Long-Term Follow-up of Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty for Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis

Center for Shoulder, Elbow and Sports Medicine, Columbia University Medical Center, 622 West 168th Street, PH-1117, New York, NY 10032. E-mail address for W.N. Levine: .
The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (Impact Factor: 5.28). 11/2012; 94(22):e1641-7. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.K.00603
Source: PubMed


There is major controversy surrounding the use of hemiarthroplasty as compared with total shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis, and long-term clinical outcomes of hemiarthroplasty are lacking.
Of a cohort of thirty patients (thirty-one shoulders) who were treated with hemiarthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis and followed longitudinally at our institution, twenty-five were available for long-term follow-up; five died, and one refused to participate. Three of the five patients who died had revision arthroplasty before death, and the data from those three were therefore included in the final follow-up (final follow-up data therefore included twenty-seven patients and twenty-eight shoulders). Follow-up through phone conversations and postal mail surveys included the following: Short Form-36, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) shoulder outcome score, EuroQol, Simple Shoulder Test, modified Neer Score, and a unique, validated self-administered range-of-motion questionnaire. Correlations between clinical outcome and age, type of glenoid wear, and cause of osteoarthritis were determined.
The average follow-up was 17.2 years (range, thirteen to twenty-one years). There were eight revisions (three of fifteen shoulders with concentric glenoids, and five of sixteen shoulders with eccentric glenoids). For those shoulders not revised, the average ASES score was 70.54 (range, 36.67 to 91.67). Overall, active shoulder forward elevation and external rotation with the arm at 90° of abduction increased from 104° preoperatively to 141.8° (range, 45° to 180°) and 20.7° to 61.0° (range, 30° to 90°), respectively (p < 0.05), at the time of final follow-up. Of those who required revision arthroplasty, the average patient age at the time of the index procedure was 51.0 years (range, twenty-six to eighty-one years), while those not requiring revision averaged 57.1 years (range, twenty-seven to sixty-three years). The overall Neer satisfaction rating was 25%. The average Neer score and Neer rating for unrevised cases were significantly higher for concentric glenoid wear compared with eccentric glenoid wear (p = 0.015 and p = 0.001, respectively). Patients who had concentric glenoid wear had higher EuroQol scores (p = 0.020). The average Neer scores were 65.29 (range, forty-seven to seventy-eight) for primary osteoarthritis and 54.46 (range, forty to seventy-seven) for secondary osteoarthritis (p = 0.036).
Only 25% of patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis treated with shoulder hemiarthroplasty are satisfied with their outcome at an average of seventeen years after the operation. Patients with concentric glenoid wear and primary osteoarthritis have better outcomes than those with eccentric glenoid wear and secondary osteoarthritis do, but patients in both groups experienced deterioration of results over time.
Therapeutic Level IV. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

1 Follower
7 Reads
  • Source
    • "The condition of the glenoid is critical in determining whether humeral head replacement alone will be successful. In particular, patients with concentric glenoid wear and primary OA seems to have better outcomes than those with eccentric glenoid wear and secondary OA [39]. The results of hemiarthroplasty in young individuals appear to deteriorate with time, and there remains a high rate of patient dissatisfaction and revision surgery [40, 41]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Osteoarthritis (OA) is the most frequent cause of disability in the USA, affecting up to 32.8% of patients over the age of sixty. Treatment of shoulder OA is often controversial and includes both nonoperative and surgical modalities. Nonoperative modalities should be utilized before operative treatment is considered, particularly for patients with mild-to-moderate OA or when pain and functional limitations are modest despite more advanced radiographic changes. If conservative options fail, surgical treatment should be considered. Although different surgical procedures are available, as in other joints affected by severe OA, the most effective treatment is joint arthroplasty. The aim of this work is to give an overview of the currently available treatments of shoulder OA.
    01/2013; 2013:370231. DOI:10.1155/2013/370231
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite the overwhelming clinical success of shoulder arthroplasty, several situations may arise that necessitate revision arthroplasty. This often requires removal of the humeral component. Extraction of a humeral prosthesis is a technically demanding procedure, which requires an understanding of the indications for humeral component explantation, careful preoperative planning, knowledge of the humeral component to be removed, a grasp of several different methods of stem removal, and the tools required. Cement extraction often poses substantial technical challenges and requires further specialized instruments. Surgeons should be prepared to manage specific complications that may arise such as canal perforation and humerus fracture.
    Seminars in Arthroplasty 03/2013; 24(1):33–38. DOI:10.1053/j.sart.2013.04.007
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Glenoid bone deficiency and eccentric posterior wear are difficult problems faced by shoulder arthroplasty surgeons. Numerous options and techniques exist for addressing these issues. Hemiarthroplasty with concentric glenoid reaming may be a viable alternative in motivated patients in whom glenoid component failure is a concern. Total shoulder arthroplasty has been shown to provide durable pain relief and excellent function in patients, and numerous methods and techniques can assist in addressing bone loss and eccentric wear. However, the ideal amount of version correction in cases of severe retroversion has not yet been established. Asymmetric reaming is a commonly used technique to address glenoid version, but correction of severe retroversion may compromise bone stock and component fixation. Bone grafting is a technically demanding alternative for uncontained defects and has mixed clinical results. Specialized glenoid implants with posterior augmentation have been created to assist the surgeon in correcting glenoid version without compromising bone stock, but clinical data on these implants are still pending. Custom implants or instruments based on each patient's unique glenoid anatomy may hold promise. In elderly, sedentary patients in whom bone stock and soft-tissue balance are concerns, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty may be less technically demanding while still providing satisfactory pain relief and functional improvements.
    Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery / American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons ... [et al.] 06/2013; 22(9). DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2013.04.014 · 2.29 Impact Factor
Show more