Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery最新文献

Introduction: Weightlifting is a common form of recreational activity that can place higher levels of stress on the shoulder joint and is of particular interest to many patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty. Despite the growing number of individuals receiving anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), recommendations regarding return to weightlifting remain unclear. The purpose of this study was to report the rate of return to weightlifting following primary shoulder arthroplasty and to evaluate postoperative function and performance outcomes.

Methods: A retrospective review of a single institution's shoulder and elbow surgery repository identified patients who underwent anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA), hemiarthroplasty (HA), or rTSA by a single fellowship-trained shoulder and elbow surgeon between February 2009 and August 2023. Patients who self-identified "weights" or "weight training" as a usual sport on the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) questionnaire at a minimum two-year follow-up were included. Demographics, surgical indications, range of motion (ROM), patient-reported outcome measures (ASES, SANE, SST, VAS pain/function), and return to weightlifting status were analyzed and compared between anatomic (aTSA/HA) and reverse (rTSA) cohorts.

Results: Of the 200 shoulder arthroplasty patients self-identified as weightlifters, 184 patients (92%) met inclusion criteria with a mean follow-up of 66.6 ± 34.7 months. The mean age was 64.8 ± 8.1 years, and 76.6% were male. Overall, 70.1% of patients reported no difficulty performing their usual weightlifting activities, 21.7% reported some difficulty, 7.6% reported great difficulty, and only one patient (0.5%) was unable to participate. There was no statistically significant difference in rates of full return to weightlifting between patients treated with aTSA or HA and those treated with rTSA (74.3% vs 56.8%, p = 0.10). Postoperative range of motion only differed for internal rotation (8 vs 4, p=0.001). Both cohorts achieved substantial postoperative improvements in ASES (mean 86.1 ± 16.8), SANE (83.4 ± 21.6), SST (10.3 ± 2.0), and VAS pain (1.3 ± 2.2) scores.

Conclusion: Shoulder arthroplasty patients can expect a high likelihood of returning to weightlifting without difficulty, with excellent pain relief and functional improvement.

Level of evidence: Level III, Retrospective Cohort Comparison, Prognosis Study.

Background: Shoulder arthroplasty effectively treats various degenerative and traumatic shoulder conditions, but outcomes can be compromised by complications, limited mobility, and persistent pain. The impact of previous non-arthroplasty surgery on functional outcomes remains unclear. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to determine if a history of prior non-arthroplasty shoulder surgery is associated with worse functional outcomes after primary shoulder arthroplasty.

Methods: This registry study with data sourced from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI) includes adult patients who underwent primary arthroplasty between 2014 and 2022, with or without a history of prior non-arthroplasty shoulder surgery. Prior surgeries were divided in the following categories: osteosynthesis, stabilization, rotator cuff, subacromial decompression, and other shoulder surgeries. The outcomes of the study include revision rate, shoulder function and shoulder pain.

Results: 25,188 shoulder arthroplasty procedures were recorded in the registry between 2014 and 2022. Of the procedures, 18,160 (72.1%) were reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, 4,772 (18.9%) anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty, and 2,256 (9.0%) hemi shoulder arthroplasty. A total of 4,203 patients (16.7%) underwent prior shoulder surgery, while 20,985 (83.3%) did not. From 2017 onwards, completion rates of PROMs ranged from 21.2% to 30.0%. Prior shoulder surgery was associated with higher chance of revision surgery (HR (95%CI) = 1.48 (1.31 to 1.68), n=25,188). Prior surgery was associated with less improvement in shoulder function (regression coefficient (95%CI) = -2.84 (-3.83 to -1.84), n=3,206), less improvement in pain score at rest (regression coefficient (95%CI) = -0.57 (-0.77 to -0.37), n=3,325) and less improvement in pain during activity (regression coefficient (95%CI) = -0.64 (-0.88 to -0.41), n=3,318) after 12 months. Patients with a history of osteosynthesis (HR (95%CI) = 1.58 (1.31 to 1.91)) or rotator cuff repair (HR (95%CI) = 1.47 (1.18 to 1.83)) had lower prosthesis survival compared to those without such interventions.

Conclusions: A history of non-arthroplasty shoulder surgery is associated with higher revision rates and poorer patient-reported outcomes after primary shoulder arthroplasty. These findings highlight the importance of surgical history in preoperative counseling and risk stratification.

Background: Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has been removed from the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services "in-patient only" list. Thus, the onus of TSA outpatient versus inpatient classification has become more complex, leading to failed outpatient TSA and unintended extended hospital stays. While most patients can be safely treated with outpatient TSA, a select vulnerable population may benefit from inpatient designation. This study aims to identify the rate of failure to discharge after two midnights, perioperative reasons for failure to discharge, and independent risk factors associated with failure to discharge.

Methods: This study retrospectively identified elective, outpatient designated, unilateral primary anatomic and reverse TSA procedures performed at a single institution between 2017 and 2023. Operative indications included osteoarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, dislocation and fracture. Demographics, medical comorbidities, surgical characteristics and social factors were compared using univariate analysis. A multivariable regression model was built to determine independent risk factors associated with conversion to inpatient stay.

Results: A total of 648 patients met inclusion criteria, with a total of 122 patients (19%) staying over two midnights. The most common reason for late discharge was inpatient medical management (63%), followed by physical therapy recommendation/rehab placement (30%), and patient/family readiness (7%). Multivariable regression found living alone to be the strongest predictor of conversion to inpatient stay (OR 4.2, 95% CI 2.6-7.1), followed by female sex (OR 2.6, 95% CI 1.5-4.6) and CCI (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.3-1.9).

Conclusion: Nearly 1 in 5 patients failed to discharge before two midnights, most commonly due to postoperative medical needs or rehabilitation barriers. Above patient comorbidities, living alone was the strongest predictor of prolonged stay. These findings support the need for more nuanced, patient-centered, risk stratification models for predicting feasibility of outpatient discharge in patients undergoing TSA.

Study design: Retrospective Case-Control.

Background: With the introduction of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) in the USA in 2004, the indications for TSA have expanded significantly, leading to a dramatic rise in primary and revision TSA procedures. Despite these increases in utilization, the epidemiology of revision TSA has not been studied on a large scale. The purpose of this study is to determine the epidemiology of revision TSA over the past 10 years and forecast the incidence over the next five years.

Methods: In this retrospective cohort study, the TriNetX US Collaborative Network database was queried from 2015-2024 using Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes 23473, 23474, and 1021145 to identify patients undergoing revision TSA. This database includes deidentified electronic health record data from 67 U.S. healthcare organizations; therefore, findings reflect patients treated within the US only. This query resulted in 70,349 patients who underwent revision during the study period. The data were analyzed using linear regression modelling to determine if there was a significant trend in the incidence of revision TSA. Poisson analysis was performed to calculate incidence rate ratios between years during the study period. An Auto-Regressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) model was used to project future trends in the incidence of revision TSA through the year 2030.

Results: The incidence of revision TSA increased from 223 to 1247 cases per 100,000 person-years 2015 to 2024, a 5.6-fold increase. Poisson analysis shows a significant and steady upward trend, with notable acceleration in the recent years (p < 0.001). The Poisson-based ARIMA model of revision TSA volume projects growth to 1,929 cases per 100,000 patients per year by 2030 (R² = 0.88, mean absolute percentage error = 16%.) CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of revision TSA has steadily increased from 2015 to 2024, with a greater than five-fold increase over the study period and a marked acceleration in recent years. Time series forecasting projects a continued upward trend with an over 50% increase in cases from 2025-2030, indicating a growing burden on healthcare systems. Sustained increases in revision procedures will require expanded healthcare resources and specialized training to meet the growing surgical demand.

Background: In subacromial pain syndrome (SAPS), a common cause of shoulder pain, thoracic spine targeted interventions have been associated with improvements in shoulder outcomes. This study aimed to investigate the effects of adding thoracic extension exercises (TEE) or thoracic kinesio taping (KT) to shoulder exercises (SE) on shoulder pain, disability, active range of motion (AROM), and strength in adults with SAPS.

Methods: Seventy-five adults with SAPS were randomized into three groups. Group A and Group B received TEE and KT in addition to SE, respectively, while Group C received only SE. All exercises were performed five days a week for three weeks. KT was applied every three days, for a total of five applications. Assessments included shoulder pain intensity (Visual Analog Scale, VAS), pressure pain threshold (PPT) of the upper trapezius and pectoralis major (algometer), self-reported disability (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand, DASH) and health status (Short Form-36), AROM (universal goniometer), isometric strength of the shoulder (hand-held dynamometer), and thoracic kyphosis (inclinometer).

Results: Pain decreased by approximately 3.1-4.4 cm on the VAS, DASH scores improved by 20-23 points, and shoulder AROM increased by 7-50° across groups (p<0.05). PPT increased by 2.7-7.2 kg/cm² in measures showing statistically significant improvement (p<0.05). Isometric shoulder strength increased in Groups A and B (p<0.05), whereas no significant strength changes were observed in Group C (p>0.05). Between-group comparisons demonstrated greater improvements in PPT of the pectoralis major and shoulder abductor and adductor strength in the groups receiving thoracic interventions compared with SE alone (p<0.05).

Conclusion: Although all interventions improved most outcomes, adding TEE or KT to SE resulted in greater improvements in pain sensitivity and shoulder muscle strength, with no superiority between TEE and KT. Longer-term studies are warranted.

Level of evidence: Level II, Randomized Controlled Trial, Treatment Study.

Background: Despite the clinical importance of rehabilitation after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR), standardized postoperative rehabilitation protocols are yet to be established. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the current consensus on rehabilitation protocols after ARCR among active members of the Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society (KSES). We hypothesized that rehabilitation protocols would vary and that there might be a tendency to adjust rehabilitation based on the preoperative tear size and level of physical demand of the individual patient.

Methods: Between November 2023 and February 2024, an anonymous electronic survey questionnaire was distributed to 140 active members of the KSES under the auspices of the KSES Public Relations Committee. It assessed the surgeon's level of experience, rehabilitation protocols, and whether adjustments were made to the immobilization period based on tear size. Additionally, the clinical scenario of a medium-sized rotator cuff tear (RCT) was used to analyze the consensus on detailed rehabilitation protocols, including immobilization, postoperative pain management, and timing of return to daily activities.

Results: A total of 113 expert shoulder surgeons, with a mean clinical experience of 14.5 ± 7.6 years, responded to the survey (response rate 80.7%). All respondents reported using an abduction brace, and 92.9% adjusted the immobilization duration based on the tear size (r = 0.648, p < 0.001). In a medium-sized RCT scenario, 43.4% initiated rehabilitation during immobilization. Range of motion exercise was started after brace removal by 96.5% and strengthening by 80.5% at postoperative 3.1 ± 0.9 months. Patient-performed self-exercise was preferred over supervised physiotherapy or continuous passive motion machine. Analgesic use declined over time, with more pronounced reductions in opioids and acetaminophen than in non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs or cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors. Injection therapy was considered by 76.1% of surgeons to manage pain that was not adequately controlled by oral analgesics. Return to work (85.8%) and sports activities (77.0%) were adjusted based on labor (r = 0.702, p < 0.001) and sports intensity (r = 0.367, p < 0.001), respectively.

Conclusions: Despite variations in detailed protocols, the structured framework based on tear size and physical demands observed among the active members of the KSES, coupled with the preference for patient-directed rehabilitation and multimodal pain control, may suggest future efforts toward developing evidence-based and culturally adaptable rehabilitation guidelines. Further studies with higher levels of evidence are required to establish standardized and effective rehabilitation protocols.

Level of evidence: V, Expert opinion.

Background: Diagnosing simple valgus instability of the elbow currently involves time and cost-intensive imaging modalities such as MRI or MRA. Previous studies have demonstrated that stress radiography represents an alternative diagnostic tool for such conditions. The aim of this study was to investigate if standardized valgus stress radiography can identify soft-tissue lesions of the medial elbow.

Methods: A telos stress device (telos GAIII/E; telos Arzt- und Krankenhausbedarf GmbH; Woelfersheim-Bernstadt; Germany) was used to apply 50 N of valgus stress to six cadaveric elbows during static radiographic imaging. Forearm flexor and extensor tendons were loaded with 25 N and 20 N respectively. Ulnohumeral joint spaces [mm] were measured with the joint in the intact state (M1), after transection of the medial collateral ligament (M2) and after release of the common flexor tendon (M3). Imaging was repeated in 0°, 30° and 60° flexion with the forearm in neutral rotation, supination and pronation in each position.

Results: Mean joint gapping was increased in all groups representing ligament- and/or tendon-deficient joint conditions compared to the intact (stressed) state (group M1). The absolute difference in ulnohumeral joint gapping after common flexor tendon transection compared to the uninjured state was statistically significant (p<0.05) in all positions but not in 30° flexion and supination. Medial joint laxity was greater in 60° than 0° or 30° flexion. Joint spaces were greater in pronation and neutral rotation compared to supination.

Conclusion: Telos stress radiographic imaging can be used to detect large ligamentous injuries at the medial elbow. Dynamic joint stabilization might affect the detection of MCL injuries. Stress radiographic imaging at the elbow should involve examination of the joint at flexion angles of 60°.

Level of evidence: 5:

Introduction: Shoulder arthroplasty is indicated to treat pain and dysfunction associated with advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA). However, the relationship between preoperative pathoanatomy and clinical presentation remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate associations between radiographic pathoanatomy, physical examination findings, patient reported outcomes (PROMs), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in patients with advanced GHOA who elect to undergo shoulder arthroplasty.

Methods: This retrospective study included 280 patients with primary GHOA (148 males, 52.9 percent; mean age 68.5 ± 8.6 years) who were treated with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA, n=147), reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA, n=81), or ream and run arthroplasty (RNR, n=52). Preoperative pathoanatomy was characterized using plain radiographs and CT scans and classified according to the Samilson-Prieto (SP), Kellgren-Lawrence (KL) and Walch classifications. Additional radiographic parameters were evaluated. Associations between pathoanatomy and clinical presentation were analyzed using multivariable regression. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was used to evaluate the clinical significance of associations.

Results: Greater humeral head flattening was associated with significantly and clinically relevant less active forward elevation (AFE) (B=-0.56, p=.048), active external rotation (AER) (B=-0.38, p=.048), and internal rotation (IR) (B=-0.06, p=.027). Larger humeral neck spur size was associated with significant and clinically relevant less AER (B=-0.40, p=.01). There were no clinically significant associations between SP grade, KL grade, Walch classification, critical shoulder angle, humeral medialization, glenoid version, or glenoid inclination and ROM or PROMs. There were no significant associations between pathoanatomy and HRQoL.

Discussion: There were limited associations between the severity of pathoanatomy in advanced GHOA and clinical presentations. The only significant associations between pathoanatomy and the clinical presentation related to the humerus, correlating with reduced ROM, but not with PROMs or HRQoL. These findings suggest that existing classification systems for GHOA may not fully capture the variability in clinical symptoms. Further research with larger cohorts, including patients with earlier stage GHOA, is needed to clarify the relationship between pathoanatomy and clinical manifestations of GHOA.

Background: Reconstruction after proximal humerus tumor resection poses challenges in restoring stability and function due to loss of rotator cuff attachments and soft-tissue integrity. Hemiarthroplasty (HA) with synthetic mesh augmentation has traditionally been used, whereas reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) has emerged as an alternative. Comparative data between these techniques in oncologic settings remain limited. This study compared functional outcomes and complication profiles between HA with aortograft mesh (HA-aortograft) and rTSA endoprosthetic reconstructions following proximal humeral oncologic resection.

Methods: A single-center retrospective cohort study was performed on 68 patients who underwent oncologic proximal humerus resection and reconstruction with HA-aortograft (n = 58) or rTSA (n = 10) from 2000 - 2025. Functional outcomes, including forward elevation (FE), external rotation (ER) lag, and internal rotation (IR) to the hip or less, were assessed preoperatively, 6 and 12 months postoperatively, and at final follow-up. Complication, recurrence, and revision rates were recorded. Between-group comparisons used t-tests or Fisher's exact tests; within-group changes used paired tests.

Results: rTSA had shorter mean final follow-up (21.9 vs 43.5 months, P = .001) and shorter resection lengths (7 vs 12.7 cm, P < .001). rTSA demonstrated superior FE at 6 months (76° vs 34°, P = .004) and final follow-up (87° vs 41°, P = .018); this superiority persisted when restricting analysis to those with preserved deltoid insertions. Longitudinally, HA-aortograft lost significant FE function from baseline at 6 months (-36°, P = .003) and 12 months (-25°, P = .042). In contrast, rTSA achieved significant gains at 6 months (+50°, P = .015) and final follow-up (+60°, P = .023). A greater proportion of rTSA patients achieved the minimal clinically important difference for FE (≥ 12°) at 6 months (80% vs 20.6%, P = .001) and final follow-up (77.8% vs 26.5%, P = .008). Rotational outcomes were largely comparable cross-sectionally, though rTSA showed a trend toward greater improvement in ER lag and IR limitation. Rates of implant-related complication (rTSA 10% vs HA-aortograft 12.1%) and revision (rTSA 10% vs HA-aortograft 5.2%) were similar between groups.

Conclusion: rTSA endoprosthetic reconstruction provided superior restoration of FE and overall functional recovery compared with HA-aortograft following proximal humeral oncologic resection, without increased complication or revision rates.