Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2026-1
A comparative analysis of a central metaphyseal humeral fixation stemless shoulder arthroplasty to an anatomic shoulder arthroplasty in a national registry cohort
This study aimed to determine the revision outcome between a centrally fixed stemless anatomic design and other total anatomic shoulder replacements using data from a large national arthroplasty registry.
Methods
The study period was from December 2011 to December 2022 and included three cohorts; primary Affinis stemless anatomic (AFS), all other primary total stemless anatomic (sTSA) and primary total stemmed anatomic shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). The endpoint was all-cause revision using cumulative percent revision (CPR). Hazard ratio (HR) models were adjusted for age and gender.
Results
There were 2489 primary AFS, 1593 primary sTSA and 11,023 primary aTSA. There was no difference in revision rates between the AFS and the sTSA group. The aTSA group had a significantly higher rate of revision compared to both AFS (HR = 1.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.30–2.05, p < 0.001) and sTSA (HR = 1.61, 95% CI 1.21–2.15, p = 0.001). However, sub-analyses stratifying for highly crosslinked polyethylene (XLPE) showed no differences between the groups.
Discussion
The rates of revision between the AFS design and other stemless prostheses were similar. Stemless had lower revision rates to aTSA. When only considering XLPE cemented glenoids, there was no significant difference in revision rates.
HuguetDDeClercqGRioB, et al.Results of a new stemless shoulder prosthesis: radiologic proof of maintained fixation and stability after a minimum of three years’ follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2010; 19: 847–852.
2.
BerthAPapG. Stemless shoulder prosthesis versus conventional anatomic shoulder prosthesis in patients with osteoarthritis: a comparison of the functional outcome after a minimum of two years follow-up. J Orthop Traumatol2013; 14: 31–37.
3.
BrolinTJCoxRMAbboudJA, et al.Stemless shoulder arthroplasty: review of early clinical and radiographic results. JBJS Rev2017; 5: e3.
4.
HawiNTauberMMessinaMJ, et al.Anatomic stemless shoulder arthroplasty and related outcomes: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2016; 17: 376–376.
5.
KarssiensTJGillJRSunil KumarKH, et al.Clinical results and survivorship of the Mathys Affinis short, short stem total shoulder prosthesis. Bone Jt Open2021; 2: 58–65.
6.
BeckSBeckVWegnerA, et al.Long-term survivorship of stemless anatomical shoulder replacement. Int Orthop2018; 42: 1327–1330.
7.
MariottiUMottaPStucchiA, et al.Stemmed versus stemless total shoulder arthroplasty: a preliminary report and short-term results. Musculoskelet Surg2014; 98: 195–200.
8.
RasmussenJVHarjulaJArverudED, et al.The short-term survival of total stemless shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis is comparable to that of total stemmed shoulder arthroplasty: a Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2019; 28: 1578–1586.
9.
ChurchillRSChuinardCWiaterJM, et al.Clinical and radiographic outcomes of the Simpliciti canal-sparing shoulder arthroplasty system: a prospective two-year multicenter study. J Bone Joint Surg Am2016; 98: 552–560.
10.
MaierMWLauerSKlotzMC, et al.Are there differences between stemless and conventional stemmed shoulder prostheses in the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis?BMC Musculoskelet Disord2015; 16: 75.
11.
AjibadeDAYinCXHamidHS, et al.Stemless reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2022; 31: 1083–1095.
12.
LiuEYKordDHornerNS, et al.Stemless anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2020; 29: 1928–1937.
13.
RazfarNReevesJMLangohrDG, et al.Comparison of proximal humeral bone stresses between stemless, short stem, and standard stem length: a finite element analysis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2016; 25: 1076–1083.
14.
DunSWarlopDSwopeS. Biomechanical comparison of initial stability of three humeral components in total shoulder arthroplasty. Orthop Proc2014; 96-B: 55.
15.
PageRSAlder-PriceACRainbirdS, et al.Reduced revision rates in total shoulder arthroplasty with crosslinked polyethylene: results from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. Clin Orthop Relat Res2022; 480: 1940–1949.
16.
Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR). Hip, knee and shoulder arthroplasty: 2021 Annual Report. https://aoanjrr.sahmri.com/annual-reports-2021 (2021, accessed 3 March 2022).
17.
MärtensNHeinzeMAwiszusF, et al.Long-term survival and failure analysis of anatomical stemmed and stemless shoulder arthroplasties. Bone Joint J2021; 103-B: 1292–1300.
18.
SandowMPageRHattonA, et al.Total shoulder replacement stems in osteoarthritis-short, long, or reverse? An analysis of the impact of crosslinked polyethylene. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2022; 31: 2249–2255.
19.
GillDRJCorfieldSHarriesD, et al.A comparison of revision rates for stemmed and stemless primary anatomic shoulder arthroplasty with all-polyethylene glenoid components: analysis from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2024; 33: 281–290.
20.
Upfill-BrownASatarianoNFeeleyB. Stemless shoulder arthroplasty: review of short and medium-term results. JSES Open Access2019; 3: 154–161.
21.
BohsaliKIBoisAJWirthMA. Complications of shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am2017; 99: 256–269.
22.
SmithPNGillDRMcAuliffeMJ, et al.Hip, Knee & Shoulder Arthroplasty: 2023 Annual Report. Adelaide. South Australia: Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR), 2023.
23.
HarrymanDTSidlesJAHarrisSL, et al.The effect of articular conformity and the size of the humeral head component on laxity and motion after glenohumeral arthroplasty. A study in cadavera. J Bone Joint Surg Am1995; 77: 555–563.
24.
VæselMTOlsenBSSøjbjergJO, et al.Humeral head size in shoulder arthroplasty: a kinematic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg1997; 6: 549–555.
25.
CuomoFChecrounA. Avoiding pitfalls and complications in total shoulder arthroplasty. Orthop Clin North Am1998; 29: 507–518.
26.
WilliamsGRJrWongKLPepeMD, et al.The effect of articular malposition after total shoulder arthroplasty on glenohumeral translations, range of motion, and subacromial impingement. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2001; 10: 399–409.
27.
KadumBWahlströmPKhoschnauS, et al.Association of lateral humeral offset with functional outcome and geometric restoration in stemless total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2016; 25: e285–e294.
28.
JohnsonCCSodhaSGarzon-MuvdiJ, et al.Does preoperative American society of anesthesiologists score relate to complications after total shoulder arthroplasty?Clin Orthop Relat Res2014; 472: 1589–1596.
29.
HeathELAckermanILorimerM, et al.National implementation of an electronic patient-reported outcome measures program for joint replacement surgery: pilot study. JMIR Form Res2022; 6: e30245.
