Subscapularis Management in Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty A Review.

Surgical management of the subscapularis tendon is critical to a successful outcome following anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. However, the optimal surgical technique for adequate exposure of the glenohumeral joint while mini-mizing complications resulting from subscapularis tendon dysfunction continues to be controversial. Common surgical techniques for the management of the subscapularis tendon include tenotomy, peeling, sparing, and lesser tuberosity oste-otomy. Despite a number of published studies comparing these techniques, no consensus has been reached regarding optimal management. This article reviews the extensive literature on the biomechanical, radiologic, and clinical outcomes of each technique, including recently published comparison studies.

Excellent Correlation of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Score With Legacy Outcome Scores Preoperatively and at 1 Year After Arthroscopic Rotator Cuff Repair.

Purpose: To assess the preoperative and postoperative performance of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity (PROMIS-UE, version 2.0) outcome score in comparison to the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Western Ontario Rotator Cuff Index (WORC) instruments in patients undergoing rotator cuff repair. Methods: This prospective longitudinal study included 91 patients undergoing rotator cuff repair. Patients completed the PROMIS-UE, ASES, and WORC instruments preoperatively and postoperatively at 2 weeks, 6 weeks, 3 months, and 12 months. The Pearson correlation coefficient (r) between these tools was calculated at each time point. Correlations were graded as excellent (>0.7), excellent-good (0.61-0.7), good (0.4-0.6), or poor (<0.4). Responsiveness to change was assessed using the effect size and the standardized response mean. Floor and ceiling effects for each instrument were also assessed. Results: The PROMIS-UE instrument showed good to excellent correlation with the legacy instruments at all time points. There were variations in the measured effect sizes of the various instruments, with the PROMIS-UE instrument showing responsiveness to change at 3 and 12 months but the ASES and WORC instruments showing responsiveness at 6 weeks, 3 months, and 12 months. Both PROMIS-UE and ASES scores displayed ceiling effects at 12 months. Conclusions: The PROMIS-UE instrument shows excellent correlation with the ASES instrument and a rotator cuff-specific outcome instrument-the WORC instrument-preoperatively and at 1 year after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair. Variations in the measured effect sizes at different postoperative time points and high ceiling effects of the PROMIS-UE instrument at the 1-year time point may limit its utility in the early postoperative phase and at long-term follow-up after rotator cuff repair. Clinical Relevance: The performance of the PROMIS-UE outcome measure after arthroscopic rotator cuff repair was investigated.

Outcomes of arthroscopic tuberoplasty for symptomatic irreparable rotator cuff tendon tear without pseudoparalysis.

Background: The purpose of this study is to report the outcomes in patients undergoing arthroscopic tuberoplasty for symptomatic irreparable rotator cuff tear (RCT). Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study comparing preoperative and postoperative data of patients undergoing arthroscopic tuberoplasty for symptomatic irreparable RCT. Exclusion criteria included open tuberoplasty, concomitant partial RCT repair, glenohumeral arthritis, concomitant ipsilateral extremity fractures, <12 months follow-up, or pseudoparalysis. Demographics, shoulder range of motion (ROM), RCT morphology, re-operation rates, satisfaction and outcome scores were collected from medical records and questionnaires. Outcome scores included Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System Upper Extremity (PROMIS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), and pain Visual Analog Score (VAS). Results: Out of 28 patients identified between 2012 and 2019, 20 (21 shoulders) were available for follow-up at a mean of 43.3 ± 20.9 months. Mean age was 64.6 ± 8.8 years. Mean PROMIS was 37.7 ± 7.3, ASES was 82.9 ± 13.8, and SVV was 67.1 ± 19.4. VAS with activity decreased from 5.0 ± 2.9 preoperatively to 2.3 ± 2.6 (P = .0029). Pre- and post-operative ROM were unchanged. There were 4 failures requiring revision. The remaining 17 patients reported high satisfaction scores (3.4 ± 0.7) and 15 (88.2%) answered "yes" to getting the procedure again, with 3/4 failures stating they would also undergo arthroscopic tuberoplasty again. Conclusion: Arthroscopic tuberoplasty demonstrates high levels of satisfaction and pain reduction in symptomatic irreparable RCT. In appropriately indicated patients, this treatment should be considered prior to other salvage options.

Outcomes after arthroscopic scapulothoracic bursectomy for the treatment of symptomatic snapping scapula syndrome.

Background: The purpose of our study was to examine the clinical outcomes after arthroscopic scapulothoracic bursectomy for the treatment of scapulothoracic bursitis at a minimum of 2-year follow-up. Methods: Twenty patients who underwent arthroscopic scapulothoracic bursectomy for the treatment of symptomatic snapping scapula syndrome were identified from a single surgeon's database. Patients were indicated for surgery if their symptoms persisted for more than 6 months and if they failed nonoperative treatment. Acquired data included patient demographics, shoulder range of motion, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon score, visual analog scale scores for pain, and the following Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores: Upper Extremity Computer Adaptive Test Version 2.0, pain intensity, and pain interference scores. Patient satisfaction and subjective shoulder value were also recorded out of 100. Fisher's test and unpaired t tests were performed for statistical analysis, and P values <.05 were considered significant. Results: A total of 20 patients (24 scapulae) were included in our study, with an average follow-up period of 44 (range: 27-91) months. The mean postoperative Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System scores for Upper Extremity Computer Adaptive Test Version 2.0, pain interference, and pain intensity were 44.2 ± 10.7, 50.9 ± 9.5, and 42.1 ± 9.5, respectively. The mean postoperative American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon score was 79.0 ± 21.5, and the mean subjective shoulder value was 82.7 ± 12.9. Visual analog scale pain levels showed a significant decrease from 4.95 ± 2.26 preoperatively to 2.27 ± 2.7 (P < .05) postoperatively. There was no significant difference in shoulder range of motion after surgery. The mean patient satisfaction was 72.9, with 65% (13/20) of patients reporting satisfaction levels ≥ 80%. Two patients did not report the resolution of their symptoms and required revision surgery. Conclusion: Arthroscopic treatment of scapulothoracic bursitis is a safe, reliable technique that is effective in providing symptomatic relief with a low rate of recurrence, with most patients reporting a significant reduction in periscapular pain.

Analysis of patient's willingness and concerns for discharge following shoulder arthroplasty.

Background: Patient's willingness and barriers for discharge after shoulder arthroplasty (SA) has not been studied. The aim of this study was to prospectively analyze patient's willingness for discharge and barriers to discharge beyond postoperative day #1 (POD#1) after SA. Methods: In this prospective study, patients undergoing primary or revision SA (anatomic, reverse, or hemiarthroplasty) at our institution were enrolled to determine their willingness and concerns for discharge after SA. Patient's willingness for discharge was inquired daily until discharge. Demographic information, patient's medical history, intraoperative details (duration of surgery, estimated blood loss, intraoperative complication), discharge disposition, length of stay (LOS), and reasons for extension of LOS beyond POD#1 were analyzed. Results: A total of 184 patients who underwent SA were included. Eight patients were discharged on POD#0, 114 patients on POD#1, 37 patients on POD#2, and 25 patients after POD#2. One hundred nineteen (119) patients were discharged to home, 40 were discharged to home with services, 15 were discharged to nursing facilities, and 10 were discharged to rehabilitation centers. Reasons for extension of LOS past POD#1 included patients failing to clear home safety evaluation (n = 4), inadequate pain control (n = 6), worsening of preexisting medical conditions (n = 8), delay in patient disposition (awaiting placement in a rehabilitation facility [n = 6] and awaiting culture results [n = 9]). Social reasons (n = 29) were the most common reasons for extension of LOS. These included patients requesting an extra day of stay (n = 20), patients requesting rehabilitation facility placement (n = 5), lack of a timely ride home (n = 2), and family-related reasons (death in the family [n = 1], lack of home help [n = 1]). Conclusions: This prospective study demonstrates modifiable factors associated with LOS beyond POD#1 (inadequate pain control, logistic delays in disposition, and patient-related social concerns) after SA. With increasing interest in same-day discharge and rising concerns to control cost and use bundled payment initiatives with SA, improving patient's willingness to discharge by addressing their concerns can improve early discharge after SA.

Outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty following failed superior capsular reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: History of prior rotator cuff repair (RCR) may adversely affect the outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), but there is no information regarding the influence of prior superior capsular reconstruction (SCR) surgery on the outcomes of RTSA. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the outcomes of RTSA following failed arthroscopic SCR. METHODS: All patients who underwent RTSA for failed SCR (SCR cohort) at our institution were identified from our institutional database. A comparative cohort of patients who had RTSA with a history of failed RCR (Control cohort) was also reviewed. Demographic information, 90-day complication rate, 90-day emergency department visits, length of stay, and outcome scores (patient-reported outcomes measurement information system [PROMIS] physical function upper extremity, Visual Analog Scale score, and range of motion) were compared. RESULTS: From 2015 to 2020, 87 arthroscopic SCRs were performed at our institution and of these, 13 patients underwent RTSA at a mean time of 14.6 months (5.8-32.4) after SCR and were followed up for an average of 17.9 months (1.6-44.6). The average number of shoulder surgeries prior to RTSA was 2.8 (1-7), with the last surgery being SCR. During the same period, we identified 15 patients who underwent an RTSA after a failed RCR (control cohort). The RTSA in the control cohort was performed on average at 12.8 months (1.5-39.5) following the last RCR, and patients were followed up for an average of 27.7 months (2.8-53.9). The average number of shoulder surgeries before the RTSA in the control cohort was 1.4 (1-3). Although the SCR cohort had significant improvements in pain scores and forward flexion (FF), there was only a modest functional improvement with PROMIS scores and no meaningful improvement with external rotation. Complications (23%) in the SCR cohort included 1 periprosthetic joint infection requiring 2-stage revision, 1 acromion stress fracture, and 1 ulnar neuritis. Overall, compared to the SCR cohort, patients in the control cohort had better function (PROMIS physical function upper extremity), lower Visual Analog Scale score, and greater range of motion (FF and external rotation) preoperatively and at last follow-up, but there were no differences in the length of stay and 90-day emergency department visits, infection, and complication rate between the 2 cohorts. CONCLUSION: RTSA after failed SCR improves pain and FF but is associated with modest functional improvements and high complication rates. However, these findings will require confirmation in a larger cohort with longer follow-up.

Performance and responsiveness to change of PROMIS UE in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty.

The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Upper Extremity Computer Adaptive Test (PROMIS UE CAT) is a newer patient-reported outcome measure for upper extremity physical function. To date, no longitudinal study exists assessing PROMIS UE CAT responsiveness in patients undergoing shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this prospective longitudinal study is to report PROMIS UE CAT responsiveness to change and correlation to legacy instruments in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Ninety-six patients (97 shoulders) undergoing TSA completed the PROMIS UE, Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) preoperatively and postoperatively at 6 weeks, 12 weeks, and after 6 months. Spearman's correlation coefficients (r) were calculated between PROMIS UE and other scores at each time-point. Responsiveness to change was assessed using the effect size (Cohen's d) and standardized response mean compared with the preoperative time-point. Floor and ceiling effects were also assessed. PROMIS UE CAT demonstrated positive responsiveness at all time-points after TSA. It demonstrated excellent correlation (range: 0.68-0.84) with ASES, SST, and OSS at all postoperative time-points, but the correlation was weaker (r < 0.6, except OSS) preoperatively. Only OSS and SST showed ceiling effects at the 6-12-month time-point (16.8% and 18.2%, respectively). PROMIS UE CAT responsiveness to change and strength of correlation with legacy instruments improves with time elapsed after TSA. Further quantification of meaningful responsiveness to change will require estimation of the minimal clinically important difference and substantial clinical benefit for PROMIS UE CAT.

Radiographic and clinical characterization of coracoid fractures: a retrospective cohort analysis.

PURPOSE: Coracoid fracture is a rare injury. The aim of this study is to present the demographics, clinical and radiologic characteristics, and outcomes of coracoid fracture in a cohort of 32 patients. METHODS: We queried our institutional electronic medical record database (years 2012-2020) to identify patients with coracoid fractures using specific International Classification of Disease-10 codes. Demographic data, injury details including mechanism of injury and associated injuries, imaging performed, and treatment outcomes were obtained from retrospective chart review. A radiologist reviewed all available imaging studies (radiographs/CT/MRI) and classified the fractures according to Ogawa and Eyres classifications. Missed diagnoses were determined by comparing initial imaging reports with the follow-up imaging obtained in the office. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients with coracoid fractures were identified during the study period. Sixteen fractures (50%) occurred in the setting of low-energy trauma. Twelve fractures were missed on initial radiographs, and diagnosis with three-view radiographs (AP, scapular-Y and axillary) was 88% compared to 33% (p < 0.03) with two views (AP, scapular-Y). The majority of fractures were non-displaced (94%), and 56% were Ogawa Type-II fractures. Associated injuries were seen in 81% of patients. Most fractures (94%) were treated without surgery with excellent outcomes. CONCLUSION: Coracoid fractures continue to be a rare injury. In contrast to previous studies, in this case series of 32 patients, half of the fractures were associated with low-energy trauma, which correlated with higher percentage of non-displaced fractures and Ogawa Type-II fractures. Addition of the axillary view in the trauma radiographic series significantly improved the initial fracture detection rate. LEVEL IV: Retrospective study.

Minimal clinically important difference, substantial clinical benefit, and patient acceptable symptom state of PROMIS upper extremity after total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System minimal clinically important difference (PROMIS MCID), substantial clinical benefit (SCB), and patient acceptable symptom state (PASS) of patient-reported outcome measures provide clinical significance to patient-reported outcome measures scores. The goal of this study is to measure the MCID, SCB, and PASS of PROMIS Upper Extremity v2.0 (PROMIS UE) in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). METHODS: All patients who underwent TSA since October 2017 were identified from our institutional database. Patients who had completed the PROMIS UE outcome measure before surgery were asked to complete a PROMIS UE and anchor survey that contained two transition questions to assess patient satisfaction and change in symptoms since treatment. The anchor-based MCID, SCB, and PASS were calculated as the change in PROMIS UE score that represented the optimal cutoff for a receiver operating characteristic curve. The distribution-based MCID was calculated as a range between the average standard error of measurement multiplied by 2 different constants: 1 and 2.77. RESULTS: This study enrolled 165 patients. The anchor-based MCID for PROMIS UE was calculated to be 8.05 with an AUC of 0.814. The anchor-based SCB was calculated to be 10.0 with an AUC of 0.727. The distribution-based MCID was calculated to be between 3.12 and 8.65. The PASS was calculated to be 37.2 with an AUC of 0.90. CONCLUSIONS: The establishment of MCID, SCB, and PASS for PROMIS UE scores after shoulder arthroplasty provides meaningful and objective clinical interpretation of the improvements in outcome scores after TSA.