Humeral Head Arthroplasty and Meniscal Allograft Resurfacing of the Glenoid: A Concise Follow-up of a Previous Report and Survivorship Analysis

Poor evidence is used to support commercial payers' coverage policies for shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The incidence of shoulder arthroplasty has continued to increase over the past decade. In response, commercial payers have implemented strategies to control the medical requirement of these surgeries in attempt to contain the growing costs. For example, most payers require a prolonged trial of conservative management prior to shoulder arthroplasty for patients who may otherwise be surgical candidates. However, little is known regarding the evidence used to support these indications. The purpose of this study was to analyze the references used by commercial payers to substantiate their coverage policies for shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

Ten of the leading commercial payers for total shoulder arthroplasty were identified. Publicly available coverage policies were searched on the internet or requested directly from the payer via email or telephone. Cited references were reviewed independently by two authors for type of document, level of evidence, and mention of the efficacy of conservative management.

RESULTS

A total of 5 coverage policies were obtained with 118 references. The most common reference type was primary journal article (n = 70; 59.3%) followed by review or expert opinion articles (n = 35; 29.7%). Most references were of level IV evidence (n = 60; 52.2%), with only 6 (5.2%) of level I or II evidence. Only 4 (3.5%) references mentioned the efficacy of conservative management in patients who may be candidates for shoulder arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION

The majority of references used to substantiate the coverage policies for shoulder arthroplasty among major commercial payers within the United States are of low scientific evidence and fail to demonstrate the success of required nonoperative intervention strategies. Our study underscores the need for high-quality, comparative trials that evaluate the outcomes of conservative management vs. shoulder arthroplasty in end-stage glenohumeral osteoarthritis patients in order to determine the most cost-effective treatment algorithm.

Shoulder Arthroplasty Options for Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis in Young and Active Patients (<60 Years Old): A Systematic Review

Aim

This study aims to describe the shoulder arthroplasty options for young and active patients (<60 years old) with glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was conducted by searching on Pubmed database. Studies that reported outcomes of patients with glenohumeral arthritis, younger than 60 years, that underwent shoulder arthroplasty [(Hemiarthroplasty (HA), Hemiarthroplasty with biological resurfacing (HABR), Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), Reversed total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA)] were included. Data include patient characteristics, surgical technique, range of motion, pain relief, outcome scores, functional improvement, complications, need for and time to revision.

Results

A total of 1591 shoulders met the inclusion criteria. Shoulder arthroplasty provided improvements in terms of ROM on the 3 plains, forward flexion (FF), abduction (Abd) and external rotation (ER), in different proportions for each type of implant. Patients submitted to RSA had lower preoperative FF (p = 0.011), and the highest improvement (Δ) in Abd, but the worst in terms of ER (vsTSA, p = 0.05). HA had better ER postoperative values (vsRSA p = 0.049). Pain scores improved in all groups but no difference between them (p = 0.642). TSA and RSA groups had the best CS Δ (p = 0.012). HA group had higher complication rates (21.7%), RSA (19.4%, p = 0.034) and TSA (19.4%, p = 0.629) groups the lowest, and HABR had the highest rate of revisions (34.5%).

Conclusions

HA had the highest rate of complications and HABR unacceptable rates of revision. These implants have been replaced by modern TSAs, with RSA reserved for complex cases. Surgeons should be aware of the common pitfalls of each option.

Humeral Head Morphology Influences Outcomes of Arthroscopic Interposition Glenoid Patch Allograft for Glenohumeral Arthritis

Purpose

To determine short- to midterm patient-reported outcomes of arthroscopic soft-tissue interposition arthroplasty using acellular dermal allograft with a minimum follow-up of 1 year and to assess outcomes in patients with and without flattening of the humeral head.

Methods

Patients with a diagnosis of primary glenohumeral arthritis who underwent arthroscopic soft-tissue interposition arthroplasty with an acellular dermal allograft from July 2010 to November 2019 were retrospectively enrolled. Inclusion criteria were a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral arthritis and Outerbridge 4 full-thickness cartilage loss of ≥50% of the glenoid articular surface. Patients underwent arthroscopic debridement, microfracture, and biological arthroscopic soft-tissue interposition arthroplasty with an acellular dermal matrix. Postoperative outcomes included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score, Penn Shoulder Score (PSS), numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, analgesic use, and conversion to total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Results were stratified according to humeral head morphology on preoperative radiographs.

Results

A total of 25 patients were included, with a mean age of 56.0 years (range 19.2 to 74.8) and a mean follow-up of 3.36 years (range 1.03 to 8.98). The mean postoperative ASES score was 64.1 (range 11.7 to 100.0), SANE score was 62% (range 5% to 100%), and PSS was 61.2 (range 10.6 to 97.9). Additionally, 56% of patients rated their shoulder function as improved or much improved, and 36% of patients converted to TSA at a mean of 2.35 years. Patients with and without humeral flattening had similar postoperative ASES scores (P = .44), SANE scores (P = .90), PSS (P = .73), and conversions to TSA (P = .83). Patients with humeral flattening were more likely to have shoulder pain at night (83.3% versus 28.6%, P = .02).

Conclusion

Arthroscopic soft-tissue interposition arthroplasty with an acellular dermal allograft resulted in satisfactory short- to mid-term postoperative outcomes for younger patients with glenohumeral arthritis but demonstrated a TSA conversion rate of 36%. Patients with humeral head flattening also had satisfactory shoulder function but were more likely to experience shoulder pain at night.

Level of Evidence

Level IV, therapeutic case series

Poor results after pyrocarbon interpositional shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to describe the clinical outcomes and complications of 10 cases of pyrocarbon interposition shoulder arthroplasty (PISA).

METHODS

The clinical and radiographic records of 10 patients who underwent PISA using the InSpyre shoulder prosthesis (Tornier-Wright) between July 2012 and March 2017 were reviewed. The mean age at surgery was 55 years. Surgical indications included patients aged <60 years with Walch type B glenoid glenohumeral osteoarthritis (n = 7), avascular necrosis (AVN) of the humeral head (n = 1), or secondary severe glenohumeral osteoarthritis with axillary nerve dysfunction (n = 2). Outcomes of interest were postoperative complications and need for revision surgery, preoperative and postoperative patient-reported outcomes (Constant score [CS] and Subjective Shoulder Value [SSV]), and range of motion. The radiographic characteristics of the implants were evaluated.

RESULTS

Among the 10 patients, 5 underwent revision to reverse shoulder arthroplasty during the study period owing to poor clinical outcomes based on the CS and SSV. All 5 revised patients had Walch type B glenoid morphology at the time of the index procedure. The mean time to revision surgery in this subset of patients was 60 months. The remaining 5 patients who did not undergo any revision procedure had significant improvement in mean CS and SSV from 30-65 points and 32%-87%, respectively, but at a shorter duration of follow-up of 35 months.

CONCLUSION

High clinical failure rate and poor results at mean 5-year follow-up were found in younger PISA patients with baseline Walch B glenohumeral osteoarthritis. We would caution against use of PISA in this challenging patient population. PISA yielded more favorable short-term outcomes in patients with humeral-sided deformity or severe secondary glenohumeral osteoarthritis with axillary nerve dysfunction; however, longevity of the implant in this population remains unclear.

Resurfacing hemiarthroplasty versus stemmed hemiarthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis

Background

Though total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has been an acknowledged treatment option for glenohumeral osteoarthritis, resurfacing hemiarthroplasty (RHA) and stemmed hemiarthroplasty (SHA) may be preferred in some circumstances by surgeons, especially for treating young or active patients. However, decision-making between the RHA and SHA is controversial. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to systematically compare two surgical procedures in terms of postoperative functional outcomes, range of motion (ROM), pain relief, complication rates, risk of revision.

Methods

The PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane Library were searched from inception to January 1, 2020, for all articles that compared the clinical effectiveness and safety of RHA with SHA. All eligible studies were selected based on certain screening criteria. Two investigators independently conducted the quality assessment and extracted the data. Fixed-effect and random-effect models were used for pooled results according to the degree of heterogeneity. All statistical analyses were performed by employing Stata software 14.0.

Results

A total of six comparative studies involving 2568 shoulders (1356 RHA and 1212 SHA) were included in the final analysis. Patients were followed up for at least 1 year in each study. Pooled results showed that RHA was associated with a better visual analog scale (SMD 0.61, p = 0.001) but higher revision rates (OR 1.50, p = 0.016) when compared to SHA. There were no significant differences in functional outcomes, such as Constant-Murley score (SMD 0.06, P = 0.878), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (SMD 0.05, P = 0.880), Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder index (SMD 0.43, p = 0.258) and quick-Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (SMD 0.06, p = 0.669). In addition, no differences were observed in forward flexion (SMD 0.16, p = 0.622), external rotation (SMD -0.17, P = 0.741) and overall complication rates (OR 1.42, p = 0.198).

Conclusion

This is the first meta-analysis to investigate the clinical efficacy and safety of RHA in comparison with SHA for the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis. The results demonstrated that the two surgical techniques were equivalent in terms of postoperative functional outcomes and complication rate. However, RHA provided greater pain relief but posed a higher risk for revision than SHA. More high-quality studies with long-term follow up are warranted to give more convincing evidence.

Soft tissue resurfacing for glenohumeral arthritis: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Severe glenohumeral arthritis in the young/active patient remains challenging. Historically, glenohumeral arthrodesis was recommended with limited return of function. Total shoulder arthroplasty has shown increasing survivorship at 15 years; however it is still not ideal for young patients. Biologic resurfacing of the glenoid with humeral head replacement has shown promising results.

METHODS

The PubMed and Embase databases were queried for studies evaluating outcomes of glenoid biologic resurfacing with autograft or allograft. Two independent reviewers performed a systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis guidelines.

RESULTS

Eleven studies (268 shoulders, 264 patients) were included. Minimum follow-up was 24 months in all but one study; patient age ranged from 14 to 75 years. Glenoid grafts used included 44.3% lateral meniscus allografts, 25.4% human acellular dermal matrix, 14.2% Achilles tendon allografts, 11.6% shoulder joint capsules, and 4.5% fascia lata autografts. Studies reported significantly improved American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Visual Analog Scale, and Simple Shoulder Test scores postoperatively; 43.3% were failures (Neer's evaluation of unsatisfactory or requiring revision). Infection occurred in 12/235.

CONCLUSIONS

Biologic resurfacing of the glenoid with a metallic humeral component can provide a significant improvement in pain, motion, and standardized outcomes scores in the well-indicated situation. Appropriate counseling is required with an appreciated complication rate of over 36% and a revision rate of 34%.

Biologic Options for Glenohumeral Arthritis

Biologic options for glenohumeral arthritis include intra-articular injections as well as allograft interposition arthroplasty. The objectives of these treatments are reduction of pain and maintenance/improvement in function, while delaying the need for arthroplasty. This article reviews the current evidence for hyaluronic acid injection, platelet-rich plasma injection, and allograft interposition arthroplasty in the young patient with glenohumeral arthritis.

Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis in the Young Patient

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis in the young patient (aged <60 years) is a difficult condition, given both age and functional demands. Primary osteoarthritis is the most common etiology in this patient demographic, but secondary causes include osteonecrosis, previous trauma (eg, fracture-dislocation), previous infection (eg, septic arthritis), previous capsulorrhaphy, previous arthroscopic surgery (eg, chondrolysis), and glenoid dysplasia. Nonsurgical modalities, including activity modification, pharmacotherapy, physical therapy, and intra-articular injections, are the mainstay of management; however, in young patients who have exhausted nonsurgical management, surgical options include arthroscopic débridement, humeral head replacement with or without glenoid treatment (ie, biologic glenoid resurfacing, glenoid reaming), and total or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Unfortunately, failure rates after surgical management are considerably higher in young patients compared with those observed in older, more sedentary patients. Here, we focus on the etiology, evaluation, and management of young patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis, with a focus on clinical outcomes.

The "tipping point" for 931 elective shoulder arthroplasties

BACKGROUND

A patient with arthritis usually experiences the progression of symptoms over time. At some stage, the patient may decide that the symptoms have reached a level of severity that leads him or her to elect to proceed with joint replacement; we refer to this degree of symptom severity as the "tipping point." Our goal was to study the factors that influenced the tipping point for patients undergoing elective shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

We analyzed the characteristics of 931 patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty to determine the factors affecting the tipping point as characterized by the patients' comfort and function at the time they determined their symptoms had progressed to the point when this elective surgery was merited.

RESULTS

The preoperative Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score for all patients averaged 3.6 ± 2.7. The average tipping points were different for the ream-and-run procedure (mean SST score, 5.0 ± 2.5), hemiarthroplasty (mean SST score, 3.1 ± 3.3), total shoulder arthroplasty (mean SST score, 3.0 ± 2.4), cuff tear arthropathy arthroplasty (mean SST score, 2.8 ± 2.5), and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (mean SST score, 1.5 ± 1.8). A number of other factors were significantly associated with a higher tipping point: younger age, better health, male sex, commercial insurance, married, nonuse of narcotics, use of alcohol, and shoulder problem not related to work.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of the tipping point-the patients' self-assessed comfort and function at the point they decide to undergo shoulder joint replacement-provides a means by which surgeons can understand the factors influencing the indications for these procedures.

Optimal management of glenohumeral osteoarthritis

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA) is defined as progressive loss of articular cartilage, resulting in bony erosion, pain, and decreased function. This article provides a gross overview of this disease, along with peer-reviewed research by experts in the field. The pathology, diagnosis, and classification of this condition have been well described. Treatment begins with non-operative measures, including oral and topical anti-inflammatory agents, physical therapy, and intra- articular injections of either a corticosteroid or a viscosupplementation agent. Operative treatment is based on the age and function of the affected patient, and treatment of young individuals with glenohumeral OA remains controversial. Various methods of surgical treatment, ranging from arthroscopy to resurfacing, are being evaluated. The roles of hemiarthroplasty, total shoulder arthroplasty, and reverse shoulder arthroplasty are similarly reviewed with supporting data.

Functional Outcomes of the Ream-and-Run Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Concise Follow-up of a Previous Report

We previously reported the results at an average of 4.5 years after treatment of 176 patients with the ream-and-run arthroplasty. In the present study, we present the patient self-reported functional outcomes and clinical implant survival of the original cohort at a mean of 10 years (range, 5 to 16 years). Twenty-eight (16%) of the 176 patients had a subsequent procedure, 11 (6%) died, and 30 (17%) had <5 years of follow-up. The Simple Shoulder Test (SST) score at the time of the latest follow-up was a median of 11 points (interquartile range, 9 to 12 points) and a mean (and standard deviation) of 10 ± 2.6 points, out of a possible 12 points. The present study demonstrates that the improvement in function and comfort derived from the ream-and-run procedure can be sustained at the time of mid-term follow-up.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Editorial Commentary: Is Shoulder Joint Preservation an Endangered Species? Let's Save the Glenoid

Joint preservation in young patients has always been the mission of arthroscopists worldwide since Bob Jackson visited Dr. Watanabe and brought the arthroscope to North America. In patients with shoulder glenohumeral arthritis, joint preservation is paramount and advanced arthroscopic techniques are of significant benefit. A recent publication shows 77% satisfactory outcomes, provides critical details on patient selection, and shows that a cohort of (younger) patients with shoulder osteoarthritis may do well after isolated glenoid resurfacing. A benefit of shoulder glenohumeral resurfacing is that shoulder replacement surgery, if required, could be delayed until a more appropriate age.

Clinical and Radiographic Outcomes of the Ream-and-Run Procedure for Primary Glenohumeral Arthritis

BACKGROUND

The ream-and-run procedure can provide improvement in shoulder function and comfort for selected patients with primary glenohumeral arthritis who wish to avoid a prosthetic glenoid component. The purpose of this study was to evaluate factors associated with medialization of the humeral head after this procedure as well as the relationship of medialization to the clinical outcome.

METHODS

We collected patient, shoulder, and procedure characteristics along with Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores before surgery and at the time of follow-up. Medialization was determined by comparing the position of the humeral head prosthesis in relation to the scapula on postoperative baseline radiographs made within 6 weeks after surgery with that on comparable follow-up radiographs made ≥18 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Two-year clinical outcomes were available for 101 patients (95% were male). Comparable radiographs at postoperative baseline and follow-up evaluations were available for 50 shoulders. For all patients, the mean SST score (and standard deviation) increased from 4.9 ± 2.8 preoperatively to 10.3 ± 2.4 at the latest follow-up (p < 0.001). Significant clinical improvement was observed for glenoid types A2 and B2. Shoulders with a type-A2 glenoid morphology, with larger preoperative scapular body-glenoid angles, and with lower preoperative SST scores, were associated with the greatest clinical improvement. Clinical outcome was not significantly associated with the amount of medialization.

CONCLUSIONS

The ream-and-run procedure can be an effective treatment for advanced primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis in active patients. Further study will be necessary to determine whether medialization affects the clinical outcome with follow-up of >2 years.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Radiological and functional 24-month outcomes of resurfacing versus stemmed anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

PURPOSE

This study compared clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients undergoing resurfacing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with those treated with a stemmed TSA.

METHODS

Patients with primary osteoarthritis who underwent humeral resurfacing (RES) or stemmed (STA) TSA were identified in our shoulder arthroplasty register for retrospective analysis. Standard radiographs and clinical/patient-rated assessments were made up to 24 months post-surgery. Implant revisions were assessed. Patients were frequency-matched in a 1:1 (RES:STA) ratio based on gender and age, and compared with regard to operation time and shoulder function (Constant, SPADI and Quick DASH scores). Mixed models with statistical adjustments were applied.

RESULTS

From 2006 to 2014, 44 RES and 137 STA operations were performed in 157 patients; one and two revisions were recorded in the RES and STA group, respectively. The final matched cohort included a total of 69 patients and 37 operations per treatment group. Resurfacing TSA was 17 min shorter (95%CI: 5-28) compared to the stemmed procedure (p = 0.005). RES and STA patients showed significant functional improvement six months post-implantation, yet all measured scores did not differ between the groups at 2 years (p ≥ 0.131). The status of static centering of the humeral head, acromiohumeral distance, and a lack of signs of implant loosening were also similar between treatments.

CONCLUSION

Similar 24-month post-operative radiological and functional outcome is achieved by RES and STA patients, even with a shorter RES surgery time. Larger cohorts and longer follow-up are required to better assess implant survival.