Outcomes after revision surgery for glenoid baseplate failure in reverse shoulder arthroplasty

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was to report clinical outcomes in patients who underwent revision surgery for glenoid baseplate failure after index reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA).

Methods

A retrospective review was performed to identify patients from 2010 to 2020 at a single institution who sustained glenoid baseplate failure after RSA and underwent revision surgery. Exclusion criteria included periprosthetic joint infection or lack of minimum 1 year clinical and radiographic follow-up. Included patients were contacted for clinical outcomes (American Shoulder Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE) and Patient Satisfaction scores).

Results

A total of 24 patients were identified, and 22 out of 24 (92%) patients were available for clinical follow-up at a mean period of 3.4 years after final revision surgery. The mean age was 70 years, and 15 out of 22 (68%) patients were female. A total of 17 patients were revised to RSA, and five patients were revised to hemiarthroplasty. For the 22 included patients, the mean follow-up ASES score was 64.6, VAS pain was 2.4 and SANE was 58%, which were all significantly improved versus pre-revision. In total, 64% of patients were satisfied or completely satisfied.

Discussion

Revision surgery after glenoid baseplate failure in RSA yields unpredictable clinical outcomes. Revision to RSA or hemiarthroplasty both resulted in modest functional results with persistent mild pain.

Keywords

Glenoid baseplate failure reverse shoulder arthroplasty revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty hemiarthroplasty glenoid baseplate

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Somerson

Hsu

Neradilek

, et al. Analysis of 4063 complications of shoulder arthroplasty reported to the US Food and Drug Administration from 2012 to 2016. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2018; 27: 1978–1986.

Cheung

Willis

Walker

, et al. Complications in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 2011; 19: 439–449.

Stephens

Simon

Clark

, et al. Revision for a failed reverse: a 12-year review of a lateralized implant. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2016; 25: e115–e124.

Laver

Garrigues

. Avoiding superior tilt in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a review of the literature and technical recommendations. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2014; 23: 1582–1590.

Gutiérrez

Walker

Willis

, et al. Effects of tilt and glenosphere eccentricity on baseplate/bone interface forces in a computational model, validated by a mechanical model, of reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011; 20: 732–739.

Bitzer

Rojas

Patten

, et al. Incidence and risk factors for aseptic baseplate loosening of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2018; 27: 2145–2152.

Bois

Knight

Alhojailan

, et al. Clinical outcomes and complications of reverse shoulder arthroplasty used for failed prior shoulder surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JSES Int 2020; 4: 156–168.

Kang

Dubiel

Cofield

, et al. Primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty using contemporary implants is associated with very low reoperation rates. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2019; 28: S175–S180.

Rojas

Choi

Joseph

, et al. Aseptic glenoid baseplate loosening after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JBJS Rev 2019; 7: e7.

10.

Shah

Gaal

Roche

, et al. The modern reverse shoulder arthroplasty and an updated systematic review for each complication: part I. JSES Int 2020; 4: 929–943.

11.

Holcomb

Cuff

Petersen

, et al. Revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty for glenoid baseplate failure after primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2009; 18: 717–723.

12.

Lädermann

Schwitzguebel

Edwards

, et al. Glenoid loosening and migration in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Bone Joint J 2019; 101-B: 461–469.

13.

Black

Roberts

Siegel

, et al.

Failure after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: what is the success of component revision?

J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2015; 24: 1908–1914.

14.

Cohn

Kunze

Polce

, et al. Establishing clinically significant outcome thresholds for the single assessment numeric evaluation 2 years following total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2021; 30: e137–e146.

15.

Tashjian

Hung

Keener

, et al. Determining the minimal clinically important difference for the American shoulder and elbow surgeons score, simple shoulder test, and visual analog scale (VAS) measuring pain after shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2017; 26: 144–148.

16.

Thakar

Chan

, et al. Early radiographic failure of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with structural bone graft for glenoid bone loss. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2020; 29: 550–560.

17.

Glanzmann

Kolling

Schwyzer

, et al. Conversion to hemiarthroplasty as a salvage procedure for failed reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2016; 25: 1795–1802.

18.

Kriechling

Andronic

Wieser

. Hemiarthroplasty as a salvage treatment for failed reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. JSES Int 2021; 5: 1055.