Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Mobile health (mHealth)— the use of medical applications in healthcare settings —include tools that can support self-management after surgery and thereby contribute to early postoperative recovery. Providing patients with timely and interactive information through mHealth is hypothesized to positively influence recovery after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The aim of this study is to determine the effectiveness of both interactive and personalized information and a rehabilitation protocol with a mobile application compared to generic non-personalized digital information on postoperative recovery in patients undergoing primary RSA. Methods A multicentre randomised controlled trial will be conducted in two Dutch hospitals. In total 170 patients undergoing elective, primary RSA will be included. Participants will be randomly allocated to one of the two groups on a 1:1 ratio. The intervention group will receive interactive postoperative information on a daily basis. The control group will receive generic, non-personalized digital information. The primary outcome is defined as functional recovery measured using the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS) at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes are: pain, physical functioning, quality of life, length of stay, complications, treatment satisfaction and app usage. The between group difference will be analysed using linear mixed-effects regression. Discussion This randomised controlled trial will compare the postoperative recovery rate in patients undergoing RSA between patients receiving an interactive mHealth application with generic digital information. The results from this study can contribute to improving postoperative care for patients undergoing RSA. Trial registration This trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06520085) on the 22nd of July 2024.

Purpose of Review Given the touted clinical and patient-reported outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) in improving pain and restoring function, shoulder surgeons are rapidly expanding the indications and utilization of RTSA. Despite its increasing use, the ideal post-operative management ensuring the best patient outcomes is still debated. This review synthesizes the current literature regarding the impact of post-operative immobilization and rehabilitation on clinical outcomes following RTSA including return to sport. Recent Findings Literature regarding the various facets of post-operative rehabilitation is heterogeneous in both methodology and quality. While most surgeons recommend 4–6 weeks of immobilization post-operatively, two recent prospective studies have shown that early motion following RTSA is both safe and effective with low complication rates and significant improvements in patient-reported outcome scores. Furthermore, no studies currently exist assessing the use of home-based therapy following RTSA. However, there is an ongoing prospective, randomized control trial assessing patient-reported and clinical outcomes which will help shed light on the clinical and economic value of home therapy. Finally, surgeons have varying opinions regarding return to higher level activities following RTSA. Despite no clear consensus, there is growing evidence that elderly patients are able to return to sport (e.g., golf, tennis) safely, though caution must be taken with younger or more high-functioning patients. Summary While post-operative rehabilitation is believed to be essential to maximize outcomes following RTSA, there is a paucity of high-quality evidence that guides current rehabilitation protocols. There is no consensus regarding type of immobilization, timing of rehabilitation, or need for formal therapist-directed rehabilitation versus physician-guided home exercise. Additionally, surgeons have varied opinions regarding return to higher level activities and sports following RTSA. There is burgeoning evidence that elderly patients can return to sport safely, though caution must be taken with younger patients. Further research is needed to clarify the optimal rehabilitation protocols and return to sport guidelines.

IntroductionIndications for reverse shoulder arthroplasties (rTSA) have increased since their development by Paul Grammont in 1985. Prosthesis design was enhanced over time, but the management of the tendon of the M. subscapularis (SSC-tendon) in primary rTSA is still a controversial subject with regard to perform a refixation or not.Methods50 patients were randomized in a refixation group (A) and a non-refixation-group (B) of the SSC-tendon in a double-blinded fashion. SSC-function was assessed at baseline before surgery, such as 3 and 12 months after surgery. Constant–Murley-Shoulder Score (CS), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score (ASES), strength, range of motion (ROM), and pain on numeric rating scale (NRS) were measured in all examinations. An ultrasound examination of the shoulder was performed for evaluation of subscapularis tendon integrity at 3 and 12 month follow-up visits. Pain was evaluated on NRS via phone 5 days after surgery. Surgery was performed by a single experienced senior surgeon in all patients.ResultsPatients with a refixation of the SSC-tendon and primary rTSA had improved internal rotation [40° (20°–60°) vs. 32° (20°–45°); p = 0.03] at 12 months of follow-up. Additionally, the A-group had increased CS [74 (13–90) vs. 69.5 (40–79); p = 0.029] 1 year after surgery. Results were strengthened by subgroup analysis of successful refixation in ultrasound examination vs. no refixation. No differences were seen in ASES and NRS 1 year after rTSA.ConclusionSSC-tendon repair in rTSA improves CS and internal rotation 12 months after surgery.

Background In recent years, orthopaedic procedures have increasingly shifted from inpatient to outpatient settings. This trend includes total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), which is being performed more frequently in outpatient facilities and ambulatory surgical centres. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes and rates of adverse events between outpatient and inpatient TSA. Methods PubMed, Cochrane, and Google Scholar (pages 1–20) databases were screened for articles comparing outpatient to inpatient TSA through June 2024, using relevant and holistic search terms. Non-comparative articles and those utilizing national databases were excluded from our study. Data on complications, myocardial infarction (MI), thromboembolic events, anaemia/transfusions, infections, readmissions, emergency department (ED) visits, revision surgery, and patient reported outcome measures at one year (Visual Analog Scale [VAS] and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons [ASES] score) were extracted. Results A total of 14 articles were included in our study, involving 1070 outpatient and 1330 inpatient TSA patients. Patients in the inpatient group were older and had a higher ASA compared to the patients in the outpatient group. The outpatient TSA group was found to have significantly lower rates of overall complications (odds ratio [OR] = 0.59, p  = 0.001), medical complications (OR = 0.43, p  < 0.001), and readmissions (OR = 0.47, p  = 0.008), as well as higher mean ASES scores (81.4 vs. 78.5, p  = 0.01) when compared to the inpatient TSA group. There were no significant differences in rates of ED visits ( p  = 0.27), revisions ( p  = 0.06), and VAS scores (p  =  0.15 ) between inpatient and outpatient TSA groups. Conclusion TSAs performed in the outpatient setting had a lower rate of overall adverse events, medical complications, readmissions, and a higher ASES score compared to inpatient TSAs. However, since patients in the inpatient group had higher ASA and were older, our results support the safety of the outpatient TSA based on the current selection criteria.

Background Proximal humerus fractures (PHF) are common and painful injuries, with the majority resulting from falls from a standing height. As with other fragility fractures, its age-specific incidence is increasing. Surgical treatment with hemiarthroplasty (HA) and reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have been increasingly used for displaced 3- and 4-part fractures despite a lack of good quality evidence as to whether one type of arthroplasty is superior to the other, and whether surgery is better than non-surgical management. The PROFHER-2 trial has been designed as a pragmatic, multicentre randomised trial to compare the clinical and cost-effectiveness of RSA vs HA vs Non-Surgical (NS) treatment in patients with 3- and 4-part PHF. Methods Adults over 65 years of age presenting with acute radiographically confirmed 3- or 4-part fractures, with or without associated glenohumeral joint dislocation, who consent for trial participation will be recruited from around 40 National Health Service (NHS) Hospitals in the UK. Patients with polytrauma, open fractures, presence of axillary nerve palsy, pathological (other than osteoporotic) fractures, and those who are unable to adhere to trial procedures will be excluded. We will aim to recruit 380 participants (152 RSA, 152 HA, 76 NS) using 2:2:1 (HA:RSA:NS) randomisation for 3- or 4-part fractures without joint dislocation, and 1:1 (HA:RSA) randomisation for 3- or 4-part fracture dislocations. The primary outcome is the Oxford Shoulder Score at 24 months. Secondary outcomes include quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), pain, range of shoulder motion, fracture healing and implant position on X-rays, further procedures, and complications. Independent Trial Steering Committee and Data Monitoring Committee will oversee the trial conduct, including the reporting of adverse events and harms. Discussion The PROFHER-2 trial is designed to provide a robust answer to guide the treatment of patients aged 65 years or over who sustain 3- and 4-part proximal humeral fractures. The pragmatic design and recruitment from around 40 UK NHS hospitals will ensure immediate applicability and generalisability of the trial findings. The full trial results will be made available in a relevant open-access peer-reviewed journal. Trial registration ISRCTN76296703. Prospectively registered on 5th April 2018

Background Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is a widely used treatment for both traumatic and degenerative glenohumeral joint diseases. Despite its popularity, data on outcomes sorted according to indications have revealed inconsistent results. Furthermore, the clinical outcome is rarely analysed in a differentiated manner using several scores. This retrospective, single-center study aimed to investigate the impact of indications on the clinical outcomes of RTSA. Methods The Constant Score, EQ-5D-5L, DASH Score were sent by post to 263 patients who received a RTSA between February 2011 and March 2022. The follow-up period was 12-139 months. Patients were categorized into primary-fracture, secondary-intervention, and degenerative-disease groups based on the indications for RTSA. We have calculated the corresponding average scores for each group. Results Of the 263 patients included in the study, 136 completed the questionnaire. The mean follow-up duration was 48 months. All outcome measures were approximately normally distributed. The mean values were as follows. Constant Score: degenerative disease 58 ± 19, primary fracture 52 ± 18, secondary intervention 49 ± 18. DASH Score: degenerative disease 35 ± 20, primary fracture 40 ± 17, secondary intervention 42 ± 20. EQ-5D-5L Index: degenerative disease 0.72 ± 0.24, primary fracture 0.75 ± 0.20, secondary intervention 0.68 ± 0.39. Conclusions In this study, clinical outcomes after RTSA varied according to the underlying indication, with the best results observed in patients with degenerative diseases and the lowest in patients undergoing secondary interventions. Further studies with larger, multi-centre cohorts are needed to confirm these findings and to strengthen the evidence base before clinical recommendations can be made. Trial registration 593/21ek.

Background The effects of tranexamic acid (TXA) in the setting of shoulder arthroplasty are unclear. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of TXA in reducing the need for blood transfusions and blood loss in patients undergoing primary total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Methods We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies (RCS) that compared outcomes of patients who did and did not receive TXA during TSA or RTSA. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, and MEDLINE for relevant studies. We assessed the risk of bias of the included studies and calculated pooled risk estimates. The primary outcome was transfusion rate, and secondary outcomes were changes in hemoglobin, estimated total blood loss (ETBL), blood loss via drainage, operative time, hospital stay, overall complications, and thromboembolic events. Results We identified 3 RCTs and 3 RCS including 677 patients with 680 shoulders (343 TXA and 337 non-TXA). The random-effects model meta-analysis showed that TXA group had a lower transfusion rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.34, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.79), less change in hemoglobin (mean difference (MD) -0.64 g/dl, 95% CI -0.81 to − 0.46), and reduced ETBL (MD -249.24 ml, 95% CI -338.74 to − 159.74). In patients with RTSA, the TXA group had a lower transfusion rate (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.79), less ETBL (MD -249.15 ml, 95% CI -426.60 to − 71.70), less change in hemoglobin (MD − 0.64 g/dl, 95% CI -0.86 to − 0.42), and less blood loss via drainage (MD − 84.56 ml, 95% CI -145.72.14 to − 23.39) than non-TXA group. Conclusions The use of TXA in primary shoulder arthroplasty appears safe, and can reduce transfusion rate, changes in hemoglobin, and perioperative total blood loss, especially in patients with RTSA. Level of Evidence: Systematic Review and meta-analysis, III.

Background Massive degenerative rotator cuff tears (MRCTs) represent a persistent challenge in shoulder surgery. While arthroscopic rotator cuff repair (ARCR) remains a widely accepted treatment with good functional outcomes, it is associated with a risk of retear and progression to cuff tear arthropathy. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has emerged as a viable alternative, particularly in cases where the reparability of the cuff is uncertain, offering pain relief and functional improvement. However, the optimal treatment approach for repairable MRCT in patients aged 60 to 80 years remains debated. This trial aims to assess whether RSA provides non-inferior outcomes to ARCR in patients with degenerative MRCTs, with a particular focus on function, pain, and quality of life. Methods This is a prospective, randomized, controlled, non-inferiority trial. A total of 145 patients with symptomatic, repairable MRCT will be enrolled and randomized in a 1:1 ratio to undergo either ARCR or RSA. The primary outcome is the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score at 24 months postoperatively. Secondary outcomes include ASES at 6 weeks and 6 months; Visual Analog Scale (VAS) for pain; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE); Constant score; range of motion (ROM) in flexion, extension, and internal/external rotation; repair integrity (ultrasound for ARCR, radiographs for RSA); and complication rates. PROMs will be assessed at baseline, 1.5, 6, and 24 months. All adverse events and complications will be systematically recorded. Discussion This trial will provide robust comparative data to assess whether RSA is non-inferior to ARCR at two years postoperatively in terms of shoulder function and patient-reported outcomes in patients with repairable MRCT. The results aim to support evidence-based decision-making in clinical practice. Trial registration The protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee Board (CCER 2023–00111) in March 2023 and by ClinicalTrial.gov (NCT05807854).

Purpose of Review As reverse total shoulder arthroplasty indications have expanded and the incidence of its use has increased, developments in implant design have been a critical component of its success. The purpose of this review is to highlight the recent literature regarding the effect of implant design on reverse total shoulder arthroplasty biomechanics. Recent Findings Implant design for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty has evolved considerably from the modern design developed by Paul Grammont. The Grammont design had a medialized center of rotation and distalized humerus resulting from a 155° humeral neck shaft angle. These changes intended to decrease the forces on the glenoid component, thereby decreasing the risk for implant loosening and improving the deltoid moment arm. However, these features also led to scapular notching. The Grammont design has been modified over the last 20 years to increase the lateral offset of the glenosphere and decrease the prosthetic humeral neck shaft angle to 135°. These changes were made to optimize functional range of motion while minimizing scapular notching and improving active external rotation strength. Lastly, the introduction of preoperative planning and patient-specific instrumentation has improved surgeon ability to accurately place implants and optimize impingement-free range of motion. Summary Success and durability of the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty has been contingent upon changes in implant design, starting with the Grammont-style prosthesis. Current humeral and glenoid implant designs vary in parameters such as humeral and glenoid offset, humeral tray design, liner thickness, and neck-shaft angle. A better understanding of the biomechanical implications of these design parameters will allow us to optimize shoulder function and minimize implant-related complications after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Background The introduction of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) as a treatment option in complex proximal humeral fractures, has significantly extended the surgical armamentarium. The aim of this study was to investigate the mid-term outcome following fracture RSA in acute or sequelae, as well as salvage procedures. It was hypothesized that revision RSA (SRSA) leads to similar mid-term results as primary fracture treatment by RSA (PRSA). Methods This retrospective study describes the radiological and clinical mid-term outcomes in a standardized single-centre and Inlay design. Patients who underwent RSA in fracture care between 2008 and 2017 were included (minimum follow-up: 2 years, minimum age: 60 years). The assessment tools used for functional findings were range of motion (ROM), Visual Analogue Scale, absolute (CS) plus normative Constant Score, QuickDASH, and Subjective Shoulder Value. All adverse events as well as the radiological results and their clinical correlations were statistically analysed (using p < .05 and 95% confidence intervals). Results Following fracture RSA, 68 patients were included (mean age: 72.5 years, mean follow-up: 46 months). Forty-two underwent primary RSA (PRSA), and 26 underwent revision RSA (SRSA). Adverse advents were observed in 13% ( n = 9/68). No statistically significant results were found for the scores of the PRSA and SRSA groups, while the failed osteosynthesis SRSA subgroup obtained statistically significantly negative values for ROM subzones (flexion: p = .020, abduction: p = .020). Decreased instances of tubercle healing were observed for the in PRSA group relative to the SRSA group ( p = .006). The absence of bony healing of the tubercles was related to significant negative clinical and subjective outcomes (all scores: p < .05, external rotation: p = .019). Significant postoperative improvements were evaluated in the SRSA group (CS: 23 to 56 at mean, p = .001), the time from index surgery to operative revision revealed no associations in functional findings. Conclusions RSA is an effective option in severe shoulder fracture management with predictable results for salvage as well as first-line treatment. Promising mid-term functional results, reasonable implant survival rates, and high patient satisfaction can be achieved. Level of evidence Level III.