Is it feasible to merge data from national shoulder registries? A new collaboration within the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association

Comparable low revision rates of stemmed and stemless total anatomic shoulder arthroplasties after exclusion of metal-backed glenoid components: a collaboration between the Australian and Danish national shoulder arthroplasty registries

BACKGROUND

The stemmed anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty is the gold standard in the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. However, the use of stemless total shoulder arthroplasties has increased in recent years. The number of revision procedures are relatively low, and therefore it has been recommended that national joint replacement registries should collaborate when comparing revision rates. Therefore, we aimed to compare the revision rates of stemmed and stemless TSA used for the diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis using data from both the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) and the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry (DSR).

METHODS

We included all patients who were registered in the AOANJRR and the DSR from January 1, 2012, to December 2021 with an anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty used for osteoarthritis. Revision for any reason was used as the primary outcome. We used the Kaplan-Meier method to illustrate the cumulative revision rates and a multivariate cox regression model to calculate the hazard ratios. All analyses were performed separately for data from AOANJRR and DSR, and the results were then reported using a qualitative approach.

RESULTS

A total of 13,066 arthroplasties from AOANJRR and 2882 arthroplasties from DSR were included. The hazard ratio for revision of stemmed TSA with stemless TSA as reference, adjusted for age and gender, was 1.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] 1.34-2.09, P < .001) in AOANJRR and 0.57 (95% CI 0.36-0.89, P = .014) in DSR. When including glenoid type and fixation, surface bearing (only in AOANJRR), and hospital volume in the cox regression model, the hazard ratio for revision of stemmed TSA compared to stemless TSA was 1.22 (95% CI 0.85-1.75, P = .286) in AOANJRR and 1.50 (95% CI 0.91-2.45, P = .109) in DSR. The adjusted hazard ratio for revision of total shoulder arthroplasties with metal-backed glenoid components compared to all-polyethylene glenoid components was 2.54 (95% CI 1.70-3.79, P < .001) in AOANJRR and 4.1 (95% CI 1.92-8.58, P < .001) in DSR.

CONCLUSION

Based on data from 2 national shoulder arthroplasty registries, we found no significant difference in risk of revision between stemmed and stemless total shoulder arthroplasties after adjusting for the type of glenoid component. We advocate that metal-backed glenoid components should be used with caution and not on a routine basis.

Glenoid wear and migration pattern of a humeral head resurfacing implant: a prospective study using radio stereometric analysis

Background

The humeral head resurfacing arthroplasty (HHR) is normally used as a hemi shoulder arthroplasty and has been in use for the treatment of Gleno-Humeral osteoarthritis (OA) of the shoulder for more than 30 years. Some studies, however, shows that anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty provides better improvement in function than a HHR for patients with OA. Reasons for this may be a progressive glenoid wear (GW) or loosening of the HHR. We, therefore, wanted to investigate the migration pattern of the HHR and also GW by using radio stereometric analysis (RSA).

Methods

21 patients (21 shoulders) with OA and a mean age of 64 years were enrolled in the study. They all received the Copeland humeral resurfacing head and were followed for 2 years with RSA. We evaluated the clinical outcome at 2 years with Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS), EuroQol 5 dimension 3L and Constant Shoulder Score. In addition, we assessed data on WOOS and revisions until 5 years follow-up by using the local clinic data within the Swedish Shoulder Arthroplasty Register.

Results

After an initial migration at two months the implants were stable in relation to the humerus with no statistically significant difference between the 2 months and the 2 years value (P = .23). The GW continued to increase during the study period with an initial migration of mean 2.3 mm and at 2 years 3.5 mm with a statistically difference between the 6 months and 2 years value (P = .046). The WOOS, EuroQol 5 dimension 3L and Constant Shoulder Score were all improved at 2 years compared to the preoperative values. We found a weak correlation between GW at 2 years and the WOOS score at 2 and 5 years, but these did not reach statistical significance. There were 4 revisions within 5 years after the primary operation, all due to pain.

Conclusion

The marker-free RSA can be used in clinical studies for assessing migration in HHR implants and was also for the first time used to measure GW. The Copeland HHR seems to obtain a secure fixation in the humerus but shows continuous GW up to two years.

Influence of design features and brand of reverse shoulder arthroplasties on survivorship and reasons for revision surgery: results of 5,494 arthroplasties with up to 15 years' follow-up reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 2007-2022

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

We aimed to report the survival of different reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) designs and brands, and factors associated with revision. The secondary aim was to evaluate the reasons for revision.

METHODS

We included 4,696 inlay and 798 onlay RSAs reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR) 2007-2022. Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and Cox models adjusted for age, sex, diagnosis, implant design, humeral fixation, and previous surgery were investigated to assess revision risks. The reasons for revision were compared using competing risk analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, the 10-year survival rate was 94% (confidence interval [CI] 93-95). At 5 years all brands exceeded 90%. Compared with Delta Xtend (n = 3,865), Aequalis Ascend Flex (HR 2.8, CI 1.7-4.6), Aequalis Reversed II (HR 2.2, CI 1.2-4.2), SMR (HR 2.5, CI 1.3-4.7), and Promos (HR 2.2, CI 1.0-4.9) had increased risk of revision. Onlay and inlay RSAs had similar risk of revision (HR 1.2, CI 0.8-1.8). Instability and deep infection were the most frequent revision causes. Male sex (HR 2.3, CI 1.7-3.1), fracture sequelae (HR 3.1, CI 2.1-5.0), and fractures operated on with uncemented humeral stems had increased risk of revision (HR 3.5, CI 1.6-7.3).

CONCLUSION

We found similar risk of revision with inlay and onlay designs. Some prosthesis brands had a higher rate of revision than the most common implant, but numbers were low.

The Delta III and Delta Xtend reverse shoulder arthroplasty-risk of revision and failure mechanisms: a report on 3650 cases from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 1994-2021

BACKGROUND

The Delta reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is commonly used worldwide and is the most frequently used RSA in Norway. The aim of this registry-based study was to report 10- and 20-year implant survival, risk of revision, and reasons for revision in 2 consecutive time periods for Delta III (1994-2010) and Delta Xtend (2007-2021) prostheses.

METHODS

We included 3650 primary RSAs reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register: 315 Delta III (42% cemented stems) and 3335 Delta Xtend (88% cemented stems). We used Kaplan-Meier analyses to investigate implant survival. The reasons for revision were compared for the 2 designs and fixation technique. Factors that could influence the risk of revision, such as implant design, fixation technique, and patient factors, were investigated using Cox regression analyses with adjustments for age, sex, and diagnosis.

RESULTS

Patients operated with Delta III were more likely to be diagnosed with inflammatory disease or fracture sequela, whereas acute fracture, osteoarthritis, and cuff arthropathy were the most frequent indications for Delta Xtend. Ten-year survival was 93.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 87.0-99.0) (cemented stem) and 81.6% (95% CI: 75.3-87.9) (uncemented stem) for Delta III and 94.7% (95% CI: 93.3-96.1) (cemented stem) and 95.7% (95% CI: 88.3-100) (uncemented stem) for Delta Xtend. Twenty-year survival for Delta III (uncemented stem) was 68.2% (95% CI: 58.8-77.6). Compared with DeltaXtend (cemented stem) at 10-year follow-up, we found a higher risk of revision for Delta III (uncemented stem) (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.9, 95% CI: 1.7-5.0), whereas no significant difference was found for Delta III (cemented stem) and Delta Xtend (uncemented stem). The most common reason for revision of Delta III (uncemented stem) was glenoid loosening followed by deep infection and instability. Instability was the most frequent revision cause for Delta Xtend (both cemented and uncemented stem). Men had an overall higher revision risk than women (HR: 2.8 [95% CI: 2.0-3.9]), and patients with fracture sequela had increased risk for revision (HR: 2.8, 95% CI: 1.7-4.7) compared with patients with osteoarthritis.

DISCUSSION

We found that Delta III (uncemented stem) had a higher risk of revision compared with Delta Xtend (cemented stem). The risk of revision for glenoid component loosening was lower for Delta Xtend, but revisions due to instability/dislocation are still a concern. This register study cannot determine whether the differences found were caused by differences in implant design or other factors that changed during the study period. Risk of revision may have been affected by the indication for primary operation.

Assessment of the Value of Registries in Shoulder Arthroplasty Using Reverse Arthroplasty as an Example

INTRODUCTION

As a consequence of the Swedish model, endoprosthesis registers have become increasingly important worldwide. Due to the increasing number of joint replacements at the shoulder, these are being increasingly included in the register databases - in addition to interventions at the hip and knee joint. In this study, the value of endoprosthesis registers is investigated, using the example of shoulder endoprosthetics and including a comparison with clinical studies.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The annual reports of 32 different endoprosthesis registers with data on hip, knee and/or shoulder arthroplasty were analysed. The number of operations and demographic patient data for all areas of endoprosthetics were examined. In addition, a more detailed consideration of variables such as the primary diagnosis, the cause of the revision, the revision rate depending on risk factors and patient-reported outcome measures (PROM scores) was carried out exclusively for the shoulder joint endoprostheses. Using the example of the inverse shoulder prosthesis, clinical studies were compared to registry data with special regard to the revision rate.

RESULTS

A total of 20 endoprosthesis registers could be included, 9 of these collected data on shoulder arthroplasty. The main primary diagnoses were osteoarthritis (40.6%), rotator cuff defect arthropathy (30.2%) and fractures (17.6%). The most commonly used shoulder joint endoprosthesis was the inverse prosthesis (47.3%). The proportion of revision surgeries in total shoulder arthroplasty operations was less than 10% in all registers. In addition to the revision rate, the PROM scores were sometimes used in the registers to evaluate the success of the prosthesis. Compared to registry data, clinical studies showed more heterogeneous data with a significantly higher revision rate of over 10% in long-term follow-up - using the example of the inverse shoulder prosthesis.

CONCLUSION

Register data are a valuable source of information in shoulder arthroplasty and can make a significant contribution to the quality assurance of endoprosthetic treatments. Compared to clinical studies, they primarily provide data on durability of different endoprosthesis and give lower revision rates. Clinical studies use PROM scores and clinical and radiological examinations to focus only on individual implants and surgical centres on the one hand and much more on the functional results on the other.

[The shoulder and elbow register of the DVSE-trend monitoring or early warning system? : A literature-based analysis]

The endoprosthesis register (SEPR) of the D‑A-CH Association for Shoulder and Elbow Surgery e. V. (DVSE) collects data on the implantation of shoulder and elbow endoprostheses. The question arises as to whether the data is only used to monitor trends in arthroplasty, or whether it can also be used as an early warning system for risks and possible complications. The existing literature on the SEPR was analyzed and compared with other national endoprosthesis registries. The SEPR of the DVSE enables the collection and analysis of epidemiological data on primary implantation, follow-up and revision in shoulder and elbow endoprosthetics. It is an instrument of quality control and contributes to ensuring the greatest possible patient safety. It is used for the early detection of risks and potential requirements associated with shoulder and elbow arthroplasty.

Innovative technologies for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in Australia: Market access challenges and implications for patients, decision-makers, and manufacturers

PURPOSE

The success of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has expanded its use for a broader range of shoulder indications worldwide. Evidence regarding the relative efficacy and long-term safety of medical technologies used in RTSA is subjected to rigorous assessment. Nonetheless, substantial challenges impede market access for innovative shoulder implant technologies for RTSA in Australia, resulting in delayed patient access.

APPROACH

This paper addresses the key challenges associated with generating evidence for the health technology assessments of innovative medical technologies for RTSA that are required for access to the Australian market. The transition to value-based care requires establishing a benchmarking reference that incorporates patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and combines revision outcomes with additional clinical outcomes to increase patient cohort sizes. Establishing the benchmark would require agreement on the outcome measures to be collected for each indication, and investment in reporting patient-reported outcomes for RTSA to the national orthopaedic registry.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The need for increased flexibility in developing evidence for health technology assessment of RTSA medical technologies is required. Optimised approaches for benchmarking RTSA require extensive stakeholder discussions, including the agreement on evidence requirements and follow-up periods, selection of clinical outcomes, as well as pre-operative and post-operative PROMs as a value assessment.

International Registries: U.K. National Joint Registry, Nordic Registries, and Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR)

National-level joint arthroplasty registries were among the first large orthopaedic surgery databases and represent some of the longest-running and most influential big databases in our profession. Nordic registries were among the first registries and were followed by excellent registries in the United Kingdom and Australia. In this article, we describe each of these registries and highlight the data elements collected, the data points that can be obtained by linking the national arthroplasty registries to other national registries or databases, the completeness of data, and the strengths and weaknesses of each database. Each of these registries publishes an annual report that is available online, and each also can do more detailed analysis of certain aspects of its data for special studies.When evaluating and interpreting data from national joint registries, the user should be aware that, despite the power of huge numbers, there remain numerous limitations to the observational data. Strong selection biases exist with regard to which patients are chosen for which procedure. Surgeons of different skill levels may use one technique or implant differentially compared with another. The end points that registries collect differ widely: for example, some report only hip dislocations leading to revision rather than all dislocations. Registries in countries in which there are long wait times for revision surgery may report artificially low revision rates compared with countries in which revision surgery is more easily accessible. Despite these limitations, registries have the merit of reporting the actual results of huge numbers of surgical procedures performed across the spectrum of hospitals, surgeons, and patients, making the data extremely powerful for identifying trends, identifying early signs of problems related to certain implants or implant classes, and identifying associations between variables that can be further studied to determine if the effect is causal.

Limited value of current shoulder arthroplasty registries in evidence-based shoulder surgery: a review of 7 national registries

National shoulder arthroplasty registries are currently used to assess incidence, indication, type of prosthesis and revision, but they seem to lack sufficient information to lead to evidence based decision-making in shoulder surgery. There appears to be a large difference in registered parameters and outcome measurement per country. First we investigated whether existing registries have sufficient common datasets to enable pooling of data. Second, we determined whether known risk factors for prosthetic failure are being recorded. Through a non-systematic literature review studies on registries were analyzed for included parameters. Seven national registries were scrutinized for the data collected and these were classified according to categories of risk factors for failure: patient-, implant and surgeon related, and other parameters. This shows a large heterogeneity of registered parameters between countries. The majority of parameters shown to be relevant to outcome and failure of shoulder prostheses are not included in the studied registries. International agreement on parameters and outcome measurement for registries is paramount to enable pooling and comparison of data. If we intend to use the registries to provide us with evidence to improve prosthetic shoulder surgery, we need adjustment of the different parameters to be included.

Effectiveness of a Web-Based Electronic Prospective Data Collection Tool for Surgical Data in Shoulder Arthroplasty

Background

The purpose of this study was to demonstrate the validity and efficiency of the Outcomes Management and Evaluation (OME) system, a prospectively designed electronic data collection tool, for collecting comprehensive and standardized surgical data in shoulder arthroplasty.

Methods

Surgical data from the first 100 cases of shoulder arthroplasty that were collected into the OME database were analyzed. Surgeons completed a traditional narrative operative note and also an OME case report using an encrypted smartphone. A blinded reviewer extracted data from the operative notes and implant logs in the electronic medical records (EMR) by manual chart review. OME and EMR data were compared with regard to data counts and agreement between 39 variables related to preoperative pathology, including rotator cuff status and glenoid wear, and surgical procedures. Data counts were assessed using both raw percentages and with McNemar's test (with continuity correction). Agreement of nominal variables was analyzed using Cohen's unweighted kappa (κ) and of ordinal variables using the linearly weighted Cohen's test. Efficiency was assessed by calculating the median time needed to complete OME.

Results

Compared to the EMR, the OME database had significantly higher data counts for 56% (22 of 39) of the variables assessed. A high level of proportional and statistical agreement was demonstrated between the data in the two datasets. 10 of 39 variables had 100% agreement but could not be statistically compared because both datasets had the same single response under those variables. Among the 29 variables that were compared, 79% (23 of 29) of variables had >80% raw proportional agreement, and 69% (20 of 29) of variables showed at least substantial agreement (κ > 0.6). The median time for completing OME surgery data entry was 92 seconds (IQR 70 - 126).

Conclusion

The prospectively designed, electronic data entry system (OME) is an efficient and valid tool for collecting comprehensive and standardized surgical data on shoulder arthroplasty.

Level of Evidence

Level IV.

A model for building a national, patient-driven database to track contraceptive use in women with rare diseases

Data on the safety and effectiveness of contraception among women with rare diseases are critical and sorely lacking. To fill this gap, we propose a national, patient-driven database that tracks contraceptive safety and effectiveness among women with rare diseases. We built a pilot database focusing on women with cystic fibrosis in 3 phases: (1) database design input from patients and experts, (2) merging of contraceptive survey data with relevant clinical outcomes from the Cystic Fibrosis Foundation Patient Registry (CFFPR), and (3) forming a data guide to facilitate accessible output data. We successfully linked 62 contraceptive survey variables with 362 relevant clinical outcome variables for 150 patients. This pilot represents a breakthrough in linking contraceptive data to disease-specific outcomes and informs how to build a national, patient-driven contraceptive database for women with rare diseases.

Thromboprophylaxis in primary shoulder arthroplasty does not seem to prevent death: a report from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register 2005-2018

Background and purpose - There is still no consensus on whether to use thromboprophylaxis as a standard treatment in shoulder replacement surgery. We investigated the use of thromboprophylaxis reported to the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register (NAR). The primary endpoint was early mortality after primary shoulder arthroplasty with and without thromboprophylaxis. Secondary endpoints included revisions within 1 year and intraoperative complications.Patients and methods - This observational study included 6,123 primary shoulder arthroplasties in 5,624 patients reported to the NAR from 2005 to 2018. Cox regression analyses including robust variance analysis were performed with adjustments for age, sex, ASA score, diagnosis, type of implant, fixation, duration of surgery, and year of primary surgery. An instrumental variable Cox regression was performed to estimate the causal effect of thromboprophylaxis.Results - Thromboprophylaxis was used in 4,089 out of 6,123 shoulder arthroplasties. 90-day mortality was similar between the thromboprophylaxis and no thromboprophylaxis groups (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.1, 95% CI 0.6-2.4). High age (> 75), high ASA class (≥ 3), and fracture diagnosis increased postoperative mortality. No statistically significant difference in the risk of revision within 1 year could be found (HR = 0.6, CI 0.3-1.2). The proportion of intraoperative bleeding was similar in the 2 groups (0.2%, 0.3%).Interpretation - We had no information on cause of death and relation to thromboembolic events. However, no association of reduced mortality with use of thromboprophylaxis was found. Based on our findings routine use of thromboprophylaxis in shoulder arthroplasty can be questioned.

Ten-year follow-up of stemmed hemiarthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures

AIMS

There is no consensus on the treatment of proximal humeral fractures. Hemiarthroplasty has been widely used in patients when non-surgical treatment is not possible. There is, despite extensive use, limited information about the long-term outcome. Our primary aim was to report ten-year patient-reported outcome after hemiarthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures. The secondary aims were to report the cumulative revision rate and risk factors for an inferior patient-reported outcome.

METHODS

We obtained data on 1,371 hemiarthroplasties for acute proximal humeral fractures from the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry between 2006 and 2010. Of these, 549 patients (40%) were alive and available for follow-up. The Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) questionnaire was sent to all patients at nine to 14 years after primary surgery. Revision rates were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Risk factors for an inferior WOOS score were analyzed using the linear regression model.

RESULTS

Mean age at surgery was 67 years (24 to 90) and 445 (81%) patients were female. A complete questionnaire was returned by 364 (66%) patients at a mean follow-up of 10.6 years (8.8 to 13.8). Mean WOOS score was 64 (4.3 to 100.0). There was no correlation between WOOS scores and age, sex, arthroplasty brand, or year of surgery. The 14-year cumulative revision rate was 5.7% (confidence interval 4.1 to 7.2). Patients aged younger than 55 years and patients aged between 55 to 74 years had 5.6-times (2.0 to 9.3) and 4.3-times (1.9 to 16.7) higher risk of revision than patients aged older than 75 years, respectively.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest long-term follow-up study of acute proximal humeral fractures treated with hemiarthroplasty. We found a low revision rate and an acceptable ten-year patient-reported outcome. The patient-reported outcome should be interpreted with caution as we have no information about the patients who died or did not return a complete WOOS score. The long-term outcome and revision rate suggest that hemiarthroplasty offers a valid alternative when non-surgical treatment is not possible. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1063-1069.

Variation and trends in reasons for knee replacement revision: a multi-registry study of revision burden

Background and purpose - Studies describing time-related change in reasons for knee replacement revision have been limited to single regions or institutions, commonly analyze only 1st revisions, and may not reflect true caseloads or findings from other areas. We used revision procedure data from 3 arthroplasty registries to determine trends and differences in knee replacement revision diagnoses.Patients and methods - We obtained aggregated data for 78,151 revision knee replacement procedures recorded by the Swedish Knee Arthroplasty Register (SKAR), the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), and the Kaiser Permanente Joint Replacement Registry (KPJRR) for the period 2003-2017. Equivalent diagnosis groups were created. We calculated the annual proportions of the most common reasons for revision.Results - Infection, loosening, and instability were among the 5 most common reasons for revision but magnitude and ranking varied between registries. Over time there were increases in proportions of revisions for infection and decreases in revisions for wear. There were inconsistent proportions and trends for the other reasons for revision. The incidence of revision for infection showed a uniform increase.Interpretation - Despite some differences in terminology, comparison of registry-recorded revision diagnoses is possible, but defining a single reason for revision is not always clear-cut. There were common increases in revision for infection and decreases in revision for wear, but variable changes in other categories. This may reflect regional practice differences and therefore generalizability of studies regarding reasons for revision is unwise.

Short-term mortality after primary and revision total joint arthroplasty: a single-center analysis of 103,560 patients

INTRODUCTION

The demand for total joint arthroplasty (TJA) is increasing worldwide with excellent long-term results. In general, TJA provides several benefits to the patients but also causes possible complications. The aim of our study was to describe trends in mortality after TJA in a high-volume arthroplasty center, and to examine the potential risk factors.

METHODS

From 1996 to 2018, a total of 103,560 patients (73,130 primary cases, 30,430 revision cases) underwent a TJA procedure in our institution. Anthropometric parameters, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), pre- and postoperative hemoglobin (Hb), blood loss during surgery, postoperative complication (such as infection, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, etc.) and cause of death from all patients who deceased during hospitalization were collected. The short-term mortality rate was analyzed between the primary and the revision groups.

RESULTS

The short-term mortality rate within our investigated groups was low with 0.041% in primary THA, 0.299% in revision THA, 0.045% in primary TKA, 0.205% in revision TKA, 0.214% in TSA/RSA, 0.15 % in primary TAA and 0% after TEA. Significant differences were found for preoperative Hb-values in patients undergoing septic revision (10.7 g/dl) compared to patients undergoing aseptic revision (12.8 g/dl) or primary arthroplasty (13.6 g/dl) (p < 0.001). Furthermore, we found significant differences regarding CCI between the groups. The comparison between causes of death (COD) showed a significantly higher number for pulmonary embolisms in the aseptic groups, while septic shock was the leading COD in the septic group and myocardial infarction as COD was found significantly more often after primary TJA.

CONCLUSION

This is the largest single-center study presenting the short-term mortality rate following TJA. Consequently, TJA is a safe procedure with a low short-term mortality rate. However, depending on the type of surgery, certain risk factors cannot be eliminated. In order to further reduce the mortality, procedures as such should continue to be performed at specialized centers under standardized conditions.

Early Experience of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in a Public Hospital in Malaysia

Introduction:

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty provides a surgical alternative to standard total shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of cuff tear arthropathy, arthritis and fracture sequelae. This study aimed to assess the short-term outcomes following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for patients in a large public hospital in Malaysia.

Materials and Methods:

We identified and performed five primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasties between 1 May 2019 and 1 June 2020. All patients were contactable and available for analysis. Assessment of functional outcomes was performed using the Constant-Murley score, the patient satisfaction score (PSS), and imaging studies. The mean follow-up from operation to the time of reporting was 9.6 months (range, 3 to 14 months)

Results:

The median age for our patients was 58 years (±11.91). The most common indication for surgery was post-traumatic arthritis, followed by rotator cuff arthropathy and osteoarthritis. The mean Constant score improved from 9.0 pre-operatively to 52.3 post-operatively at a mean of 9.6 months. The majority of the patients were satisfied with the surgery as the post-operative range of motion, especially anterior elevation and abduction, improved in four of our patients and there were no short-term complications, for example, of infection or revisions, reported at the last follow-up.

Conclusion:

This study has shown that reverse total shoulder arthroplasty can yield good short-term outcomes for the treatment of complex shoulder problems in addition to cuff tear arthropathy. It should be considered a treatment for rotator cuff tears, severe arthritis and ≥ 3 parts proximal humeral fractures.

Glenoid failure after total shoulder arthroplasty with cemented all-polyethylene versus metal-backed implants: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is an effective treatment adopted for patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA). The glenoid component failure is the main risk that occurs in this therapeutic choice; however, doubts remain regarding the selection of the best implant for avoiding complication. This systematic review aims to evaluate the glenoid component in TSA by comparing the complications of different types of implants.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A systematic review of randomised clinical trials or quasi-randomised trials will be performed by applying the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis protocols and comparing polyethylene (keeled and pegged) versus metal-backed implants in adult patients with glenohumeral OA. Our search strategy will be performed using MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE and Web of Science. Data management and extraction will be performed using a data withdrawal form and by analysing study method characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention characteristics, results and methodological domains. The database search will be performed by February 2021. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation will be used for assessing the quality of evidence of each study selected; however, some critical and important outcomes were determined such as the shoulder function through functional scores (Constant-Murley and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons), complications represented by pain (Visual Analogue Scale), surgical revision, radiograph radiolucency and loosening. The confidence in estimated effects for these outcomes will be applied as the overall confidence. The outcomes will be defined as early or late, according to the postoperative follow-up of less than or greater than 1 year, respectively, for complications and radiographs. For the shoulder function, follow-ups will be divided into 6, 12 and 24 months. Heterogeneity is expected in systematic reviews; therefore, the selection of outcomes, as well as the sample size, and specific statistical analysis can lead to meta-analysis; however, if it fails, narrative evidence synthesis will be conducted. Other analyses such as descriptive, subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed whenever possible. This systematic review will, therefore, provide evidence concerning the best clinical practice for avoiding complications.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Universidade Federal de São Paulo (protocols 0725/2017, 2.157.415 and 70473017.5.0000.5505), and the findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018079537.

Early revision in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty in osteoarthritis: a cross-registry comparison

BACKGROUND

We evaluated anatomic total shoulders undergoing early revision (less than two years) in the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) and the Kaiser Permanente Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry (KPSAR).

METHODS

A cross-sectional comparison of both registries was performed between the years of 2009 and 2012. Only patients who underwent anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty for a primary diagnosis of osteoarthritis were included. Aggregate-level data of patients undergoing early revisions done within two years of index arthroplasty were evaluated, and descriptive analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

During the study period, 4614 patients were identified in the AOANJRR compared to 2036 in the KPSAR. Rotator cuff pathology, component loosening, and prosthetic instability were among the most common reasons for revision in both registries. A higher rate of revision in the AOANJRR was found to be secondary to the failure of one specific prosthesis, which has since been discontinued.

DISCUSSION

Comparing reasons for early revision in total shoulder arthroplasty revealed several similarities between the AOANJRR and KPSAR. Differences were also noted, and this study served to highlight the importance prosthesis selection can play in determining outcomes. Cooperation among registries may allow for earlier identification of risk factors for failure in shoulder arthroplasty.

The Schulthess local Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry (SAR): cohort profile

PURPOSE

Clinical registries are essential for evaluation of surgical outcomes. The Schulthess Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry (SAR) was established in 2006 to evaluate safety, function, quality-of-life and patient satisfaction in patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult patients undergoing anatomic or reverse shoulder joint replacement at the Schulthess Klinik, a high-volume, leading orthopaedic surgery centre in Zürich, Switzerland.

FINDINGS TO DATE

Between March 2006 and December 2019, the registry covered 98% of eligible operations. Overall, 2332 patients were enrolled with a total of 2796 operations and 11 147 person-years of follow-up. Mean age at baseline was 71 (range: 20-95), 65% were women. Most common indication was rotator cuff tears with osteoarthritis (42%) and the mean preoperative Constant Score was 31 (±15). The most frequent arthroplasty type was reverse, increasing from 61% in 2006-2010 to 86% in 2015-2019. Functional recovery peaked at 12-month postoperatively and did not show a clinically relevant deterioration during the first ten follow-up years. Since its establishment, the registry was used to address multiple pertinent clinical and methodological questions. Primary focus was on comparing different implant configurations (eg, glenosphere diameter) and surgical techniques (eg, latissimus dorsi transfer) to maximise functional recovery. Additionally, the cohort contributed to the determination of the clinical relevance and validity of radiological monitoring of cortical bone resorption and scapular notching. Finally, SAR data helped to demonstrate that returning to sports was among key patient expectations after reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

FUTURE PLANS

As first patients are approaching the 15 years follow-up landmark, the registry will continue providing essential data on long-term functional outcomes, implant stability, revision rates and aetiologies as well as patient satisfaction and quality-of-life. In addition to research and quality-control, the cohort data will be brought back to the patients by bolstering real-time clinical decision support.

Low arthroplasty survival after treatment for proximal humerus fracture sequelae: 3,245 shoulder replacements from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association

Background and purpose - Proximal humerus fractures (PHF) may result in sequelae indicating arthroplasty. We report cumulative survival rates and reasons for revision after arthroplasty for proximal humerus fracture sequelae (PHFS).Patients and methods - Data were derived from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to illustrate survival rates. A scaled Schoenfeld residual plot was used to report the risk of revision for men relative to women in patients who were treated with reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Revision was defined as removal or exchange of any component or the addition of a glenoid component.Results - 30,190 primary arthroplasties were reported from 2004 to 2016, of which 3,245 were for PHFS. The estimated 1-, 5-, and 10-year cumulative survival rates (95% CI) were 96% (95-97), 90% (89-92), and 86% (83-88) for stemmed hemiarthroplasty and 94% (92-95), 89% (87-91), and 86% (82-90) for RSA with a median time to revision of 18 months (IQR 9-44) and 3 months (IQR 0-17). The risk of revision for men relative to women in patients who were treated with RSA was 3.2 (1.9-5.1) 0-1 year after surgery and 1.9 (0.9-4.1) 1-8 years after surgery. The estimated 1-, 5-, and 10-year cumulative survival rates (95% CI) were 94% (92-96), 88% (85-90), and 80% (75-86) for men and 95% (94-96), 86% (84-89), and 81% (77-84) for young patients.Interpretation - Shoulder arthroplasty for PHFS was associated with lower survival rates, compared with previously published results of shoulder arthroplasty for acute PHF. The low arthroplasty survival rates for men and young patients especially are worrying.

Re-intervention and revision rates following primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty - review of a local shoulder arthroplasty registry

PURPOSE

Our primary aim was to describe the re-intervention and revision rates after primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) documented in a local shoulder arthroplasty registry. We also identify the main indication for revision and re-intervention, which may be relevant for patient outcome post-RSA.

METHODS

Since July 2006, RSAs are consecutively documented in our clinic registry and prospectively controlled with follow-ups. Any intervention after primary RSA requiring a return to the operating room for any shoulder-related indication was termed a re-intervention. Revisions were defined as surgeries involving any exchange, removal, or addition of at least one component. The study endpoints were survival rates at two, five and ten years follow-up for both definitions.

RESULTS

Until July 2017, 63 from a total of 1480 primary RSAs required at least one re-intervention and 33 patients had a revision. Open reduction and internal fixation for fractures around the implant (n = 14) were the predominating indications for re-intervention. The re-intervention rate for instability was 0.5%. For re-interventions, survival rates were 97.7, 95.4 and 90.8% at two, five and ten years, respectively, and the respective rates for revisions were 98.7, 97.5 and 95.3%.

CONCLUSION

The revision rate after primary RSA for our patient registry is low. A relevant number of additional interventions were noted that did not require any component revision but may impair the final outcome post-RSA. By only reporting revision rates, the number of post-RSA re-interventions is clearly underestimated. We recommend the documentation of all events leading to any re-intervention in arthroplasty registries.

Low risk of revision after reverse shoulder arthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures

Background

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has gained popularity in the treatment of proximal humeral fractures (PHFs), especially in elderly patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the use of RSA implants for acute PHFs and risk of revision, as well as risk factors for revision.

Methods

RSA implants for acute PHFs were identified from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association registry data from 2004 to 2016. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to calculate implant survival. Cox multiple regression analysis was used to calculate the adjusted revision rate for sex, age, country of operation, and year of surgery.

Results

The study included 1523 RSA implants for PHFs (84% women; average age, 77 years; average follow-up time, 2.5 years). The 5-year cumulative implant survival rate was 97% (confidence limits, 95.5% and 98%). Revision was performed for 33 implants (2%). The most common reason for revision was instability, occurring in 11 cases (0.7%), followed by fracture, occurring in 6 (0.4%), and infection, occurring in 5 (0.3%). Four different arthroplasty brands were used in this cohort, with the Delta Xtend in two-thirds of cases (n = 1025). Age younger than 60 years and male sex were associated with slightly higher rates of revision; however, these differences did not reach statistical significance (hazard ratio of 2.02 with P = .075 and hazard ratio of 3.23 with P = .057, respectively).

Conclusion

The use of RSA for acute PHFs is increasing in the Nordic countries. The short-term risk of revision is low. The main reason for revision of RSA for this indication is instability.

Core set of unfavorable events of shoulder arthroplasty: an international Delphi consensus process

BACKGROUND

Shoulder arthroplasty (SA) complications require standardization of definitions and are not limited to events leading to revision operations. We aimed to define an international consensus core set of clinically relevant unfavorable events of SA to be documented in clinical routine practice and studies.

METHODS

A Delphi exercise was implemented with an international panel of experienced shoulder surgeons selected by nomination through professional societies. On the basis of a systematic review of terms and definitions and previous experience in establishing an arthroscopic rotator cuff repair core set, an organized list of SA events was developed and reviewed by panel members. After each survey, all comments and suggestions were considered to revise the proposed core set including local event groups, along with definitions, specifications, and timing of occurrence. Consensus was reached with at least two-thirds agreement.

RESULTS

Two online surveys were required to reach consensus within a panel involving 96 surgeons. Between 88% and 100% agreement was achieved separately for local event groups including 3 intraoperative (device, osteochondral, and soft tissue) and 9 postoperative event groups. Experts agreed on a documentation period that ranged from 3 to 24 months after SA for 4 event groups (peripheral neurologic, vascular, surgical-site infection, and superficial soft tissue) and that was lifelong until implant revision for other groups (device, osteochondral, shoulder instability, pain, late hematogenous infection, and deep soft tissue).

CONCLUSION

A structured core set of local unfavorable events of SA was developed by international consensus to support the standardization of SA safety reporting. Clinical application and scientific evaluation are needed.

The short-term survival of total stemless shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis is comparable to that of total stemmed shoulder arthroplasty: a Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to compare the short-term survival rate of total stemless, metaphyseal fixated, shoulder arthroplasty with that of total stemmed shoulder arthroplasty in the treatment of osteoarthritis.

METHODS

Data were collected by the national arthroplasty registries in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden and merged into 1 dataset under the umbrella of the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association. For the present study, we included all patients with osteoarthritis treated with either stemless (n = 761) or stemmed (n = 4398) shoulder arthroplasty from 2011 to 2016.

RESULTS

A total of 21 (2.8%) stemless and 116 (2.6%) stemmed shoulder arthroplasties were revised. The 6-year unadjusted cumulative survival rates were 0.953 for stemless shoulder arthroplasty and 0.958 for stemmed shoulder arthroplasty, P = .77. The most common indication for revision of both arthroplasty types was infection. Five (0.7%) stemless and 16 (0.4%) stemmed shoulder arthroplasties were revised because of loosening of either the glenoid or the humeral component. In the multivariate cox regression model, which included age, category, gender, year of surgery, previous surgery, and arthroplasty type, the hazard ratio (HR) for revision of the stemless shoulder arthroplasty was 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63-1.61), P = .99, with the stemmed shoulder arthroplasty as reference. Male gender (HR = 1.50 [95% CI, 1.06-2.13], P = .02) and previous surgery (HR = 2.70 [95% CI, 1.82-4.01], P < .001) were associated with increased risk of revision.

CONCLUSION

The short-term survival of total stemless shoulder arthroplasty appears comparable with total stemmed shoulder arthroplasty, but longer observation time is needed to confirm whether they continue to perform equally.

Total ankle arthroplasty and national registers: What is the impact on scientific production?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this systematic review was to analyze clinical studies on total ankle replacement (TAR) whose data were extracted from national registers.

METHODS

A systematic review of the literature, to identify all studies reporting outcomes after TAR, was performed. Two independent investigators performed the research using MEDLINE, CINAHL (Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature), Embase and Cochrane Databases (1950 to December 2017). The search terms used were "total ankle replacement" or "total ankle arthroplasty" AND "register" or "registers" or "registry" or "registries" or "national registry" or "national register".

RESULTS

Analysis of the literature included 18 articles from 2007 to 2017. Of these 5 articles performed a comprehensive analysis of the national registers, 5 articles evaluated complications and reasons of failure after TAR, 6 articles made a specific outcome register analysis, one article compared TAR and ankle arthrodesis while the last one analyzed the role of TAR in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

CONCLUSIONS

Scientific publications extracted from national joint registers for total ankle replacement provide useful but heterogeneous information on implants survivorship, implant models and risk factors. There is still a discrepancy between the data reported by designers in clinical studies and the data reported by the registries. The centralization of registers in specialized hospitals with dedicated surgeons, the use of patient reported outcomes (PROMs) in association with surgeon assessments and periodical publications can improve the development of registries and consequently of the literature in this regard.

A comparison of the minimum data sets for primary shoulder arthroplasty between national shoulder arthroplasty registries. Is international harmonization feasible?

The aims of this study were to identify the common components of the Minimum Data Set (MDS) of current national shoulder arthroplasty registries that could be pooled for analysis; and to determine whether further harmonisation of data collection across these registries would be feasible. Copies of primary shoulder arthroplasty MDS forms, annual reports, and other publications from national shoulder arthroplasty registries were identified using internet search engines up to November 2016. Data relating to local or regional registries was excluded. There were nine national shoulder arthroplasty registries reporting a total of 97,388 primary shoulder replacements. All minimum data sets included patient identifiers, date of surgery, implant identification, laterality of surgery, indication and mode of implant fixation. At least 6 registries had common options within the categories of indication, implant fixation and previous operations. Most discrepancies were seen in categories for additional interventions, outcome measures, and intra-operative complications. As numbers within individual registries are relatively small, international collaboration would harness the global strength of knowledge and experience in shoulder replacement. Several similarities were identified between the current national registries that could become unified with only minor changes by a few registries, highlighting the potential feasibility of MDS harmonisat.

The benefits of collaboration: the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association

The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) was established in 2007 by arthroplasty register representatives from Sweden, Norway and Denmark with the overall aim to improve the quality of research and thereby enhance the possibility for quality improvement with arthroplasty surgery. Finland joined the NARA collaboration in 2010.

NARA minimal hip, knee and shoulder datasets were created with variables that all countries can deliver. They are dynamic datasets, currently with 25 variables for hip arthroplasty, 20 for knee arthroplasty and 20 for shoulder arthroplasty.

NARA has published statistical guidelines for the analysis of arthroplasty register data. The association is continuously working on the improvement of statistical methods and the application of new ones.

There are 31 published peer-reviewed papers based on the NARA databases and 20 ongoing projects in different phases. Several NARA publications have significantly affected clinical practice. For example, metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty and resurfacing arthroplasty have been abandoned due to increased revision risk based on i.a. NARA reports. Further, the use of uncemented total hip arthroplasty in elderly patients has decreased significantly, especially in Finland, based on the NARA data.

The NARA collaboration has been successful because the countries were able to agree on a common dataset and variable definitions. The collaboration was also successful because the group was able to initiate a number of research projects and provide answers to clinically relevant questions. A number of specific goals, set up in 2007, have been achieved and new one has emerged in the process.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4 DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180058

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty has a higher risk of revision due to infection than anatomical shoulder arthroplasty

Aims

The aim of this study was to use national registry database information to estimate cumulative rates and relative risk of revision due to infection after reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Patients and Methods

We included 17 730 primary shoulder arthroplasties recorded between 2004 and 2013 in The Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA) data set. With the Kaplan–Meier method, we illustrated the ten-year cumulative rates of revision due to infection and with the Cox regression model, we reported the hazard ratios as a measure of the relative risk of revision due to infection.

Results

In all, 188 revisions were reported due to infection during a mean follow-up of three years and nine months. The ten-year cumulative rate of revision due to infection was 1.4% overall, but 3.1% for reverse shoulder arthroplasties and 8.0% for reverse shoulder arthroplasties in men. Reverse shoulder arthroplasties were associated with an increased risk of revision due to infection also when adjusted for sex, age, primary diagnosis, and year of surgery (relative risk 2.41 (95% confidence interval 1.26 to 5.59); p = 0.001).

Conclusion

The overall incidence of revision due to infection was low. The increased risk in reverse shoulder arthroplasty must be borne in mind, especially when offering it to men. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:702–707.

Low revision rate despite poor functional outcome after stemmed hemiarthroplasty for acute proximal humeral fractures: 2,750 cases reported to the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry

Background and purpose - The revision rate of stemmed hemiarthroplasty (SHA) for acute proximal humeral fractures is low, but does not necessarily reflect the functional outcome. We report the revision rate of SHA for acute proximal humeral fractures and the proportion of arthroplasties that are not revised despite low functional outcome scores. Patients and methods - The Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry was used to identify all patients with a proximal humeral fracture that was treated with a SHA between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2015. Information on demographics, surgical procedures, and revisions was collected by the registry. The Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index at 1 year was used as functional outcome score. We converted the score to a percentage of a maximum score with 100 being the best. Results - 2,750 SHAs in 2,719 patients were included. Mean age was 72 years (SD 11); 79% were women. Mean WOOS at 1 year was 55 (SD 26). A total of 101 (4%) arthroplasties were revised, and the 10-year cumulative implant survival rate was 95%. The Cox regression model showed a statistically significant impact on implant survival of age, but not of sex or arthroplasty brand. A WOOS score below 30 and 50 was reported in 11% and 25% of patients, respectively. Interpretation - We found a high implant survival rate, but also a high proportion of patients with a low functional outcome score 1 year after surgery.

Risk and risk factors for revision after primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty for cuff tear arthropathy and osteoarthritis: a Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association study

BACKGROUND

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has gained increasing popularity in the treatment of rotator cuff tear arthropathy (CTA). The purpose of this study was to evaluate the survival of RSA and the risk factors for revision following RSA.

METHODS

RSA patients with CTA or osteoarthritis were identified from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association registry data (2004-2013). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used to calculate survival probabilities. Cox multiple regression analysis was used to calculate revision rates adjusted for sex, arthroplasty brand, age (<70 years), and year of surgery.

RESULTS

The study included 1904 patients with RSA (1904 RSAs) (69% women; mean age, 74 years; age range, 35-97 years). Revision was performed in 95 patients (5%), with a 10-year cumulative revision rate of 0.91. The most common reason for revision was infection (n = 42), followed by loosening (n = 16) and instability (n = 12). Most revisions occurred less than 6 months after the primary operation. Men had a significantly increased risk of revision compared with women (risk ratio, 3.8; 95% confidence interval, 2.4-6.1). The most common implants were the Delta Xtend (n = 1366) and Delta Mark III (n = 246). The risk of revision of the Delta Mark III was 2.1 (95% confidence interval, 1.1-4.3) compared with the Delta Xtend. Age and year of surgery were not statistically significantly associated with risk of revision.

CONCLUSION

The overall midterm risk of revision after RSA for CTA was low (5%). The most common reason for early revision was infection. Male sex was associated with a significantly increased risk of revision.

Increasing incidence of primary shoulder arthroplasty in Finland - a nationwide registry study

Background

The incidence of shoulder arthroplasties is reportedly increasing and the types of arthroplasty are changing. The purpose of this study was to investigate the incidence of primary shoulder arthroplasty in Finland.

Methods

We analyzed nationwide data from the Finnish Arthroplasty Register (FAR) and the Finnish National Hospital Discharge Register (NHDR) during time period 2004–2015. The primary outcome variable was the incidence of shoulder arthroplasty per 100,000 person-years stratified by age, sex and year of surgery. The secondary outcome variables were surgical indication, arthroplasty type and prosthesis model.

Results

The number of primary shoulder arthroplasties was 7504 (women = 4878, men = 2625). The rate of operations increased from 6 to 15 per 100,000 person-years among men, and 11 to 26 per 100,000 person-years among women. The indication for arthroplasty was osteoarthritis in 56%, acute fracture in 21%, inflammatory arthritis in 13%, and rotator cuff arthropathy in 4% of the cases. Hemiarthroplasties accounted for 66%, total shoulder arthroplasties 8%, and reverse shoulder arthroplasties 12% of the cases, 14% of the cases was missing. During the 12-year study period the incidence of hemiarthroplasties decreased by 23% and the number of total shoulder and reverse shoulder arthroplasty increased by 500 and 4500%, respectively.

Conclusions

The incidence of primary shoulder arthroplasty has increased by 160% during the study period in Finland. The incidence of hemiarthroplasties decreased while total and reverse shoulder arthroplasties increased.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12891-018-2150-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty used for glenohumeral osteoarthritis has higher survival rates than hemiarthroplasty: a Nordic registry-based study

OBJECTIVE

To report the10-year survival rates of different shoulder arthroplasty types used for glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

DESIGN

Data from 2004 to 2013 was prospectively collected by the national shoulder arthroplasty registers in Denmark, Norway and Sweden and merged into a harmonized dataset under the umbrella of the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association. The common dataset included data that all three registers could deliver and where consensus regarding definitions could be made. Revision was defined as removal or exchange of any component or the addition of a glenoid component.

RESULTS

The cumulative survival rates at 10 years after resurfacing hemiarthroplasty (RHA) (n = 1,923), stemmed hemiarthroplasty (SHA) (n = 1,587) and anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) (n = 2,340) were 0.85, 0.93 and 0.96 respectively (P < 0.001, Log rank test). RHA (HR: 2.5; CI 1.9-3.4, P < 0.001) and SHA (HR: 1.4; CI 1.0-2.0, P < 0.04) had an increased risk of revision compared to TSA. Gender, age and period of surgery were included in the Cox regression model. For patients below 55 years, the 10-year cumulative survival rates were 0.75 (RHA, n = 354), 0.81 (SHA, n = 146), and 0.87 (TSA, n = 201).

CONCLUSIONS

Anatomical TSA had the highest implant-survival rate. Young patients had, independently of the arthroplasty type, lower implant-survival rates. The treatment of young patients with end-stage osteoarthritis remains a challenge.

Lower age increases the risk of revision for stemmed and resurfacing shoulder hemi arthroplasty

Background and purpose - The number of patients where shoulder hemiarthroplasty (SHA) is an option is still substantial. Descriptive analyses performed by the Swedish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry (SSAR) showed that while patients receiving SHA designs, i.e. resurfacing hemi (RH) and stemmed hemi (SH), reported similar shoulder functionality and quality of life, the revision rate for RH (12%) was larger than for SH (6.7%); this difference was studied. Patients and methods - All primary SHA (n = 1,140) for OA reported to SSAR between 1999 and 2009 were analyzed regarding risk factors for revision and PROM outcome, 950 shoulders with primary OA (POA), and 190 secondary OA (SOA). Mean age was 67.4 years (SD 10.8). PROM including WOOS and EQ-5D were collected at 5 years, until December 31, 2014. Results - 76/950 prostheses because of POA and 16/190 prosthesis because of SOA were revised. Age at primary surgery was the main factor that influenced the risk of revision, lower age increased the risk of revision, and was also the explanation for the difference between SH and RH. We also found that SH and RH had similar outcomes measured by PROM, but the POA group had higher scores than the SOA group with a clinically relevant difference of 10% in WOOS. Interpretation - The risk of revision for SH and RH is similar when adjusted for age and does not depend on primary diagnosis or sex. A lower age increases the risk of revision. Patients suffering from POA experience better shoulder functionality than SOA patients irrespective of implant type.

The experience of the RIPO, a shoulder prosthesis registry with 6-year follow-up

BACKGROUND

Implant registries have proved valuable in assessing the outcomes of arthroplasty procedures. Moreover, by identifying lesser quality implants they have indirectly improved the quality of care. The registry of prosthetic shoulder implants was established in 2008.

METHODS

It records information on all types of primary and revision arthroplasty procedures involving the glenohumeral joint, including reverse and total arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, resurfacing, removal, and any other surgical procedures that are required to manage these patients. The collected data include patient demographics, weight, height, operated side, cuff status, and diagnosis/reason for revision surgery, information on previous surgical procedures involving either shoulder, comorbidities, antibiotic and thromboembolic prophylaxis, blood transfusions, surgical approach, cuff repair procedures performed during arthroplasty, bone grafts, drains, and perioperative complications, and data about the prosthetic components implanted, including the fixation method.

RESULTS

Procedures were performed on 3754 shoulders. They included 2226 RSA, 320 TSA, 730 HA, 233 resurfacing procedures, 245 revisions, and 77 "other" procedures. The survival curves of the implants are greater than 90%, and no differences were found among prosthesis from different manufacturers. The diagnosis that prompted to arthroplasty was: osteoarthritis in 60.9% of cases and fractures, bone necrosis, sequelae of fracture and rotator cuff tear arthropathy for the rest of implants.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This study describes the epidemiological data and mid-term implant outcomes of the shoulder arthroplasty procedures performed in our region, from 2008 to 2014, and compares them with published data from national registries of similar size.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

International variation in shoulder arthroplasty

Background and purpose - The number of shoulder registries increases. We assessed international trends in use of shoulder arthroplasty, and described the current state of procedure selection and outcome presentation as documented in national and regional joint registries. Methods - Published reports from 9 population-based shoulder arthroplasty registries (country/region: Norway, Sweden, New Zealand, Denmark, California, Australia, Emilia-Romagna, Germany, and United Kingdom) were analyzed. Data were extracted on age, sex, disease indication, type of surgical procedure, surgical volume, and outcomes. Results - Shoulder arthroplasty incidence rate in 2012 was 20 procedures/10⁵ population with a 6-fold variation between the highest (Germany) and lowest (United Kingdom) country. The annual incidence rate increased 2.8-fold in the past decade. Within the indications osteoarthritis, fracture, and cuff-tear arthropathy variations in procedure choice between registries were large. Outcomes evaluation focused on revision in all registries, but different measures and strata were used. Only Australia provided revision rates for prosthesis brands stratified by both indication and procedure. Finally, in 2 registries with available data surgeons performed on average 10-11 procedures yearly. Interpretation - Annual incidence rates of shoulder arthroplasty have almost tripled over the past decade. There is wide variation in procedure selection for the major indications, a low average surgeon volume, a substantial number of brands with small annual volume, and large variation in outcome presentation. The internationally increasing registry activity is an excellent basis for improving the so far weak evidence in shoulder arthroplasty.

Revision after shoulder replacement for acute fracture of the proximal humerus

Background and purpose - For more than half a century, stemmed hemiarthroplasty (SHA) has been used in the treatment of comminuted and displaced fractures of the proximal humerus. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has been increasingly popular in cases where it is difficult to obtain satisfactory fixation of the tuberosities. We report revision rates and reasons for revision after shoulder arthroplasty for acute fractures of the proximal humerus. Patients and methods - This study was based on a common dataset from the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association (NARA), which includes data reported to the national shoulder arthroplasty registries in Denmark, Sweden, and Norway. We included 6,756 shoulder arthroplasties performed for acute fractures between 2004 and 2013. Results - There were 6,112 SHAs (90%) and 565 RSAs (8.4%). The cumulative arthroplasty survival rate after 5 years was 0.96 for both SHA and RSA. The relative risk of revision of RSA was 1.4 (95% CI: 0.9-2.2) with SHA as reference. For both types of arthroplasty, the most common reason for revision was infection (SHA 0.8%, RSA 2.1%). The relative risk of revision due to infection was 3.1 (95% CI: 1.6-5.9) for RSA with SHA as reference. The relative risk of revision for patients who were less than 75 years of age was 2.8 (95% CI: 2.0-3.8) compared to older patients. Interpretation - Revision after shoulder arthroplasty for acute fractures was rare. Survival rates were similar between SHA and RSA, but RSA had a statistically significant and clinically relevant higher risk of revision because of infection.

Towards standardised definitions of shoulder arthroplasty complications: a systematic review of terms and definitions

INTRODUCTION

A transparent, reliable and accurate reporting of complications is essential for an evidence-based evaluation of shoulder arthroplasty (SA). We systematically reviewed the literature for terms and definitions related to negative events associated with SA.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Various biomedical databases were searched for reviews, clinical studies and case reports of complications associated with SA. Any general definition of a complication, classification system, all reported terms related to complications and negative events with their definitions were extracted. Terms were grouped and organised in a hierarchical structure. Definitions of negative events were tabulated and compared.

RESULTS

From 1086 initial references published between 2010 and 2014, 495 full-text papers were reviewed. Five reports provided a general definition of the term "surgical complication" and 29 used a classification system of complications. A total of 1399 extracted terms were grouped based on similarities and involved implant or anatomical parts. One hundred and six reports (21.4%) defined at least one negative event for 28 different terms. There were 64 definitions related to humeral or glenoid loosening, and 25 systems documenting periprosthetic radiolucency. Other definitions considered notching, stress shielding, implant failure and tuberosity malposition.

CONCLUSIONS

A clear standardised set of SA complication definitions is lacking. Few authors reported complications based on definitions mainly considering radiological criteria without clinical parameters. This review should initiate and support the development of a standardised SA complication core set.