Racial and Gender Shoulder Arthroplasty Utilization Disparities of High- and Low-Volume Centers in New York State

Introduction The literature has consistently demonstrated utilization disparities in joint replacement procedures, though no studies have evaluated disparities in total shoulder arthroplasty with regard to operative volume. Methods We queried the New York (NY) Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS) database for 32 410 total shoulder arthroplasties performed between 2009 and 2017. Patients were identified using Clinical Classifications Software code 154 for Non-Hip/Knee Arthroplasty and All Patient Refined-Diagnosis Related Group code 322 for Shoulder. Racial groups included Hispanic, non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic black, and Other. High-volume centers were facilities that performed 2 standard deviations above the mean annual procedures. Utilization rates were calculated by dividing total shoulder arthroplasties per group by the 2010 NY Census population of that group. The Fisher exact test was used to determine significance. Results Total shoulder arthroplasty utilization increased from 43/100 000 to 73/100 000, two-thirds of which was driven by an increase in white resident utilization. More White residents per 100 000 underwent shoulder arthroplasty than Black, Hispanic, and Other residents per 100 000 residents of their respective race. White residents were 90% more likely than Hispanic residents to undergo total shoulder arthroplasty at high-volume centers ( P = .04). There were no differences in utilization rate regarding operative volume comparing Black or Other residents to White residents. More females underwent total shoulder arthroplasty than males, though there was no difference in utilization rate regarding operative volume. Conclusion Though total shoulder arthroplasty utilization nearly doubled, disparities persisted across gender and minority groups particularly in Hispanic utilization as White residents were 90% more likely than Hispanic residents to undergo shoulder arthroplasty at high-volume centers.

Anatomic versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a mid-term follow-up comparison

Background Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty improves pain and function with a reported reoperation rate of approximately 1% per year. With improved glenoid fixation, reverse shoulder arthroplasty implants may outperform anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. We evaluate the functional outcomes and reoperation rate of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty at a minimum eight-year follow-up or revision. Methods Between 2005 and 2010, 187 shoulders (137 anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty, 50 reverse shoulder arthroplasty) were retrospectively reviewed at a mean of 8.8 years. The mean age at surgery was 67 years. Females were more commonly treated with reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Both groups had similar body mass index and comorbidities. Outcome measures evaluated included abduction, forward elevation, external rotation, internal rotation, Simple Shoulder Test, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Score, University of California Los Angeles Shoulder score, and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index. Results At follow-up, anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty demonstrated greater overhead range of motion and external rotation. All patient-reported outcomes remained similar between groups. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty patients were more likely to rate shoulders as much better or better after surgery (90% versus 67%, p = 0.004). Complications were observed in 24% of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties and 8% of reverse shoulder arthroplasties (p = 0.02). Reoperation was more common in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties (23% versus 4%, p = 0.003). Discussion At mid-to-long-term follow-up, reverse shoulder arthroplasties demonstrated significantly fewer complications and reoperations than anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties. Despite similar patient-reported outcomes, reverse shoulder arthroplasty patients were more likely to be satisfied with their shoulder.

Reassessing the minimum two-year follow-up standard after total shoulder arthroplasty—Is one year sufficient?

Background US Food and Drug Administration Investigation Device Exemption studies and academic journals emphasize the importance of two-year follow-up data in reporting outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty, but there is limited data evaluating appropriate follow-up length. We aim to evaluate change in postoperative outcomes and complications between one and two years following anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasties. Methods We retrospectively identified 250 patients who underwent anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasties between 2013 and 2016 from a single surgeon arthroplasty registry. Patients without both one- and two-year follow-up data were excluded. We compared American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Visual Analog Scale for pain, and goniometer-measured range of motion. Results Patient-reported outcome measurements ( p > 0.05) did not change between one and two years postoperatively following both reverse ( n = 146) and anatomic ( n = 104) total shoulder arthroplasties. Range of motion increased slightly ( p < 0.05), but this change was not clinically relevant. There were no additional complications. Discussion Minimum two-year clinical follow-up may not be necessary for future shoulder arthroplasty Investigation Device Exemption and other peer-reviewed investigations. Patient-reported outcomes (ASES and pain score) and range of motion plateau at one year postoperatively without additional complications. One-year follow-up is an acceptable minimum follow-up length. Level of evidence Level III—retrospective analysis.

Glenoid bone grafting in primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review

Background Primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty can be challenging in patients with complex glenoid wear patterns and bone loss. Severe retroversion (>15°) or significant bone loss may require bone grafting. This review summarizes the rate of revision and long-term outcomes of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with bone graft. Methods A systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, PubMed, and CENTRAL databases was conducted from the date of inception to 23 October 2018. Two reviewers independently screened articles for eligibility and extracted data for analysis. The primary outcome was rate of revision. The secondary outcomes were rate of component loosening, functional outcome, and range of motion. Results Of the 1056 articles identified in the search, 26 underwent full-text screening and 7 articles were included in the analysis. All procedures were one-stage anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties. The rate of revision was 5.4% with component loosening and infection listed as indications over a weighted mean follow-up period of 6.3 years. Complications occurred in 12.6% of patients. Conclusion Glenoid bone grafting in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty results in comparable revision rates and improvement in pain compared to augmented glenoid components and reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Due to the low quality of evidence, further prospective studies should be conducted. Level of evidence IV

Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Using a Self-Pressurizing Pegged Bone-Preserving Cemented Glenoid Component: A 2- to 5-Year Follow-up Study

Background: High rates of radiographic loosening have been reported with various glenoid designs. Many available designs sacrifice most of the bone at the central portion of the glenoid vault, creating large areas of deficiency when revision becomes necessary. The purpose of this study was to report the 2- to 5-year outcome of shoulder arthroplasty using a bone-preserving all-polyethylene glenoid components with self-pressurizing pegs. Methods: Between August 2011 and December 2014, 202 consecutive anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties (TSAs) were performed by a single surgeon with implantation of a self-pressurizing cemented pegged glenoid component in 190 patients (12 patients had both shoulders replaced). Patients were followed up prospectively and evaluated for pain, motion, strength, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores, and radiographic changes. The mean follow-up time was 2.7 (2–5) years. Results: TSA improved pain and function reliably. At the most recent follow-up, 94% of the shoulders had no or mild pain. Motion included 154 ± 25° of elevation, 68 ± 18° of external rotation, and median internal rotation to T10 (range, iliac crest to T4). The most recent average ASES score was 82 ± 15 points. Early postoperative radiographs showed no radiolucent lines. No humeral or glenoid component was considered radiographically loose at the most recent follow-up. Complications requiring reoperation included subscapularis insufficiency (4), posterior instability (2), deep infection (1), stiffness (1), and a painful loose body (1). No components were revised for loosening. Conclusions: Anatomic TSA using a cemented bone-preserving all-polyethylene pegged self-pressurizing glenoid component provided satisfactory clinical outcomes and survival at 2 to 5 years.