Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery最新文献

Background: Socioeconomic status has been shown to impact a patient's access to orthopedic care, but outcomes such as compliance with physical therapy and time to return to full activities has not been established. The aim of this study is to investigate the impact of socioeconomic status on physical therapy compliance and return to play time specifically in patients with shoulder instability. The area deprivation index (ADI) is a validated tool using factors from the US Census that measures socioeconomic deprivation in neighborhoods. Our hypothesis is that patients with higher socioeconomic deprivation are more likely to have more missed scheduled physical therapy appointments and a longer return to play after arthroscopic shoulder labrum repair for instability.

Methods: This study included patients who underwent arthroscopic shoulder labrum repair between 2019 and 2023 at a single orthopedic hospital by a single surgeon. Demographic information (race, age, and sex), insurance type, ADI, physical therapy no-show visit rates, and return to play times were recorded.

Results: The cohort included 73 patients, 14 of whom did not have return to play times. A total of 82.2% of the patients were male, 63.0% were White, and the mean age was 24 years. Patients with increasing ADI were significantly more likely not to attend a scheduled physical therapy session (P = .035). No association between ADI and return to play time was found (P = .165). No significant association between insurance type (private vs. Medicaid) and missed scheduled physical therapy appointments (P = .139) and return to play times was found (P = .741).

Conclusion: Increasing socioeconomic deprivation is associated with increased likelihood to miss scheduled physical therapy visits after shoulder instability surgery. These findings elucidate gaps in orthopedic care as postoperative physical therapy is a crucial part in the comprehensive care of shoulder instability.

Hypothesis: The purpose of this study was to systematically review complications arising from intramedullary nailing (IMN) of proximal and humeral shaft fractures. This study hypothesized that there would be a low rate of complications and revision among patients treated with IMN for humerus fractures.

Methods: Two independent reviewers performed a literature search in the PubMed database based on Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Studies were included if they reported on outcomes following the use of intramedullary nails for proximal humerus fractures or humeral shaft fractures. Variables that were collected included complications, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain scores, and revision operations.

Results: Overall, 179 studies met the inclusion criteria, with 7984 shoulders. The average age of patients in this study was 55.2 years and 60.7% of patients were female. The mean follow-up was 16.6 months. The overall complication rate for all fractures treated with intramedullary nails was 18.9%, and the overall revision rate was 6.8%. Among the complications were fracture complications (7.5%), hardware complications (7.2%), soft tissue complications (1.8%), neurovascular complications (1.6%), and infection (0.8%). 4-part proximal humerus fractures (52.9%) and open fractures (36.7%) had the highest rates of complication. Among the reasons for revision were hardware removal or replacement (5.0%), conversion to arthroplasty (0.6%), and other (1.2%). The mean VAS pain score at last follow-up was 1.6.

Conclusion: Overall, there was a moderate rate of complications but low rate of revision following IMN of humerus fractures. Open fractures and 4-part proximal humerus fractures had the highest complication rates.

Purpose: Lateralization shoulder angle (LSA) and distalization shoulder angle (DSA) are two parameters that had been described for a better planification of the arthroplasty, but the range of these angles are very wide. The purpose of this study was to investigate the best combination in terms of lateralization and distalization to optimize the outcome of Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty(RTSA) for cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) with a functional deltoid.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study, conducted between 2014 and 2018 at a specialized shoulder unit in Paris, focused on patients exclusively treated with RTSA for CTA, ensuring a minimum follow-up of 1 year. The primary outcome measure was the ASES score. Secondary outcome measures included range of motion and patient-reported outcomes at the final follow-up, such as the Constant score, SSV, SST, and VAS. Optimal RTSA outcomes were delineated by scores surpassing the patient's acceptable symptom state (PASS) for ASES, set in literature at 76. Patients were categorized into two groups based on ASES scores at the last follow-up: those below and those above 76. The capabilities of LSA and DSA to predict the outcome of interest were assessed and the corresponding optimal thresholds for having better outcome were calculated using the Receiver Operator Characteristic (ROC) curve.

Results: Sixty-two patients were included in the study with a mean age of 74.51 ± 6.79. Correlation analysis revealed significant medium correlation between ASES and both LSA (r = -0.43, p = .001) and DSA (r = 0.39, p = .002). The DSA of patients with ASES > 76 was 48.55 ± 12.44 with an IQR of 39.5 - 57.5, as compared to lower values for patients with ASES < 76, which was 37.82 ± 9.8 (IQR 32 - 46.5) (p=0.009). Similarly, the LSA of patients with ASES > 76 was 86.43 ± 11.4 (IQR 79.5 - 93.5), as compared to higher values for patients with ASES < 76, which was 100.09 ± 7.63 (IQR 93 - 105.5) (p<0.001). The ROC curve confirmed LSA and DSA as good predictors for the ASES outcome, with AUCs of 0.851 and 0.741, respectively. The optimal LSA should be no more than 90.5° (Se=100%, Sp=67.7%). The optimal DSA should be no less than 37.5° (Se=78.4%, Sp=63.6%).

Conclusion: The LSA and DSA angle could represent a helpful tool to optimize the clinical outcomes of an adaptable RTSA in CTA with a functional deltoid and a complete passive range of motion.

Introduction: Radial head arthroplasty (RHA) is performed with increasing frequency for reconstruction of comminuted radial head fractures. Implants can be categorized by stem design, either loose fit or press fit. Currently, the RHA literature does not suggest one implant type is superior to another based on revision and reoperation rates, although most RHA outcome studies have small numbers of patients with few events to detect a difference. This study evaluated the association between stem design and risk of revision and reoperation after RHA.

Methods: 1575 patients aged ≥18 years who underwent primary RHA within a US-based healthcare system were identified (2009-2021). Revision following the index RHA was the primary outcome of interest; ipsilateral reoperation was a secondary outcome. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate the risk of outcomes by loose versus press fit with the adjustment for race/ethnicity, ASA classification, region, surgeon RHA volume, and simultaneous ipsilateral extremity procedures.

Results: Of the 1575 RHA, 681 (43.2%) received a loose fit stem. The cumulative revision probability was 2.6% for loose fit and 3.5% for press fit. In adjusted analysis, we did not observe a difference in risk of revision (HR=0.78, 95% CI=0.41-1.46) or reoperation (HR=0.73, 95% CI=0.43-1.25). Additionally, there were no observed differences in risk of revision (HR=0.62, 95% CI=0.28-1.38) or reoperation (HR=0.90, 95% CI=0.48-1.71) in the patient subgroup who underwent additional procedures in the same extremity at the time of RHA.

Conclusion: In this large multi-center cohort of 1575 primary RHA, we did not observe a difference in risk of revision or reoperation following RHA based upon stem design. The choice between using an implant with a loose or press fit stem may be based more on surgeon familiarity, implant availability and cost, and ease of use.

Background: The effect of smoking status on clinical outcomes in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) has not been thoroughly characterized. We sought to compare pain and functional outcomes, complications, and revision-free survivorship between current smokers, former smokers, and non-smokers undergoing primary rTSA.

Methods: We retrospectively reviewed a prospectively-collected shoulder arthroplasty database from 2004-2020 to identify patients who underwent primary rTSA. Three cohorts were created based on smoking status: current smokers, former smokers, and non-smokers. Outcome scores (SPADI, SST, ASES, UCLA, Constant), range of motion (ROM) (external rotation [ER], forward elevation [FE], abduction, internal rotation [IR]) and shoulder strength (ER, FE) evaluated at 2-4-year follow-up were compared between cohorts. The incidence of complication and revision-free implant survivorship were evaluated.

Results: We included 676 primary rTSAs, including 38 current smokers (44±47 pack-years), 84 former smokers who quit on average 20±14 years (range: 0.5-57 years) prior to surgery (38±32 pack-years), and 544 non-smokers. At 2-4-year follow-up, current smokers had less favorable SPADI, SST, ASES scores, UCLA scores, and Constant scores compared to former smokers and non-smokers. On multivariable analysis, current smokers had less favorable SPADI, SST, ASES score, UCLA score, and Constant score compared to non-smokers. There were no significant differences between cohorts in complication rate and revision-free survivorship.

Conclusion: Our data showed that current smokers may have poorer functional outcomes after rTSA compared to former smokers and non-smokers despite the incidence of complications and revision surgery not differing significantly between cohorts.