Top

International Orthopaedics

Published in:

01-01-2013 | Original Paper

Pain and function in eight hundred and fifty nine patients comparing shoulder hemiprostheses, resurfacing prostheses, reversed total and conventional total prostheses

Authors: Bjørg-Tilde S. Fevang, Stein H. L. Lygre, Glenn Bertelsen, Arne Skredderstuen, Leif I. Havelin, Ove Furnes

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 1/2013

Abstract

Purpose

Functional results of reversed total prostheses (RTP) have—to a very limited degree—been compared with those of other shoulder prosthesis types. The aim of our study was to compare results of four different types of shoulder prostheses in terms of function, pain, and quality of life (QoL).

Methods

Questionnaires were completed by 859 patients with shoulder prostheses registered in the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Patients with osteoarthritis (OA), rheumatoid arthritis (RA), or fracture sequela (FS) were included. Symptoms and function were assessed using the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS, scale 0–48), and the EuroQoL-5D (EQ-5D) was used to assess QoL.

Results

Best functional results were obtained using conventional total prostheses (TPs) and RTPs —mean OSS improvement 18 and 16 units, respectively, vs 11 with hemiprostheses (HPs). For patients with OA, TPs performed best; for those with RA and FS, RTPs performed best; and those with HPs had the worst results in all diagnostic groups. The greatest improvement in QoL was seen in patients with TPs and RTPs.

Conclusions

Conventional TPs provide the best improvement in pain, function and QoL in OA patients; RTPs are superior in patients with RA and FS.

Lo IK, Litchfield RB, Griffin S, Faber K, Patterson SD, Kirkley A (2005) Quality-of-life outcome following hemiarthroplasty or total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis. A prospective, randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(10):2178–2185PubMedCrossRef

Gartsman GM, Roddey TS, Hammerman SM (2000) Shoulder arthroplasty with or without resurfacing of the glenoid in patients who have osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82(1):26–34PubMed

Rahme H, Mattsson P, Wikblad L, Nowak J, Larsson S (2009) Stability of cemented in-line pegged glenoid compared with keeled glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91(8):1965–1972. doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00938 PubMedCrossRef

Kircher J, Wiedemann M, Magosch P, Lichtenberg S, Habermeyer P (2009) Improved accuracy of glenoid positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty with intraoperative navigation: a prospective-randomized clinical study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18(4):515–520. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2009.03.014 PubMedCrossRef

Boileau P, Avidor C, Krishnan SG, Walch G, Kempf JF, Mole D (2002) Cemented polyethylene vs uncemented metal-backed glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11(4):351–359. doi:10.1067/mse.2002.125807 PubMedCrossRef

Singh JA, Sperling J, Buchbinder R, McMaken K (2010) Surgery for shoulder osteoarthritis. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (10):CD008089. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008089.pub2

Farshad M, Gerber C (2010) Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty-from the most to the least common complication. Int Orthop 34(8):1075–1082. doi:10.1007/s00264-010-1125-2 PubMedCrossRef

Mizuno N, Denard PJ, Raiss P, Walch G (2012) The clinical and radiographical results of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with eccentric glenosphere. Int Orthop 36(8):1647–1653. doi:10.1007/s00264-012-1539-0 PubMedCrossRef

Murray DW, Frost SJ (1998) Pain in the assessment of total knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Br 80(3):426–431PubMedCrossRef

10.

Fevang BT, Lygre SH, Bertelsen G, Skredderstuen A, Havelin LI, Furnes O (2012) Good function after shoulder arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. doi:10.3109/17453674.2012.720118

11.

Dawson J, Fitzpatrick R, Carr A (1996) Questionnaire on the perceptions of patients about shoulder surgery. J Bone Joint Surg Br 78(4):593–600PubMed

12.

Wilson J, Baker P, Rangan A (2009) Is retrospective application of the Oxford Shoulder Score valid? J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18(4):577–580. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2009.02.024 PubMedCrossRef

13.

EuroQol–a new facility for the measurement of health-related quality of life. The EuroQol Group (1990). Health Policy 16(3):199–208

14.

Bryant D, Litchfield R, Sandow M, Gartsman GM, Guyatt G, Kirkley A (2005) A comparison of pain, strength, range of motion, and functional outcomes after hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87(9):1947–1956PubMedCrossRef

15.

Pfahler M, Jena F, Neyton L, Sirveaux F, Mole D (2006) Hemiarthroplasty vs total shoulder prosthesis: results of cemented glenoid components. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 15(2):154–163. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2005.07.007 PubMedCrossRef

16.

Radnay CS, Setter KJ, Chambers L, Levine WN, Bigliani LU, Ahmad CS (2007) Total shoulder replacement compared with humeral head replacement for the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16(4):396–402. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2006.10.017 PubMedCrossRef

17.

Edwards TB, Kadakia NR, Boulahia A, Kempf JF, Boileau P, Nemoz C, Walch G (2003) A comparison of hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: results of a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 12(3):207–213. doi:10.1016/mse.2003.S1058274602868045 PubMedCrossRef

18.

Christie A, Dagfinrud H, Engen Matre K, Flaatten HI, Ringen Osnes H, Hagen KB (2010) Surgical interventions for the rheumatoid shoulder. Cochrane Database Syst Rev (1):CD006188. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD006188.pub2

19.

Trail IA, Nuttall D (2002) The results of shoulder arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84(8):1121–1125PubMedCrossRef

20.

Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS (2007) Total shoulder arthroplasty vs hemiarthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis of the shoulder: results of 303 consecutive cases. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16(6):683–690. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2007.02.135 PubMedCrossRef

21.

Young AA, Smith MM, Bacle G, Moraga C, Walch G (2011) Early results of reverse shoulder arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93(20):1915–1923. doi:10.2106/JBJS.J.00300 PubMedCrossRef

22.

Ekelund A, Nyberg R (2011) Can reverse shoulder arthroplasty be used with few complications in rheumatoid arthritis? Clin Orthop Relat Res 469(9):2483–2488. doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1654-4 PubMedCrossRef

23.

Holcomb JO, Hebert DJ, Mighell MA, Dunning PE, Pupello DR, Pliner MD, Frankle MA (2010) Reverse shoulder arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 19(7):1076–1084. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2009.11.049 PubMedCrossRef

24.

John M, Pap G, Angst F, Flury MP, Lieske S, Schwyzer HK, Simmen BR (2010) Short-term results after reversed shoulder arthroplasty (Delta III) in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and irreparable rotator cuff tear. Int Orthop 34(1):71–77. doi:10.1007/s00264-009-0733-1 PubMedCrossRef

25.

Warner JJ, Shah A (2011) Shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of rotator cuff insufficiency. Instr Course Lect 60:113–121PubMed

26.

Aldinger PR, Raiss P, Rickert M, Loew M (2010) Complications in shoulder arthroplasty: an analysis of 485 cases. Int Orthop 34(4):517–524. doi:10.1007/s00264-009-0780-7 PubMedCrossRef

27.

Cil A, Veillette CJ, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Sperling JW, Schleck CD, Cofield RH (2010) Survivorship of the humeral component in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 19(1):143–150. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2009.04.011 PubMedCrossRef

28.

Fevang BT, Lie SA, Havelin LI, Skredderstuen A, Furnes O (2009) Risk factors for revision after shoulder arthroplasty: 1,825 shoulder arthroplasties from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register. Acta Orthop 80(1):83–91PubMedCrossRef

Title: Pain and function in eight hundred and fifty nine patients comparing shoulder hemiprostheses, resurfacing prostheses, reversed total and conventional total prostheses
Authors: Bjørg-Tilde S. Fevang
Stein H. L. Lygre
Glenn Bertelsen
Arne Skredderstuen
Leif I. Havelin
Ove Furnes
Publication date: 01-01-2013
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: International Orthopaedics / Issue 1/2013
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-012-1722-3

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Pain and function in eight hundred and fifty nine patients comparing shoulder hemiprostheses, resurfacing prostheses, reversed total and conventional total prostheses

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

Comment on Schepers: acute distal tibiofibular syndesmosis injury: a systematic review of suture-button versus syndesmotic screw repair

Biomechanical performance of different cable and wire cerclage configurations

Is there evidence for accelerated polyethylene wear in uncemented compared to cemented acetabular components? A systematic review of the literature

Cartilage repair of the knee with Hyalograft C:® Magnetic Resonance Imaging assessment of the glycosaminoglycan content at midterm

Enhanced trabecular micro-architecture of the femoral neck in hip osteoarthritis vs. healthy controls: a micro-computer tomography study in postmenopausal women

Comparison between normal and loose fragment chondrocytes in proliferation and redifferentiation potential