RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses on the diagnostic accuracy of shoulder clinical tests do not reach conclusions regarding subscapularis tears. PURPOSE: To compare the diagnostic accuracy of commonly used clinical tests for subscapularis tears. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review; Level of evidence, 3. METHODS: An electronic literature search was conducted using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library/Central. Eligibility criteria were original clinical studies reporting the diagnostic accuracy of clinical tests to diagnose the presence of rotator cuff tears involving the subscapularis. RESULTS: The electronic literature search returned 2212 records, of which 13 articles were eligible. Among 8 tests included in the systematic review, the lift-off test was most frequently reported (12 studies). Four tests were eligible for meta-analysis: bear-hug test, belly-press test, internal rotation lag sign (IRLS), and lift-off test. The highest pooled sensitivity was 0.55 (95% CI, 0.28-0.79) for the bear-hug test, while the lowest pooled sensitivity was 0.32 (95% CI, 0.13-0.61), for the IRLS. In all tests, pooled specificity was >0.90. CONCLUSION: Among the 4 clinical tests eligible for meta-analysis (bear-hug test, belly-press test, IRLS, and lift-off test), all had pooled specificity >0.90 but pooled sensitivity <0.60. No single clinical test is sufficiently reliable to diagnose subscapularis tears. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO (CRD42019137019).
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: To date, there is no consensus on when and how to perform acromioplasty during rotator cuff repair (RCR). We aimed to determine the volume of impinging bone removed during acromioplasty and whether it influences postoperative range of motion (ROM) and clinical scores after RCR. METHODS: Preoperative and postoperative computed tomography scans of 57 shoulders that underwent RCR were used to reconstruct scapula models to simulate volumes of impinging acromial bone preoperatively and then compare them to the volumes of bone resected postoperatively to calculate the proportions of desired (ideal) vs. unnecessary (excess) resections. All patients were evaluated preoperatively and at 6 months to assess ROM and functional scores. RESULTS: The volume of impinging bone identified was 3.5 ± 2.3 cm3, of which 1.6 ± 1.2 cm3 (50% ± 27%) was removed during acromioplasty. The volume of impinging bone identified was not correlated with preoperative critical shoulder angle (r = 0.025, P = .853), nor with glenoid inclination (r = -0.024, P = .857). The volume of bone removed was 3.7 ± 2.2 cm3, of which 2.1 ± 1.6 cm3 (53% ± 24%) were unnecessary resections. Multivariable analyses revealed that more extensive removal of impinging bone significantly improved internal rotation with the arm at 90° of abduction (beta, 27.5, P = .048) but did not affect other shoulder movements or clinical scores. CONCLUSIONS: Acromioplasty removed only 50% of the estimated volume of impinging acromial bone. More extensive removal of impinging bone significantly improved internal rotation with the arm at 90° of abduction.
RESUMO
PURPOSE: To determine how different combinations of humeral stem and glenosphere designs for reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) influence range of motion (ROM) and muscle elongation. METHODS: A computed tomography scan of a non-pathologic shoulder was used to simulate all shoulder motions, and thereby compare the ROM and rotator cuff muscle lengths of the native shoulder versus 30 combinations of humeral components (1 inlay straight stem with 155° inclination and five onlay curved stems with 135°, 145° or 155° inclinations, using concentric, medialized or lateralized trays) and glenospheres (standard, large, lateralized, inferior eccentric and bony increased-offset (BIO-RSA)). RESULTS: Only five of the 30 combinations restored ≥ 50% of the native ROM in all directions: the 145° onlay stem (concentric tray) combined with lateralized or inferior eccentric glenospheres and the 145° stem (lateralized tray) combined with either a large, lateralized or inferior eccentric glenosphere. Lengthening of the supraspinatus and infraspinatus, observed for all configurations, was greatest using onlay stems (7-30%) and BIO-RSA glenospheres (13-31%). Subscapularis lengthening was observed for onlay stems combined with BIO-RSA glenospheres (5-9%), while excessive subscapularis shortening was observed for the inlay stem combined with all glenospheres except the BIO-RSA design (> 15%). CONCLUSIONS: The authors suggest implanting 145° onlay stems, with concentric or lateralized trays, together with lateralized or inferior eccentric glenospheres.
