glenoid bone loss give excellent ROM and functional outcomes in primary rTSA. The use of augmented base plates may confer fewer complications and revisions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1334–1342

Aims. Extensive literature exists relating to the management of shoulder instability, with a more recent focus on glenoid and humeral bone loss. However, the optimal timing for surgery following a dislocation remains unclear. There is concern that recurrent dislocations may worsen subsequent surgical outcomes, with some advocating stabilization after the first dislocation. The aim of this study was to determine if the recurrence of instability following arthroscopic stabilization in patients without significant glenoid bone loss was influenced by the number of dislocations prior to surgery. Methods. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using the PubMed, EMBASE, Orthosearch, and Cochrane databases with the following search terms: ((shoulder or glenohumeral) and (dislocation or subluxation) and arthroscopic and (Bankart or stabilisation or stabilization) and (redislocation or re-dislocation or recurrence or instability)). Methodology followed the PRISMA guidelines. Data and outcomes were synthesized by two independent reviewers, and papers were assessed for bias and quality. Results. Overall, 35 studies including 7,995 shoulders were eligible for analysis, with a mean follow-up of 32.7 months (12 to 159.5). The rate of post-stabilization instability was 9.8% in first-time dislocators, 9.1% in recurrent dislocators, and 8.5% in a mixed cohort. A descriptive analysis investigated the influence of recurrent instability or age in the risk of instability post-stabilization, with an association seen with increasing age and a reduced risk of recurrence post-stabilization. Conclusion. Using modern arthroscopic techniques, patients sustaining an anterior shoulder dislocation without glenoid bone loss can expect a low risk of recurrence postoperatively, and no significant difference was found between first-time and recurrent dislocators. Furthermore, high-risk cohorts can expect a low, albeit slightly higher, rate of redislocation. With the findings of this study, patients and clinicians can be more informed as to the likely outcomes of arthroscopic stabilization within this patient subset. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1141–1149

Aims. The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences in revision and complication rates, functional outcomes, and radiological outcomes between cemented and press-fit humeral stems in primary anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Materials and Methods. A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted searching for studies that included patients who underwent primary anatomical TSA for primary osteoarthritis or rheumatoid arthritis. Results. There was a total of 36 studies with 927 cemented humeral stems and 1555 press-fit stems. The revision rate was 5.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 3.9 to 7.4) at a mean of 89 months for cemented stems, and 2.4% (95% CI 1.1 to 4.7) at a mean of 40 months for press-fit stems. A priori subgroup analysis to control for follow-up periods demonstrated similar revision rates: 2.3% (95% CI 1.1 to 4.7) for cemented stems versus 1.8% (95% CI 1.4 to 2.9) for press-fit stems. Exploratory meta-regression found that longer follow-up was a moderating variable for revision (p = 0.003). Conclusion. Cement fixation had similar revision rates when compared to press-fit stems at short- to midterm follow-up. Rotator cuff pathology was a prevalent complication in both groups but is likely not related to fixation type. Overall, with comparable revision rates, possible easier revision, and decreased operative time, humeral press-fit fixation may be an optimal choice for primary anatomical TSA in patients with sufficient bone stock. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:1107–1114

Aims

Body exhaust suits or surgical helmet systems (colloquially, ‘space suits’) are frequently used in many forms of arthroplasty, with the aim of providing personal protection to surgeons and, perhaps, reducing periprosthetic joint infections, although this has not consistently been borne out in systematic reviews and registry studies. To date, no large-scale study has investigated whether this is applicable to shoulder arthroplasty. We used the New Zealand Joint Registry to assess whether the use of surgical helmet systems was associated with lower all-cause revision or revision for deep infection in primary shoulder arthroplasties.

Aims

Hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) are often the preferred forms of treatment for patients with atraumatic avascular necrosis of the humeral head when conservative treatment fails. Little has been reported about the survival of HA and TSA for this indication. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in revision rates between HA and TSA in these patients, to determine whether one of these implants has a superior survival and may be a better choice in the treatment of this condition.

Aims

The current evidence comparing the two most common approaches for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), the deltopectoral and anterosuperior approach, is limited. This study aims to compare the rate of loosening, instability, and implant survival between the two approaches for rTSA using data from the Dutch National Arthroplasty Registry with a minimum follow-up of five years.

Aims

Stemless humeral implants have been developed to overcome stem-related complications in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). However, stemless implant designs may hypothetically result in less stable initial fixation, potentially affecting long-term survival. The aim of this study is to investigate early fixation and migration patterns of the stemless humeral component of the Simpliciti Shoulder System and to evaluate clinical outcomes.

Aims

This systematic review places a recently completed multicentre randomized controlled trial (RCT), UK FROST, in the context of existing randomized evidence for the management of primary frozen shoulder. UK FROST compared the effectiveness of pre-specified physiotherapy techniques with a steroid injection (PTSI), manipulation under anaesthesia (MUA) with a steroid injection, and arthroscopic capsular release (ACR). This review updates a 2012 review focusing on the effectiveness of MUA, ACR, hydrodilatation, and PTSI.