Is suture cerclage fixation a valid treatment for intraoperative nondisplaced calcar fractures in reverse total shoulder arthroplasties?

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty with a Cementless and Metaphyseal Stem Fixation Is a Viable Option for the Treatment of Proximal Humeral Fractures with Calcar Involvement

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the suitability of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) with a cementless and metaphyseal stem fixation as a treatment for complex proximal humeral fractures (PHFs) with a calcar fragment when this may be fixed with a steel wire cerclage. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were compared with the same RTSA for PHFs without a calcar fragment at a minimum of five-year follow-up.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on acute PHFs "with a medial calcar fragment" (group A) and "without a calcar fragment" (group B) treated with a RTSA and cementless metaphyseal stem fixation.

RESULTS

At an average follow-up of 6.7 years (5-7.8 years), no statistical difference was observed comparing group A (18 patients) to group B (50 patients) for active anterior elevation (141 ± 15° vs. 145 ± 10°, p = 0.67), active external rotation ER1 (49 ± 15° vs. 53 ± 13°, p = 0.55), and active internal rotation (5 ± 2 vs. 6 ± 2, p = 0.97). Similarly, a comparison of ASES score (89.2 ± 10 vs. 91.6 ± 9, p = 0.23) and Simple Shoulder Test score (91.1 ± 11 vs. 90.4 ± 10, p = 0.49) revealed no significant difference.

CONCLUSION

RTSA with a cementless and metaphyseal stem fixation represents a safe and feasible treatment for complex PHFs with a medial calcar fragment when this may be fixed with a steel wire cerclage.

Hemiarthroplasty as a salvage treatment for failed reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

Background

The implantation rates of reverse total shoulder arthroplasties (RTSAs) are increasing worldwide, resulting in higher absolute numbers of the associated complications and revision surgeries. This requires the discussion of salvage therapies for failed RTSAs without revision to a new RTSA. Revision to hemiarthroplasty may offer a valid fallback option in certain cases. This study aimed to analyze the incidence, indications, and clinical outcomes, especially the reduction in pain levels compared to a matched control group.

Methods

Our prospectively enrolled patient cohort of RTSA implantations at a tertiary referral center between January 2005 and December 2018 was retrospectively queried for revision to a hemiarthroplasty. For clinical outcome evaluation, a minimum follow-up duration of 2 years after revision to hemiarthroplasty was required. Clinical outcome measures were compared to two matching groups, one with RTSA preserving revision and one without any reintervention. The outcome measures were the absolute and relative Constant-Murley score (aCS and rCS), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), range of motion, and pain.

Results

A total of 21 out of 1237 RTSAs (1.7%) underwent salvage revision to hemiarthroplasty at a mean time of 20 ± 21 months (range, 1-75 months). Of those, 12 were available for a minimum follow-up of 2 years after revision to a hemiarthroplasty. The main indications were glenoid loosening (8/12), scapular spine fracture (2/12), and instability (2/21). Clinical outcome was analyzed at a mean follow-up period of 46 ± 26 months (24 months to 123 months) after revision to a hemiarthroplasty. The revision significantly reduced CS pain from 6 ± 4 points to 12 ± 3 points (scale 0 to 15 with 15 as optimum, P < .01). The aCS, rCS, SSV, and range of motion did not improve. Comparison with the RTSA preserving revision group and the RTSA group without reintervention showed significantly worse outcome scores for aCS (33 ± 10 vs. 55 ± 19 vs. 69 ± 12 points), rCS (41 ± 14% vs. 67 ± 20% vs. 84 ± 13%), SSV (35 ± 19% vs. 64 ± 20% vs. 81 ± 15%), flexion (53 ± 27° vs. 64 ± 20° vs. 128 ± 24°), and abduction (50 ± 23° vs. 109 ± 42° vs. 142 ± 24°). Pain was similar in all groups at the last follow-up visit.

Conclusion

In a few cases, RTSA retention or revision to another RTSA is impossible. For those patients, conversion to hemiarthroplasty is a valid fallback option to reduce the patient's pain levels and provide low-level function.

Biomechanical Value of a Protective Proximal Humeral Cerclage in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is a commonly performed salvage procedure for failed proximal humeral fracture fixation. The rate of intraoperative periprosthetic fractures is higher compared to primary RSA. The goal of this study was to investigate the biomechanical value of a protective cerclage during stem impaction in a revision surgery setting. Twenty-eight fresh-frozen human humeri were used to assess different configurations for steel wire and FiberTape cerclages. A custom-built biomechanical test setup simulated the mallet strikes during the stem impaction process with the Univers Revers prothesis stem. The mallet energy until the occurrence of a first crack was not different between groups. The total energy until progression of the fracture distally to the cerclage was significantly higher in the cerclage groups compared to the native humerus (9.5 J vs. 3.5 J, respectively; p = 0.0125). There was no difference between the steel wire and FiberTape groups (11.4 J vs. 8.6 J, respectively; p = 0.2695). All fractures were located at the concave side of the stem at the metaphyseal calcar region. This study demonstrates that a protective cerclage can successfully delay the occurrence of a fracture during stem impaction in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. A FiberTape cerclage is biomechanically equally efficient compared to a steel wire cerclage.