Reverse shoulder arthroplasty used for revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review

Background: As reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) cases increase, so too will the need to revise subsequent failures. Many of the complications associated with revising anatomic total shoulder and hemiarthroplasty have been adequately addressed by RSA including glenoid bone deficiency, instability,...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: John J. Heifner, MD, MS, Anjali D. Kumar, MPH, Eric R. Wagner, MD, MS
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: Elsevier 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/e2ca8bc79e6d4b5688ae1e0130ba2f99
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:e2ca8bc79e6d4b5688ae1e0130ba2f99
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:e2ca8bc79e6d4b5688ae1e0130ba2f992021-11-22T04:32:03ZReverse shoulder arthroplasty used for revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review2666-639110.1016/j.xrrt.2021.07.002https://doaj.org/article/e2ca8bc79e6d4b5688ae1e0130ba2f992021-11-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666639121000687https://doaj.org/toc/2666-6391Background: As reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) cases increase, so too will the need to revise subsequent failures. Many of the complications associated with revising anatomic total shoulder and hemiarthroplasty have been adequately addressed by RSA including glenoid bone deficiency, instability, and functional outcomes. However, the risk for complication when revising a failed reverse prosthesis may be more pronounced with increased bone and soft tissue deficiency. The ability for the reversed prosthesis to accommodate these insufficiencies following a prior reversed prosthesis is unclear. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were queried for articles which fit the inclusion criteria of a reversed prosthesis used to revise a failed primary reverse prosthesis with a minimum follow-up of 12 months and clinical outcome reporting. Results: After exclusions, 9 studies reporting on 242 reverse shoulders with a mean follow-up of 40.29 months were analyzed. The differences between preoperative and postoperative weighted means were not significant for Constant (P = .26), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder score (P = .61), SSV (P = .57), and visual analog scale for pain (P = .48). Functional improvements in elevation (74°-102°) and external rotation (18°-21°) were consistent with those reported for primary reverse procedures, although differences in preoperative and postoperative measures were not statistically significant. Patient satisfaction was 89% with a major complication rate of 25%. Discussion: The reverse shoulder prosthesis has proven satisfactory in revising hemiarthroplasty and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. The current results indicate RSA is also a satisfactory treatment option when revising a prior reverse prosthesis. Inherent to revision shoulder surgery is the obstacle of humeral and glenoid bone loss, an attenuated soft-tissue envelope, and instability. The reverse prosthesis may adequately address these commonly confronted difficulties with its inherent design characteristics. RSA provides a secure glenoid fixation for bone grafting, the ability to increase construct stability with component sizing, and a reliance on the deltoid for function. As our learning about revision of RSA improves, so will our ability to preemptively address potential issues which may lead to decreased complications in these cases. Despite the 25% rate of major complication, patients reported satisfaction of 89% which demonstrates the improvements in function and pain relief that are provided by the reverse prosthesis.John J. Heifner, MD, MSAnjali D. Kumar, MPHEric R. Wagner, MD, MSElsevierarticleFailed reverse shoulderGlenoid bone lossReverse shoulder replacementRevision reverse shoulderRevision shoulder arthroplastySurgeryRD1-811ENJSES Reviews, Reports, and Techniques, Vol 1, Iss 4, Pp 329-334 (2021)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Failed reverse shoulder
Glenoid bone loss
Reverse shoulder replacement
Revision reverse shoulder
Revision shoulder arthroplasty
Surgery
RD1-811
spellingShingle Failed reverse shoulder
Glenoid bone loss
Reverse shoulder replacement
Revision reverse shoulder
Revision shoulder arthroplasty
Surgery
RD1-811
John J. Heifner, MD, MS
Anjali D. Kumar, MPH
Eric R. Wagner, MD, MS
Reverse shoulder arthroplasty used for revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review
description Background: As reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) cases increase, so too will the need to revise subsequent failures. Many of the complications associated with revising anatomic total shoulder and hemiarthroplasty have been adequately addressed by RSA including glenoid bone deficiency, instability, and functional outcomes. However, the risk for complication when revising a failed reverse prosthesis may be more pronounced with increased bone and soft tissue deficiency. The ability for the reversed prosthesis to accommodate these insufficiencies following a prior reversed prosthesis is unclear. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar were queried for articles which fit the inclusion criteria of a reversed prosthesis used to revise a failed primary reverse prosthesis with a minimum follow-up of 12 months and clinical outcome reporting. Results: After exclusions, 9 studies reporting on 242 reverse shoulders with a mean follow-up of 40.29 months were analyzed. The differences between preoperative and postoperative weighted means were not significant for Constant (P = .26), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Shoulder score (P = .61), SSV (P = .57), and visual analog scale for pain (P = .48). Functional improvements in elevation (74°-102°) and external rotation (18°-21°) were consistent with those reported for primary reverse procedures, although differences in preoperative and postoperative measures were not statistically significant. Patient satisfaction was 89% with a major complication rate of 25%. Discussion: The reverse shoulder prosthesis has proven satisfactory in revising hemiarthroplasty and anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. The current results indicate RSA is also a satisfactory treatment option when revising a prior reverse prosthesis. Inherent to revision shoulder surgery is the obstacle of humeral and glenoid bone loss, an attenuated soft-tissue envelope, and instability. The reverse prosthesis may adequately address these commonly confronted difficulties with its inherent design characteristics. RSA provides a secure glenoid fixation for bone grafting, the ability to increase construct stability with component sizing, and a reliance on the deltoid for function. As our learning about revision of RSA improves, so will our ability to preemptively address potential issues which may lead to decreased complications in these cases. Despite the 25% rate of major complication, patients reported satisfaction of 89% which demonstrates the improvements in function and pain relief that are provided by the reverse prosthesis.
format article
author John J. Heifner, MD, MS
Anjali D. Kumar, MPH
Eric R. Wagner, MD, MS
author_facet John J. Heifner, MD, MS
Anjali D. Kumar, MPH
Eric R. Wagner, MD, MS
author_sort John J. Heifner, MD, MS
title Reverse shoulder arthroplasty used for revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review
title_short Reverse shoulder arthroplasty used for revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review
title_full Reverse shoulder arthroplasty used for revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review
title_fullStr Reverse shoulder arthroplasty used for revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Reverse shoulder arthroplasty used for revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review
title_sort reverse shoulder arthroplasty used for revision of reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review
publisher Elsevier
publishDate 2021
url https://doaj.org/article/e2ca8bc79e6d4b5688ae1e0130ba2f99
work_keys_str_mv AT johnjheifnermdms reverseshoulderarthroplastyusedforrevisionofreverseshoulderarthroplastyasystematicreview
AT anjalidkumarmph reverseshoulderarthroplastyusedforrevisionofreverseshoulderarthroplastyasystematicreview
AT ericrwagnermdms reverseshoulderarthroplastyusedforrevisionofreverseshoulderarthroplastyasystematicreview
_version_ 1718418193934974976