Value Analysis of Anatomic and Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty for Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis with an Intact Rotator Cuff.

BACKGROUND: While anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has historically been considered the ideal treatment for end-stage glenohumeral osteoarthritis, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has recently gained popularity. With substantial differences in implant design and cost between TSA and RSA, further investigation of outcomes and value is needed to support recent trends. The purpose of this study was to use the average and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ACER and ICER) and the procedure value index (PVI) to examine differences in outcomes and value between TSA and RSA for treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff. METHODS: We performed a retrospective matched-cohort study of patients treated with primary shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff who had a minimum 2-year follow-up. Outcome measures analyzed included the Simple Shoulder Test (SST), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) questionnaire, visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and overall satisfaction. Patients treated with TSA were matched 4:1 to those treated with RSA based on sex, age, and preoperative SST score. Value differences between TSA and RSA were calculated. Radiographs were analyzed for preoperative glenoid classification and postoperative radiolucent lines and gross loosening. RESULTS: Two hundred and fifty-two TSA-treated patients were matched to 63 RSA-treated patients with no significant differences in sex, age, or preoperative SST score. Total hospitalization costs, charges, and reimbursements along with outcome improvements in units of minimal clinically important differences (MCIDs) and patient satisfaction did not differ between the groups. For RSA, the implant cost was significantly higher than that for TSA, but the operating room, anesthesia, and cement costs were lower. The TSA group had a 3.2% rate of gross glenoid loosening and a 2.4% revision rate. There was no loosening or revision in the RSA group. None of the value analytics differed between groups even after inclusion of the outcomes and costs of early TSA revisions. CONCLUSIONS: TSA and RSA demonstrated similar outcomes and value when used to manage glenohumeral osteoarthritis with an intact rotator cuff. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Does application of hydrogen peroxide to the dermis reduce incidence of Cutibacterium acnes during shoulder arthroplasty: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) following shoulder arthroplasty are a major source of morbidity and are most commonly caused by Cutibacterium acnes, a bacteria found concentrated in the dermis. Skin preparation using hydrogen peroxide has been shown to reduce positive cultures; however, direct application to the dermis has not been investigated. The purpose of this study is to determine whether the application of hydrogen peroxide to the dermis affects the incidence of positive C acnes cultures. METHODS: A prospective, randomized controlled trial of patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty by a single fellowship-trained surgeon was performed between February and November 2020. Enrolled patients were randomized to either receive standard skin preparation and antibiotic prophylaxis with or without an additional application of hydrogen peroxide to the dermis following incision. Culture samples were taken from the skin, dermis, glenohumeral joint, and air. Laboratory personnel and patients were blinded to randomization, and all cultures were held for 14 days. Culture positivity rate along with culture site, day of culture positivity, and bacterial abundance of positive cultures were analyzed. Stratified analysis by gender and age of ≤69 years was also performed. RESULTS: Sixty patients undergoing primary arthroplasty were randomized. The group receiving hydrogen peroxide (n =30) and the control group (n = 30) were similar in age (71.1 ± 7.1 vs. 73.4 ± 9.8; P = .30), body mass index (29.4 ± 5.7 vs. 28.5 ± 6.0; P = .57), gender (P = .64), hand dominance (P = .65), and surgery type (P = .90). The overall rate of at least 1 positive culture was 18%. All positive cultures were C acnes. The positive culture rate in the hydrogen peroxide (20%) and control group were similar (16%; P > .99). There were no positive glenohumeral joint cultures and no wound complications. There was no significance difference in the culture site, day of culture positivity, and bacterial abundance. Stratification analysis by gender and age also demonstrated similar rates of C acnes between study groups. CONCLUSION: Standard skin preparation and antibiotic prophylaxis results in an overall low rate of skin and dermis culture positivity. The use of hydrogen peroxide after initial incision did not significantly alter the rate of positive C acnes cultures during shoulder arthroplasty and did not increase wound complications.

The Basic Shoulder Arthroplasty: Simple Shoulder Replacement for the Generalist.

Shoulder arthroplasty was first introduced through the developments of Dr. Charles Neer and over the past decade has seen several advancements. Improved recognition and training have heightened the awareness of arthroplasty as a treatment alternative both for surgeons and patients. The addition of reverse shoulder arthroplasty has been the driving force behind the explosive growth of arthroplasty and is now performed more often than anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. Although revision shoulder arthroplasty is primarily of interest to the subspecialist, it is a skill sought by the general orthopaedic surgeon. It is important for the orthopaedic surgeon to be knowledgeable about the planning, necessary skills, and management of basic shoulder arthroplasty.

Mid-term outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty using the alternative center line for glenoid baseplate fixation: a case-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: A critical step in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is glenoid baseplate fixation. In cases of glenoid bone loss, use of the anatomic glenoid center line may not provide sufficient bone support for fixation. Anteversion along the alternative center line is a described method for achieving baseplate fixation in these cases. However, concern remains regarding negative consequences in functional outcomes and complications. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of RSA using the anatomic or alternative center line. METHODS: We performed a retrospective case-controlled study of patients who underwent RSA between November 2006 and August 2017, performed by a single surgeon, with a minimum of 2 years' follow-up. Patients treated with the anatomic center-line technique for baseplate fixation were matched 3:1 based on sex, indication for surgery, and age with patients treated with the alternative center-line technique. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), active range of motion, and the ability to perform functional tasks of internal rotation were compared. Evaluations of the most recently obtained radiographs focused on acromial fractures, scapular notching, and glenoid loosening. RESULTS: A total of 88 patients (66 in anatomic center-line group and 22 in alternative group) participated in the matched analysis, with a mean age of 74.2 years (range, 58-89 years) and mean follow-up period of 53 months (range, 24-130 months). At the final follow-up, we found no significant differences in PROMs, including the Simple Shoulder Test score (P = .829), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (P = .601), visual analog scale pain score (P = .068), and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (P = .674). Moreover, both the overall improvements in these PROMs and all active motions and functional tasks of internal rotation were not different. No radiographic evidence of glenoid loosening was found in either group, and 2 patients in each cohort (3% of the anatomic group and 9% of the alternative group) experienced an acromial fracture. Low-grade scapular notching developed in 15.2% of the anatomic group and 18.2% of the alternative center line group (P = .736). CONCLUSION: The alternative center line can be used for baseplate fixation in the setting of glenoid bone loss and leads to similar patient outcomes and functional tasks of internal rotation, as well as a low rate of complications, compared with the anatomic center line following RSA.

Effects of Gamification on Surgical Duration and Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Fixation of Intertrochanteric Hip Fractures.

OBJECTIVE: To compare surgical duration and clinical outcomes with associated complications in surgeons using gamification techniques for resident education versus those surgeons who do not. DESIGN: Retrospective, cohort study. Level III evidence. Surgical interventions included long cephalomedullary nailing with gamification techniques compared to long cephalomedullary nailing alone. Main outcome measurements were total fluoroscopy time, operative time, hospital length of stay, discharge status, and complications. SETTING: Urban Level 1 Trauma Center. PARTICIPANTS: One fourty-eight adult patients with operative intertrochanteric femur fractures from January 2010 to January 2019. RESULTS: There were lower total operative times (45.6 vs. 57.1 minutes, p =< 0.01) and fluoroscopy times (1.6 vs. 2.1 minutes, p = 0.01) in the gamification group. There were no significant differences between groups in patient demographics, fracture pattern, postoperative complications, length of hospital stay, total follow-up, total ICU stay time, or discharge to extended care facility versus home. CONCLUSIONS: Gamification techniques with use of long cephalomedullary nails are a valid approach to the treatment of intertrochanteric femur fractures. This approach demonstrates equivalent outcomes postoperatively to nongamification treatment of intertrochanteric femur fractures, with the potential advantage of decreased operative and fluoroscopic times.

Determining the validity of the Outpatient Arthroplasty Risk Assessment (OARA) tool for identifying patients for safe same-day discharge after primary shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Early discharge has been a target of cost-control efforts given the growing demand for joint replacement surgery. The Outpatient Arthroplasty Risk Assessment (OARA) score, a medically based risk-assessment score, has shown high predictive ability in achieving safe early discharge following outpatient lower-extremity arthroplasty using a score threshold initially set at ≤59 points but more recently adapted to ≤79 points. However, no study has been performed using the OARA tool for shoulder replacement, which has been shown to have lower associated medical risks than lower-extremity arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to determine the OARA score threshold for same-day discharge (SDD) following shoulder arthroplasty and evaluate its effectiveness in selecting patients for SDD. We hypothesized that the OARA score threshold for shoulder arthroplasty would be higher than that for lower-extremity arthroplasty. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of 422 patients who underwent primary anatomic or reverse shoulder arthroplasty between April 2018 and October 2019 performed by a single surgeon. As standard practice, all patients were counseled preoperatively regarding SDD and given the choice to stay overnight. Medical history, length of stay, and 90-day readmissions were obtained from medical records. Analysis of variance testing and screening test characteristics compared the performance of the OARA score vs. the American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) class and a previously published OARA score threshold used to define a low risk of outpatient lower-extremity arthroplasty. RESULTS: A preoperative OARA score cutoff of ≤110 points demonstrated a sensitivity of 98.0% for identifying patients with SDD after shoulder arthroplasty, compared with 66.7% using the hip and knee OARA score threshold of ≤59 points (P < .0001) and 80.4% using ASA-PS class ≤ 2 (P = .008). OARA scores ≤ 110 points also showed a negative predictive value of 98.9% and a false-negative rate of 2.0% but remained incomprehensive with a specificity of 24.0% (P < .0001). Analysis of variance demonstrated that mean OARA scores increased significantly with length of stay (P = .001) compared with ASA-PS classes (P = .82). Patients with OARA scores ≤ 110 points were also 2.5 times less likely to have 90-day emergency department visits (P = .04) than those with OARA scores > 110 points. There was no difference in 30- and 90-day readmission rates for patients with OARA scores ≤ 59 points, OARA scores ≤ 110 points, and ASA-PS classes ≤ 2. CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that a preoperative OARA score threshold of ≤110 points is effective and conservative in screening patients for SDD following shoulder arthroplasty, with low rates of 90-day emergency department visits and readmissions. This threshold is a useful screening tool to identify patients who are not good candidates for SDD.

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for patients with minimal preoperative pain: a matched-cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Profound improvements in function have been described in patients following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Previous studies have demonstrated young age, high preoperative function, and neurologic dysfunction to be predictors of poor functional improvement. However, no study to date has focused on patients electing to undergo RSA for function more than pain. The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of RSA in patients with minimal preoperative pain with those in patients who have higher baseline pain. METHODS: We performed a retrospective matched-cohort study of RSA patients treated by a single surgeon with a minimum of 2 years' follow-up. Patients with at least moderate baseline pain (function-pain group), predefined by existing literature as a visual analog scale pain score > 3, were matched 3:1 based on sex, indication, and age to patients with minimal pain (function group), defined as a visual analog scale score ≤ 3. Patient-reported outcome measures, active range of motion, and overall satisfaction were compared. The percentage of maximal improvement in outcomes and the proportion of patients exceeding the established threshold that predicts excellent satisfaction were also compared. RESULTS: A total of 260 patients (195 in function-pain group and 65 in function group) were selected for matched analysis with a similar sex distribution; the mean age was 73.1 years, and the mean follow-up period was 50 months. No differences in most recent postoperative function, overall improvement in functional scores, and active motion were found between patients in the 2 groups (P > .05). However, pain scores improved only in patients with at least moderate baseline pain (P < .0001). Patient satisfaction was significantly different (P = .035), as 10.8% of patients who elected to undergo RSA for function were unsatisfied. The function cohort also had worse percentage of maximal Simple Shoulder Test score (P = .034) and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (P < .0001) improvement, and a lower proportion of these patients exceeded the threshold for the percentage of maximal improvement that predicts an "excellent" outcome (P < .0001). CONCLUSION: RSA patients with minimal preoperative pain achieve significant improvements in function and motion similar to those who choose to undergo RSA for both pain and function, but they are less satisfied and are less likely to achieve an excellent outcome. Patients electing to proceed with RSA with minimal pain should be counseled accordingly.

Effect of Blocking Screws on Union of Infraisthmal Femur Fractures Stabilized With a Retrograde Intramedullary Nail.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of blocking screws (BS) on the union rate and stability of infraisthmal femur fractures treated with retrograde intramedullary nail (RIMN) insertion. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A single level 1 trauma center. PATIENTS/PARTICIPANTS: All patients with an infraisthmal femur fracture treated with a RIMN from 2005 to 2012 were included. INTERVENTION: All fractures were treated with a RIMN. BS were used at the discretion of the treating surgeon. MAIN OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS: (1) Radiographic time to union, (2) initial postoperative sagittal and coronal angulation, and (3) final sagittal and coronal angulation. RESULTS: Neither the average time to union (BS 21.1 weeks vs. 21.8 weeks), nor union rates (BS 61% vs. 77%) were statistically different between BS and non-BS constructs. No significant alignment differences existed whether BS were used or not. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we were not able to verify our hypothesis. In fact, we did not find any significant advantages when BS were added to a RIMN construct for distal femur fractures with respect to union time, union rate, or improvements in alignment. Additional studies are needed to determine the actual benefit of BS in the treatment of infraisthmal femoral shaft fractures treated with retrograde intramedullary nailing. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Determining When It Is Safe to Remove the External Fixator: Results From a Survey of the Limb Lengthening and Reconstruction Society.

Thousands of external fixators are applied for distraction osteogenesis each year. Determining when it is safe to remove the fixator can be difficult. The purpose of this study was to survey an international group of external fixation surgeons to determine their current practice patterns surrounding external fixator removal. A 10-question, open-ended survey was emailed to members of the Limb Lengthening and Reconstruction Society. Responses were recorded, and statistical analysis was performed. Pearson's chi-square test and likelihood ratio were used when indicated. A total of 124 surveys were sent, and 44 responses were received (35% response rate). The top 5 responses for determining when it is safe to remove a fixator were full weight bearing (75%), 3 cortices (71%), no pain (55%), after dynamization (55%), and duration of time (30%). Forty-eight percent of respondents routinely dynamized the frame prior to removal. Significantly fewer surgeons who dynamized the frame protected the limb after removal (P=.046). Physicians who dynamized the frame tended to use a less-constricting device for protection (boot or brace vs cast) than those who did not dynamize (P=.016). This study showed that most surgeons used radiographs and clinical evaluation to determine timing of fixator removal. Only 23% reported using computed tomography. Most surgeons dynamized the fixator prior to removal. Those who dynamized the frame were more confident in the regenerate healing. Although this study offers insight into what experienced surgeons do in their daily practice, it reveals many areas for improvement in the literature. [Orthopedics. 2017; 40(5):e876-e879.].