OBJECTIVE: The aim of this review is to summarize information published in the recent peer-reviewed literature on reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for proximal humerus fractures.
RESULTS: Although there is still some debate regarding which may be the best treatment for proximal humerus fractures in certain age ranges, RSA seems to offer more predictable results than other surgical treatments for elderly patients. Successful tuberosity healing seems to correlate with better outcomes. Recent trends indicate interest in cementless fixation, fracture-specific stems and a 135-degree polyethylene opening angle. RSA provides a successful surgical solution for selected proximal humerus fractures. Indications, design features, and surgical execution have continued to evolve over the last few years.

Background: The treatment of complex proximal humerus fractures in elderly patients is not yet fully elucidated. Of all treatment options, reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) and non-operative treatment (NOT) appear to provide the best results. Evidence to guide the choice between the two is sparse. Therefore, this review provides an overview of the available evidence on RSA versus NOT. Methods: Studies comparing complex proximal humerus fractures in patients aged >65 years treated either with RSA or NOT were included for systematic review and direct comparison via pooled analysis of patient-rated outcome and range of motion. Indirect comparison of case series and non-comparative studies on either treatment was performed separately. Results: Three comparative studies including 77 patients treated with RSA and 81 treated non-operatively were analysed. The RSA group scored better for both the Constant-Murley score (mean difference 6 points) and DASH score (mean difference 8 points). No differences were detected in ASES, PENN score, pain scores, or range of motion between treatment groups. The most common complications for RSA were infection (3%), nerve injury (2%), and dislocation (2%). Reoperation was required in 5%. In the NOT group, common complications included malunion (42%), osteonecrosis (25%), and non-union (3%); no reoperation was required. Patient satisfaction was equal in both groups. Conclusions: The functional outcomes and range of motion after RSA seemed satisfactory and potentially superior to NOT in elderly patients. Patient satisfaction was comparable despite a high malunion and osteonecrosis rate in the non-operative treatment group, which did not require re-interventions.

BACKGROUND: The use of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has increased at a greater rate than other shoulder procedures. In general, clinical and functional outcomes after RTSA have been favorable regardless of indication. However, little evidence exists regarding patient specific factors associated with clinical improvement after RTSA. Predicting postoperative outcomes after RTSA may support patients and physicians to establish more accurate patient expectations and contribute in treatment decisions. The aim of this study was to determine predictive factors for postoperative outcomes after RTSA for patients with degenerative shoulder disorders.
METHODS: EMBASE, PubMed, Cochrane Library and PEDro were searched to identify cohort studies reporting on predictive factors for postoperative outcomes after RTSA. Authors independently screened publications on eligibility. Risk of bias for each publication was assessed using the QUIPS tool. A qualitative description of the results was given. The GRADE framework was used to establish the quality of evidence.
RESULTS: A total of 1986 references were found of which 11 relevant articles were included in the analysis. Risk of bias was assessed as low (N = 7, 63.6%) or moderate (N = 4, 36.4%). According to the evidence synthesis there was moderate-quality evidence indicating that greater height predicts better postoperative shoulder function, and greater preoperative range of motion (ROM) predicts increased postoperative ROM following.
CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative predictive factors that may predict postoperative outcomes are: patient height and preoperative range of motion. These factors should be considered in the preoperative decision making for a RTSA, and can potentially be used to aid in preoperative decision making.
METHODS: Level I; Systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Patients who rely on their upper extremities for ambulation, or upper extremity ambulators (UEAs), place considerable stress on their shoulders through the use of assistive devices like walkers, crutches, canes, and wheelchairs. It has been postulated that UEAs may be at increased risk for complications following shoulder arthroplasty. This study aimed to systematically review the literature related to (1) patient-reported outcomes measures (PROMs), (2) functional outcomes, and (3) complications in UEAs who undergo shoulder arthroplasty.
METHODS: A systematic review of the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases was performed to identify studies reporting clinical outcomes of shoulder arthroplasty in UEAs. Patient demographics, clinical characteristics, PROMs, radiographic outcomes, and postoperative range of motion were collected and compared to control patients (i.e. bipedal ambulators) from the constituent studies.
RESULTS: A total of eight studies evaluating 248 UEA cases and 206 control cases were included for review. Ambulatory assistive devices utilized by UEAs included walkers (39%), wheelchairs (38%), canes (22%), and a crutch (<1%). Among UEA cases, 197 (79%) reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, 37 (15%) anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty, and 14 (6%) hemiarthroplasty were performed. Overall, patients exhibited significant improvements in mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores, Constant-Murley scores, Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores, and Visual Analog Scale (VAS) scores postoperatively. Among 3 studies that included comparison with control groups of bipedal ambulators, no significant differences in outcomes were identified. The overall clinical complication rate was 17% for UEAs compared to 9.1% for controls. The rate of revision surgery was 7.7% for UEAs and 4.9% for bipedal ambulators.
CONCLUSIONS: UEAs experience satisfactory pain relief, functional improvements, and good subjective outcomes following shoulder arthroplasty. However, complication and revision rates are higher compared to those for bipedal ambulators, and the majority of UEAs undergo reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) compared to anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA).

BACKGROUND: The role of tendon transfer and ideal insertion sites to improve axial rotation in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is debated. We systematically reviewed the available biomechanical evidence to elucidate the ideal tendon transfer and insertion sites for restoration of external and internal rotation in the setting of RTSA and the influence of implant lateralization.
METHODS: We queried the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify biomechanical studies examining the application of tendon transfer to augment shoulder external or internal rotation range of motion in the setting of concomitant RTSA. A descriptive synthesis of six included articles was conducted to elucidate trends in the literature.
RESULTS: Biomechanics literature demonstrates that increasing humeral-sided lateralization optimized tendon transfers performed for both ER and IR. The optimal latissimus dorsi (LD) transfer site for ER is posterior to the greater tuberosity (adjacent to the teres minor insertion); however, LD transfer to this site results in greater tendon excursion compared to posterodistal insertion site. In a small series with nearly 7-year mean follow-up, the LD transfer demonstrated longevity with all 10 shoulders having>50% ER strength compared to the contralateral native shoulder and a negative Hornblower\'s at latest follow-up; however, reduced electromyography activity of the transferred LD compared to the native contralateral side was noted. One study found that transfer of the pectoralis major has the greatest potential to restore IR in the setting of lateralized humerus RTSA.
CONCLUSIONS: To restore ER, LD transfer posterior on the greater tuberosity provides optimal biomechanics with functional longevity. The pectoralis major has the greatest potential to restore IR. Future clinical investigation applying the biomechanical principles summarized herein is needed to substantiate the role of tendon transfer in the modern era of lateralized RTSA.
METHODS: IV; systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study is to systematically review the evidence in the literature to ascertain the functional outcomes, range of motion (ROM), and complication and reoperation rates after revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for a failed primary total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) or hemiarthroplasty (HA).
METHODS: Two independent reviewers performed the literature search based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines using the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and The Cochrane Library databases. Studies were included if they reported clinical outcomes for revision RSA for a failed primary TSA or HA.
RESULTS: Our review found 23 studies including 1041 shoulders (627 TSA and 414 HA) meeting our inclusion criteria. The majority of patients were female (66.1%), with an average age of 69.0 years (range: 39-93 years) and a mean follow-up of 46.3 months. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and visual analog scale pain scores improved from 32.6 to 61.9 and 6.7 to 2.7, respectively. ROM results include forward flexion, abduction, and external rotation, which improved from 59.4° to 107.7°, 50.7° to 104.4°, and 19.8° to 26.3°, respectively. Only 1 of the 10 studies reporting internal rotation found a statistically significant difference, with the mean internal rotation improving from S1-S3 preoperatively to L4-L5 postoperatively for patients undergoing HA. The overall complication rate and reoperation rate were 23.4% and 12.5%, respectively. The most common complications were glenoid component loosening (6.0%), fracture (periprosthetic, intraoperative, or other scapula fractures) (n = 4.7%), and infection (n = 3.3%).
CONCLUSIONS: Revision RSA for a failed primary TSA and HA has been shown to result in excellent functional outcomes and improved ROM, suggesting that patients who have failed TSA or HA may benefit from a revision RSA.

暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: There is no consensus concerning the rehabilitation protocol following reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Several patients are expecting to be able to use their arms for sports or recreation shortly after their operation.
UNASSIGNED: This review was designed as an intervention systematic review with narrative analysis. Authors searched English literature in PubMed and Embase databases from 1/1/1989 until July 2022. Controlled studies comparing rehabilitation protocols for patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty were included. Data quality was examined with the Cochrane risk of a bias assessment tool for randomized trials, the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized studies (MINORS) tool, as well as the Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.
UNASSIGNED: Three studies were finally analyzed. At 3 months post-op, forward flexion was found to be significantly higher in the early rehabilitation group (140.5, 95% confidence intervals (CIs): 135.10-145.89; the delayed rehabilitation group mean was 131.24, 95% CI: 125.73-136.74; p = 0.019). Twelve months post-op, no significant difference in any clinical or patient-reported outcome was shown. More complications were reported in the 6 weeks-delayed rehabilitation group.
UNASSIGNED: Newer regimes permit immediate shoulder mobilization but may not be applied to every patient. The lack of strong evidence warrants the need for future controlled studies; subsequently, postoperative rehabilitation should be individualized.

BACKGROUND: Several reconstruction methods exist for Malawer type I/V proximal humerus reconstruction after bone tumor resection; however, no consensus has been reached regarding the preferred methods.
METHODS: We conducted a literature search on various types of proximal humerus oncologic reconstruction methods. We collected data on postoperative functional outcomes assessed based on Musculoskeletal Tumor Society (MSTS) scores, 5-year reconstruction survival rates, and complications. We calculated each reconstruction\'s weighted mean based on the sample size and standard errors. Complications were categorized based on the Henderson classification. Based on these integrated data, our primary objective is to propose an optimal strategy for proximal humerus reconstruction after bone tumor resection.
RESULTS: We examined various reconstruction techniques, including modular prosthesis (752 patients in 21 articles), osteoarticular allograft (142 patients in 6 articles), allograft prosthesis composites (APCs) (236 patients in 12 articles), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (141 patients in 10 articles), composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (33 patients in 4 articles), claviculo-pro-humero (CPH) technique (51 patients in 6 articles), and cement spacer (207 patients in 4 articles). Weighted mean MSTS scores were: modular prosthesis (73.8%), osteoarticular allograft (74.4%), APCs (79.2%), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (77.0%), composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (76.1%), CPH technique (75.1%), and cement spacer (69.1%). Weighted 5-year reconstruction survival rates were modular prosthesis (85.4%), osteoarticular allograft (67.6%), APCs (85.2%), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (84.1%), and cement spacer (88.0%). Reconstruction survival data was unavailable for composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty and CPH technique. Major complications included shoulder joint instability: modular prosthesis (26.2%), osteoarticular allograft (41.5%), APCs (33.9%), reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (17%), composite reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (6.1%), CPH technique (2.0%), and cement spacer (8.7%). Aseptic loosening of the prosthesis occurred: modular prosthesis (3.9%) and reverse shoulder total arthroplasty (5.7%). Allograft fracture was observed in 54.9% of patients with osteoarticular allograft.
CONCLUSIONS: The complication profiles differed among reconstruction methods. Weighted mean MSTS scores exceeded 70% in all methods except cement spacer, and the 5-year reconstruction survival rate surpassed 80% for all methods except osteoarticular allograft. Proximal humerus reconstruction after bone tumor resection should consider potential complications and patients\' individual factors.

OBJECTIVE: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is often used to surgically address massive irreparable rotator cuff tears (MIRCT) without arthritis. The impact of prior attempted rotator cuff repair (RCR) on outcomes is unclear.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this systematic review was to compare functional outcomes, range of motion, and complications in patients with a MIRCT without arthritis who underwent RSA as a primary procedure versus after prior RCR.
METHODS: A systematic review was performed on RSA for a MIRCT. The search was conducted from February to March of 2022 using the MEDLINE database. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROs), range of motion (ROM), and complications were extracted. These outcomes were weighted and analysed based on whether the reverse was performed as the primary procedure or following a prior RCR.
RESULTS: Seven studies were included in the analysis, consisting of 343 cases in the primary RSA group and 95 cases in the prior RCR group, with a mean follow-up of 40.8 months. There were no demographic differences between cohorts. Postoperative PROs and ROM were comparable between groups, although the prior RCR group had a higher maximal percentage of improvement (MPI%) for the Constant-Murley Score and Simple Shoulder Test. There was a higher risk for complications (relative risk [RR] 6.26) and revisions (RR 3.91) in the prior RCR group. The most common complications were acromial stress fractures and prosthetic dislocation.
CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing RSA for MIRCT following a prior RCR have functional outcomes that are largely comparable to those who have a primary RSA, but they may be at higher risk of complications and revision.
METHODS: IV.