Discovery Elbow System arthroplasty polyethylene bearing exchange: outcomes and experience.

BACKGROUND: The Discovery Elbow System (DES) utilizes a polyethylene bearing within the ulnar component. An exchange bearing requires preoperative freezing and implantation within 2 minutes of freezer removal to allow insertion. We report our outcomes and experience using this technique. METHODS: This was an analysis of a two-surgeon consecutive series of DES bearing exchange. Inclusion criteria included patients in which exchange was attempted with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Clinical and radiographic review was performed 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 and 10 years postoperative. Outcome measures included range of movement, Oxford Elbow Score (OES), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), complications and requirement for revision surgery. RESULTS: Eleven DESs in 10 patients were included. Indications were bearing wear encountered during humeral component revision (n=5); bearing failure (n=4); and infection treated with debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR; n=2). Bearing exchange was conducted on the first attempt in 10 cases. One case required a second attempt. One patient developed infection postoperatively managed with two-stage revision. Mean follow-up of the bearing exchange DES was 3 years. No further surgery was required, with no infection recurrence in DAIR cases. Mean elbow flexion-extension and pronosupination arcs were 107° (±22°) and 140° (±26°). Mean OES was 36/48 (±12) and MEPS was 83/100 (±19). CONCLUSIONS: Our results support the use of DES bearing exchange in cases of bearing wear with well-fixed stems or acute infection. This series provides surgeons managing DES arthroplasty with management principles, successful and reproducible surgical techniques and expected clinical outcomes in performing DES polyethylene bearing exchange. Level of evidence: IV.

Does long-term follow-up and monitoring of primary shoulder arthroplasty identify failing implants requiring revision?

BACKGROUND: Published scoping review has identified evidence paucity related to long-term follow-up of shoulder arthroplasty. We aim to report effectiveness of elective primary shoulder arthroplasty surveillance in identifying failing implants requiring revision. METHODS: A prospective database recording shoulder arthroplasty and subsequent follow-up surveillance in a shoulder unit was analyzed. Shoulder arthroplasty was performed by 4 fellowship-trained shoulder surgeons for accepted elective indications including the use of anatomic arthroplasty in arthritic shoulders with intact rotator cuff and a reverse prosthesis being used in rotator cuff-deficient shoulders and rotator cuff-competent arthritic shoulders when deemed preferable by the treating surgeon. All shoulder arthroplasty implants used had achieved a minimum 7A Orthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel (ODEP) rating. The included shoulder arthroplasties were performed between May 1, 2004, and December 31, 2021, with minimum 1-year follow-up. Surveillance program involves specialist physiotherapist review at 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 10, and 15 years postoperatively, including clinical examination, outcome scoring, and radiographs. Patient-initiated review occurred between time points if a patient requested assessment because of symptoms. Outcome measures include ratio of failing implants identified by surveillance and patient-initiated review, with number of surveillance reviews offered and proportion that identified a failing implant requiring revision calculated. RESULTS: A total of 1002 elective primary shoulder arthroplasty with minimum 1-year follow-up were performed (547 reverse total shoulder arthroplasty [rTSA], 234 anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty [aTSA], and 221 hemiarthroplasty [HA]). A total of 238 patients died prior to December 31, 2022, resulting in 4019 surveillance appointments offered. Thirty-eight prostheses required revision ≥1 year postoperatively (6 rTSA, 9 aTSA, and 23 HA), with surveillance identifying requirement in 53% (33% rTSA, 56% aTSA, and 57% HA) and patient-initiated review in 47%. Mean years from implantation to revision was 5.2 (2.7 rTSA, 3.6 aTSA, and 6.6 HA). Revision indications included rotator cuff failure (56% aTSR and 43% HA) and glenoid erosion (57% HA). CONCLUSION: This is the first series reporting effectiveness of shoulder arthroplasty surveillance in identifying implants requiring revision. Surveillance identified more than half of implants requiring revision, although only 0.5% of appointments identified revision requirement. Surveillance enrolment may influence patient-initiated review utilization; therefore, similar studies using only patient-initiated follow-up would help inform recommendations.

Minimum five-year outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using a trabecular metal glenoid base plate.

AIMS: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) using trabecular metal (TM)-backed glenoid implants has been introduced with the aim to increase implant survival. Only short-term reports on the outcomes of TM-RTSA have been published to date. We aim to present the seven-year survival of TM-backed glenoid implants along with minimum five-year clinical and radiological outcomes. METHODS: All consecutive elective RTSAs performed at a single centre between November 2008 and October 2014 were reviewed. Patients who had primary TM-RTSA for rotator cuff arthropathy and osteoarthritis with deficient cuff were included. A total of 190 shoulders in 168 patients (41 male, 127 female) were identified for inclusion at a mean of 7.27 years (SD 1.4) from surgery. The primary outcome was survival of the implant with all-cause revision and aseptic glenoid loosening as endpoints. Secondary outcomes were clinical, radiological, and patient-related outcomes with a five-year minimum follow-up. RESULTS: The implant was revised in ten shoulders (5.2%) with a median time to revision of 21.2 months (interquartile range (IQR) 9.9 to 41.8). The Kaplan-Meier survivorship estimate at seven years was 95.9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 91.7 to 98; 35 RTSAs at risk) for aseptic mechanical failure of the glenoid and 94.8% (95% CI 77.5 to 96.3; 35 RTSAs at risk) for all-cause revision. Minimum five-year clinical and radiological outcomes were available for 103 and 98 RTSAs respectively with a median follow-up time of six years (IQR 5.2 to 7.0). Median postoperative Oxford Shoulder Score was 38 (IQR 31 to 45); median Constant and Murley score was 60 (IQR 47.5 to 70); median forward flexion 115° (IQR 100° to 125°); median abduction 95° (IQR 80° to 120°); and external rotation 25° (IQR 15° to 40°) Scapular notching was seen in 62 RTSAs (63.2%). CONCLUSION: We present the largest and longest-term series of TM-backed glenoid implants demonstrating 94.8% all-cause survivorship at seven years. Specifically pertaining to glenoid loosening, survival of the implant increased to 95.9%. In addition, we report satisfactory minimum five-year clinical and radiological outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(8):1333-1338.

Mid- to long-term survivorship of the cemented, semiconstrained Discovery total elbow arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) is increasing, and an improved understanding of elbow kinematics and biomaterials has driven advances in implant design. In modern practice, cemented, semiconstrained devices are most frequently used. The Discovery TEA has demonstrated promising early results, although there are a paucity of follow-up studies and no dedicated mid- to long-term series. We therefore present the longest, most complete such study to date. METHODS: A prospectively maintained local joint registry was interrogated to yield a consecutive series of Discovery TEAs performed at a single non-design center. The minimum follow-up period was set at 5 years. Revision procedures and TEAs performed for acute trauma were excluded. The primary outcome was survivorship of the implant. The secondary outcomes included clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes. RESULTS: We identified 67 TEAs in 58 patients for inclusion at a mean of 98.5 ± 20.4 months from surgery. Four cases (6%) were lost to follow-up, and implant survival was censored accordingly. The implant was revised in 14 cases (20.9%). The Kaplan-Meier method showed an implant survivorship rate of 76.8% at 119 months. A significant difference in survival was found between dominant and nondominant elbows (P = .012, Breslow test), with elbow dominance conferring a 4.5-fold increased risk of revision (relative risk, 4.5; 95% confidence interval, 1.1-18.5). Pooled clinical outcomes (70.9% follow-up at minimum of 60 months and median of 77.8 months) were also determined. CONCLUSIONS: We present the longest-term and most complete single-center follow-up study of the Discovery TEA to date. Further long-term survival studies are required to elucidate the performance of this implant compared with more established designs. We have also demonstrated differences in implant survivorship owing to hand dominance for the first time.

Outcomes for a large metaphyseal volume hemiarthroplasty in complex fractures of the proximal humerus.

BACKGROUND: A large metaphyseal volume shoulder hemiarthroplasty has been in use within our department since 2008; however, no clinical outcome data are available for this prosthesis apart from the designer surgeon series. MATERIALS AND METHODS: During a 5-year period, data were collected for 40 patients (30 women, 10 men) treated consecutively with the Zimmer Anatomical Shoulder Fracture hemiarthroplasty system (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA). RESULTS: The final analysis included 26 patients. The median age was 79 years (range, 58-91 years), and the median follow-up was 3.7 years (range, 2.0-5.8 years). The median Constant Score was 34 points (range, 16-70 points), and the median Oxford Shoulder Score was 27 points (range, 5-46 points). The greater tuberosity healed satisfactorily in 12 patients. Resorption of the greater tuberosity was seen radiologically in 18 patients. The presence of resorption had no significant effect on the Constant Score (P = .264) or the Oxford Shoulder Score (P = .469). Three patients (12%) required revision. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first report from a nondesigner center for outcomes for this prosthesis to date. The results demonstrate reduced functional performance compared with the designer series.

The octogenarian total knee arthroplasty.

Sixty-five patients aged > 80 years were compared to 65 patients aged between 60 and 70 years to assess total knee arthroplasty (TKA) outcome using the octogenarian postoperative Knee Society knee and function scores. Knee Society knee scores showed excellent outcomes with no statistically significant difference in the younger cohort (preoperative score, P = .7156; 5-year score, P = -.0677). Knee Society function scores also showed good outcomes with no statistically significant difference between the groups (preoperative score, P = .1147; 5-year score, P = .1348). Average length of stay increased by 3 days for octogenarians. Octogenarians had more pre-existing medical conditions and suffered more postoperative confusion. All but 1 patient rated the result as good/excellent. Patients maintained their independence for approximately 3.5 years before requiring more social input. With careful preoperative planning and counseling, TKA is recommended for the octogenarian.