Is outpatient shoulder arthroplasty safe? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Amid rising health care costs and recent advances in surgical and anesthetic protocols, the rate of outpatient joint arthroplasty has risen steadily in recent years. Although the safety of outpatient total knee arthroplasty and total hip arthroplasty has been well established, outpatient shoulder arthroplasty is still in its infancy. The purpose of this study was to synthesize the current literature and provide further data regarding the outcomes and safety of outpatient shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted following the standard PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. Included were studies that evaluated the outcomes of patients undergoing outpatient total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or reverse TSA. Meta-analysis was conducted using Mantel-Haenszel statistics to generate odds ratios (ORs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) comparing outpatient and inpatient shoulder arthroplasty. RESULTS: Twelve studies were included, with a total of 194,513 patients, of whom 7162 were outpatients. Of the studies, 8 were level III and 4 were level IV. The average age of the outpatients was 66.6 years, and the average age of the inpatients was 70.1 years. The overall OR for complications was significantly lower in outpatients (OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.35-0.45) than in inpatients. There was no significant difference in rates of 90-day readmission (OR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.75-1.03), revision (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.65-1.41), and infection (OR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.64-1.35) when comparing outpatients with inpatients. CONCLUSION: Outpatient TSA, in an appropriately selected patient population, is safe and results in comparable patient outcomes to those of inpatient shoulder arthroplasty. Given the expected increase in the number of patients requiring TSA, surgeons, hospital administrators, and insurance carriers should strongly consider the merits of a cost- and care-efficient approach to total shoulder replacement.

Corticosteroid Injections May Increase Retear and Revision Rates of Rotator Cuff Repair: A Systematic Review.

PURPOSE: To synthesize the clinical outcome data of preoperative and postoperative corticosteroid injections (CIs) and their effect on rotator cuff repairs (RCRs). METHODS: A systematic review was performed to identify studies that reported the results or clinical outcomes of RCRs in patients receiving either preoperative or postoperative CIs. The searches were performed using MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Embase, and studies were chosen following PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies were included with data for 176,352 shoulders: 6 studies involving 175,256 shoulders with data regarding preoperative CIs, 4 studies involving 1,096 shoulders with data regarding postoperative CIs, and 1 study with 212 shoulders containing preoperative and postoperative data. Preoperative CIs were found in 3 studies to increase the risk of revision surgery when administered within 6 months (odds ratio [OR], 1.38-1.82) and up to 1 year (OR, 1.12-1.52) prior to RCR, with revision rates in 2 studies being highest when patients received 2 or more injections (OR, 2.12-3.26) in the prior year. Postoperative CIs reduced pain and improved functional outcomes in 5 studies without increasing the retear rates (5.7%-19% for CI and 14%-18.4% for control) in most studies. CONCLUSIONS: CIs provide benefit by relieving pain and improving functional outcome scores. However, repeated preoperative CIs may increase retear rates and the likelihood of revision surgery. A lower frequency of CI and longer preoperative waiting period after CI should be considered to decrease such risks. Postoperative CIs several weeks after RCR do not appear to increase retear rates. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level I through IV studies.