Steen Brandon M, Cabezas Andres F, Santoni Brandon G, Hussey Michael M, Cusick Michael C, Kumar Avinash G, Frankle Mark A
Florida Orthopaedic Institute, Shoulder and Elbow Service, Tampa, FL, USA.
Foundation for Orthopaedic Research and Education, Phillip Spiegel Orthopaedic Research Laboratory, Tampa, FL, USA.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015 Sep;24(9):1433-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.01.005. Epub 2015 Mar 11.
Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is commonly used to treat glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) with an intact rotator cuff. Recently, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has been used for GHOA patients who are elderly or have eccentric glenoid wear. We evaluated patients with GHOA scheduled to have TSA but who were changed to RSA because of intraoperative difficulties with the glenoid component or instability and compared them with a cohort that underwent TSA to determine if the groups had similar outcomes.
We identified 24 consecutive GHOA patients who underwent RSA and matched them to 96 patients who underwent TSA. Glenoid wear and rotator cuff musculature were assessed with preoperative computed tomography scans. Direct hospital costs of the procedure were collected.
Postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test score, and range of motion were similar between the 2 groups. Five TSA patients had radiographic glenoid loosening, whereas no RSA patients did. Neither group required a revision. One RSA patient required surgery for treatment of a periprosthetic fracture. RSA was $7274 more costly than TSA, related mainly to implant cost.
Patients with GHOA who were converted intraoperatively to RSA because of improper seating of the glenoid trial or persistent posterior subluxation had outcomes comparable to those of a similar group of patients in whom TSA was performed. At midterm follow-up, TSA is associated with lower cost than RSA. The higher rate of radiographic loosening in the TSA group warrants longer follow-up to assess revision costs. In cases in which a TSA cannot be performed with confidence, RSA is a reasonable alternative.
全肩关节置换术(TSA)常用于治疗肩袖完整的盂肱关节骨关节炎(GHOA)。近来,反式肩关节置换术(RSA)已用于老年或存在肩胛盂偏心磨损的GHOA患者。我们评估了计划行TSA但因术中肩胛盂假体植入困难或不稳定而改为RSA的GHOA患者,并将他们与一组接受TSA的患者进行比较,以确定两组的预后是否相似。
我们确定了24例连续接受RSA的GHOA患者,并将他们与96例接受TSA的患者进行匹配。术前通过计算机断层扫描评估肩胛盂磨损和肩袖肌肉组织。收集手术的直接住院费用。
两组患者术后美国肩肘外科医师评分、简易肩关节测试评分及活动范围相似。5例TSA患者出现影像学肩胛盂松动,而RSA患者无此情况。两组均无需翻修。1例RSA患者因假体周围骨折需要手术治疗。RSA比TSA贵7274美元,主要与植入物成本有关。
因肩胛盂试验假体安装不当或持续后脱位而在术中改为RSA的GHOA患者,其预后与一组接受TSA的类似患者相当。在中期随访中,TSA的成本低于RSA。TSA组影像学松动率较高,需要更长时间的随访以评估翻修成本。在无法自信地进行TSA的情况下,RSA是一种合理的选择。