Conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty

Humeral stem retention versus revision

Matthew Dilisio, Lindsay R. Miller, Elana J. Siegel, Laurence D. Higgins

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

6 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

As the volume of shoulder arthroplasty procedures performed in the United States continues to increase, the predicted number of revision shoulder arthroplasties grows even higher. Conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty has become common. Many commercially available shoulder arthroplasty systems now offer a platform humeral stem that is used for both anatomic shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. This study investigated whether retaining the humeral stem offers advantages over revising the humeral stem in conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The study included 26 patients (mean age, 68.46 years) with failed shoulder arthroplasty who underwent conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean, 34.38 months). Patients who had retention of the humeral stem were compared with those who had stem revision. Humeral stem retention was associated with a significantly shorter operative time (178.92 vs 237 minutes, P=.02). Decreases in blood loss, complications, and length of hospitalization were observed, but the differences were not statistically significant. Minimal differences were observed for patient-reported outcomes. Of patients undergoing humeral stem removal, 21.4% had an intraoperative humeral shaft or tuberosity fracture compared with none in the stem retention group. Humeral stem retention was associated with decreased operative time compared with humeral stem revision in the conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The use of a platform shoulder arthroplasty system may benefit patients with failed shoulder arthroplasty undergoing conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty by avoiding humeral stem revision.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e773-e779
JournalOrthopedics
Volume38
Issue number9
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1 2015

Fingerprint

Arthroplasty
Operative Time
Hospitalization

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty : Humeral stem retention versus revision. / Dilisio, Matthew; Miller, Lindsay R.; Siegel, Elana J.; Higgins, Laurence D.

In: Orthopedics, Vol. 38, No. 9, 01.09.2015, p. e773-e779.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Dilisio, Matthew ; Miller, Lindsay R. ; Siegel, Elana J. ; Higgins, Laurence D. / Conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty : Humeral stem retention versus revision. In: Orthopedics. 2015 ; Vol. 38, No. 9. pp. e773-e779.
@article{97631fd2078945a59dc62f76f02784cc,
title = "Conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty: Humeral stem retention versus revision",
abstract = "As the volume of shoulder arthroplasty procedures performed in the United States continues to increase, the predicted number of revision shoulder arthroplasties grows even higher. Conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty has become common. Many commercially available shoulder arthroplasty systems now offer a platform humeral stem that is used for both anatomic shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. This study investigated whether retaining the humeral stem offers advantages over revising the humeral stem in conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The study included 26 patients (mean age, 68.46 years) with failed shoulder arthroplasty who underwent conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean, 34.38 months). Patients who had retention of the humeral stem were compared with those who had stem revision. Humeral stem retention was associated with a significantly shorter operative time (178.92 vs 237 minutes, P=.02). Decreases in blood loss, complications, and length of hospitalization were observed, but the differences were not statistically significant. Minimal differences were observed for patient-reported outcomes. Of patients undergoing humeral stem removal, 21.4{\%} had an intraoperative humeral shaft or tuberosity fracture compared with none in the stem retention group. Humeral stem retention was associated with decreased operative time compared with humeral stem revision in the conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The use of a platform shoulder arthroplasty system may benefit patients with failed shoulder arthroplasty undergoing conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty by avoiding humeral stem revision.",
author = "Matthew Dilisio and Miller, {Lindsay R.} and Siegel, {Elana J.} and Higgins, {Laurence D.}",
year = "2015",
month = "9",
day = "1",
doi = "10.3928/01477447-20150902-54",
language = "English",
volume = "38",
pages = "e773--e779",
journal = "Orthopedics",
issn = "0147-7447",
publisher = "Slack Incorporated",
number = "9",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty

T2 - Humeral stem retention versus revision

AU - Dilisio, Matthew

AU - Miller, Lindsay R.

AU - Siegel, Elana J.

AU - Higgins, Laurence D.

PY - 2015/9/1

Y1 - 2015/9/1

N2 - As the volume of shoulder arthroplasty procedures performed in the United States continues to increase, the predicted number of revision shoulder arthroplasties grows even higher. Conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty has become common. Many commercially available shoulder arthroplasty systems now offer a platform humeral stem that is used for both anatomic shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. This study investigated whether retaining the humeral stem offers advantages over revising the humeral stem in conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The study included 26 patients (mean age, 68.46 years) with failed shoulder arthroplasty who underwent conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean, 34.38 months). Patients who had retention of the humeral stem were compared with those who had stem revision. Humeral stem retention was associated with a significantly shorter operative time (178.92 vs 237 minutes, P=.02). Decreases in blood loss, complications, and length of hospitalization were observed, but the differences were not statistically significant. Minimal differences were observed for patient-reported outcomes. Of patients undergoing humeral stem removal, 21.4% had an intraoperative humeral shaft or tuberosity fracture compared with none in the stem retention group. Humeral stem retention was associated with decreased operative time compared with humeral stem revision in the conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The use of a platform shoulder arthroplasty system may benefit patients with failed shoulder arthroplasty undergoing conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty by avoiding humeral stem revision.

AB - As the volume of shoulder arthroplasty procedures performed in the United States continues to increase, the predicted number of revision shoulder arthroplasties grows even higher. Conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty has become common. Many commercially available shoulder arthroplasty systems now offer a platform humeral stem that is used for both anatomic shoulder arthroplasty and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. This study investigated whether retaining the humeral stem offers advantages over revising the humeral stem in conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The study included 26 patients (mean age, 68.46 years) with failed shoulder arthroplasty who underwent conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with a minimum 2-year follow-up (mean, 34.38 months). Patients who had retention of the humeral stem were compared with those who had stem revision. Humeral stem retention was associated with a significantly shorter operative time (178.92 vs 237 minutes, P=.02). Decreases in blood loss, complications, and length of hospitalization were observed, but the differences were not statistically significant. Minimal differences were observed for patient-reported outcomes. Of patients undergoing humeral stem removal, 21.4% had an intraoperative humeral shaft or tuberosity fracture compared with none in the stem retention group. Humeral stem retention was associated with decreased operative time compared with humeral stem revision in the conversion of failed shoulder arthroplasty to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The use of a platform shoulder arthroplasty system may benefit patients with failed shoulder arthroplasty undergoing conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty by avoiding humeral stem revision.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84941276731&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84941276731&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.3928/01477447-20150902-54

DO - 10.3928/01477447-20150902-54

M3 - Article

VL - 38

SP - e773-e779

JO - Orthopedics

JF - Orthopedics

SN - 0147-7447

IS - 9

ER -