Skip to main content
Top
Published in: MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY 3/2018

01-12-2018 | Original Article

The experience of the RIPO, a shoulder prosthesis registry with 6-year follow-up

Authors: G. Porcellini, A. Combi, G. Merolla, B. Bordini, S. Stea, G. Zanoli, P. Paladini

Published in: MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY | Issue 3/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Implant registries have proved valuable in assessing the outcomes of arthroplasty procedures. Moreover, by identifying lesser quality implants they have indirectly improved the quality of care. The registry of prosthetic shoulder implants was established in 2008.

Methods

It records information on all types of primary and revision arthroplasty procedures involving the glenohumeral joint, including reverse and total arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, resurfacing, removal, and any other surgical procedures that are required to manage these patients. The collected data include patient demographics, weight, height, operated side, cuff status, and diagnosis/reason for revision surgery, information on previous surgical procedures involving either shoulder, comorbidities, antibiotic and thromboembolic prophylaxis, blood transfusions, surgical approach, cuff repair procedures performed during arthroplasty, bone grafts, drains, and perioperative complications, and data about the prosthetic components implanted, including the fixation method.

Results

Procedures were performed on 3754 shoulders. They included 2226 RSA, 320 TSA, 730 HA, 233 resurfacing procedures, 245 revisions, and 77 “other” procedures. The survival curves of the implants are greater than 90%, and no differences were found among prosthesis from different manufacturers. The diagnosis that prompted to arthroplasty was: osteoarthritis in 60.9% of cases and fractures, bone necrosis, sequelae of fracture and rotator cuff tear arthropathy for the rest of implants.

Discussion and conclusion

This study describes the epidemiological data and mid-term implant outcomes of the shoulder arthroplasty procedures performed in our region, from 2008 to 2014, and compares them with published data from national registries of similar size.

Level of evidence

III.
Literature
7.
go back to reference Furnes O, Paxton E, Cafri G, Graves S, Bordini B, Comfort T et al (2014) Distributed analysis of hip implants using six national and regional registries: comparing metal-on-metal with metal-on-highly cross-linked polyethylene bearings in cementless total hip arthroplasty in young patients. J Bone Jt Surg 96(Suppl 1):25–33. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00459 CrossRef Furnes O, Paxton E, Cafri G, Graves S, Bordini B, Comfort T et al (2014) Distributed analysis of hip implants using six national and regional registries: comparing metal-on-metal with metal-on-highly cross-linked polyethylene bearings in cementless total hip arthroplasty in young patients. J Bone Jt Surg 96(Suppl 1):25–33. https://​doi.​org/​10.​2106/​JBJS.​N.​00459 CrossRef
9.
go back to reference Luzi I (2015) Interventi di artroprotesi: analisi dati SDO. In: Torre M (ed) Secondo Report RIAP. Il pensiero scientifico editore, Roma, pp 49–94 Luzi I (2015) Interventi di artroprotesi: analisi dati SDO. In: Torre M (ed) Secondo Report RIAP. Il pensiero scientifico editore, Roma, pp 49–94
10.
go back to reference National Joint Registry (2014) 12th Annual Report. 12th. Annu Rep 2014(12):81–88 National Joint Registry (2014) 12th Annual Report. 12th. Annu Rep 2014(12):81–88
15.
go back to reference Rothwell A, Larmer P, Hobbs T, Rothwell A (2014) The New Zealand Joint Registry Annual Report Editorial Committee. NZJR Rothwell A, Larmer P, Hobbs T, Rothwell A (2014) The New Zealand Joint Registry Annual Report Editorial Committee. NZJR
17.
go back to reference Torre M, Bellino S, Luzi I, Ceccarelli S, Salvatori G, Balducci MT, et al (2016) Progetto Registro Italiano ArtroProtesi. Terzo Report. Controllo e qualità dei dati. Roma: Il Pensiero Scientifico Editore Torre M, Bellino S, Luzi I, Ceccarelli S, Salvatori G, Balducci MT, et al (2016) Progetto Registro Italiano ArtroProtesi. Terzo Report. Controllo e qualità dei dati. Roma: Il Pensiero Scientifico Editore
18.
go back to reference Torre M, Luzi I, Carrani E, Leone L, Romanini E, Zanoli G (2014) Progetto Registro Italiano ArtroProtesi. Idea, sviluppo e avvio. Primo Report, Pensiero Scientifico Editore, Roma Torre M, Luzi I, Carrani E, Leone L, Romanini E, Zanoli G (2014) Progetto Registro Italiano ArtroProtesi. Idea, sviluppo e avvio. Primo Report, Pensiero Scientifico Editore, Roma
Metadata
Title
The experience of the RIPO, a shoulder prosthesis registry with 6-year follow-up
Authors
G. Porcellini
A. Combi
G. Merolla
B. Bordini
S. Stea
G. Zanoli
P. Paladini
Publication date
01-12-2018
Publisher
Springer Milan
Published in
MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY / Issue 3/2018
Print ISSN: 2035-5106
Electronic ISSN: 2035-5114
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12306-017-0529-1

Other articles of this Issue 3/2018

MUSCULOSKELETAL SURGERY 3/2018 Go to the issue