Emilie V. Cheung

Complications in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Abstract Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty was initially used to manage complex shoulder problems. Indications have been expanded to include rotator cuff arthropathy, massive rotator cuff tear, failed shoulder arthroplasty, and fracture sequelae. Increased use of primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty has led to reports of associated problems unique to the procedure. The most common complications include neurologic injury, periprosthetic fracture, hematoma, infection, scapular notching, dislocation, mechanical baseplate failure, and acromial fracture. Little information has been published regarding best practices for managing these complications.

Strategies in Biologic Augmentation of Rotator Cuff Repair A Review

BackgroundDegenerative rotator cuff tears are increasing with the aging population, and healing is not uniform after surgery. Rotator cuffs may show improved healing when biologic factors are added during surgery.Questions/purposesWe asked: (1) What cellular processes are involved in normal bone-to-tendon healing? (2) What approaches are being developed in tendon augmentation? (3) What approaches are being developed with the addition of growth factors?MethodsWe reviewed research in relating to biologic augmentation and cellular processes involved in rotator cuff repair, focusing on animal models of rotator cuff repair and nonrandomized human trials.ResultsRegular bone-to-tendon healing forms a fibrous junction between tendon and bone that is distinct from the original bone-to-tendon junction. Tendon augmentation with cellular components serves as scaffolding for fibroblastic cells and a possible source of growth factors and fibroblastic cells. Extracellular matrices provide a scaffold for incoming fibroblastic cells, although current research does not conclusively confirm which if any of these scaffolds enhance repair owing in part to intermanufacturer variations and the limited human research. Growth factors and platelet-rich-plasma are established in other fields of research and may enhance repair but have not been rigorously tested.ConclusionsThere is potential application of biologic augmentation to improve healing after rotator cuff repair. However, research in this field is still inconclusive and has not been sufficiently demonstrated to merit regular clinical use. Future human trials can elucidate the use of biologic augmentation in rotator cuff repairs.

Spondylolysis and Spondylolisthesis in Children and Adolescents: I. Diagnosis, Natural History, and Nonsurgical Management

Spondylolysis and spondylolisthesis are often diagnosed in children presenting with low back pain. Spondylolysis refers to a defect of the vertebral pars interarticularis. Spondylolisthesis is the forward translation of one vertebral segment over the one beneath it. Isthmic spondylolysis, isthmic spondylolisthesis, and stress reactions involving the pars interarticularis are the most common forms seen in children. Typical presentation is characterized by a history of activity-related low back pain and the presence of painful spinal mobility and hamstring tightness without radiculopathy. Plain radiography, computed tomography, and single-photon emission computed tomography are useful for establishing the diagnosis. Symptomatic stress reactions of the pars interarticularis or adjacent vertebral structures are best treated with immobilization of the spine and activity restriction. Spondylolysis often responds to brief periods of activity restriction, immobilization, and physiotherapy. Low-grade spondylolisthesis (< or =50% translation) is treated similarly. The less common dysplastic spondylolisthesis with intact posterior elements requires greater caution. Symptomatic high-grade spondylolisthesis (>50% translation) responds much less reliably to nonsurgical treatment. The growing child may need to be followed clinically and radiographically through skeletal maturity. When pain persists despite nonsurgical interventions, when progressive vertebral displacement increases, or in the presence of progressive neurologic deficits, surgical intervention is appropriate.

Revision shoulder arthroplasty for glenoid component loosening

Although glenoid component loosening has been recognized as a common reason for failure after total shoulder arthroplasty, there are few studies on the outcome of revision surgery for this problem. The purpose of this study is to determine the outcome of patients who underwent revision for glenoid component loosening. Between 1976 and 2002, 68 shoulders in 66 patients underwent revision for glenoid loosening at our institution. Group I consisted of 33 shoulders that underwent placement of a new glenoid component, and group II consisted of 35 shoulders that had removal and bone grafting without glenoid reimplantation. Follow-up averaged 3.8 years for group I and 6.2 years for group II. There was significant overall improvement in pain from preoperatively to postoperatively in both groups (P = .0001). Pain relief occurred in 23 of 33 shoulders in group I and in 24 of 35 in group II (P = .9203). Regarding range of motion, there was no significant change from preoperatively to postoperatively (P > .05), except for active elevation in group I (P = .0387). Patient satisfaction occurred in 24 in group I and in 19 in group II (P = .1150). The rate of survival free of reoperation at 5 years was 91% (95% confidence interval, 81% to 100%) in group I and 78% (95% confidence interval, 63% to 96%) in group II (P = .3019). When the Neer result rating was applied, 9 shoulders in group I and 3 in group II had an excellent or satisfactory result (P = .0432). Twenty shoulders had late positive cultures, most commonly, Propionibacterium acnes. Glenoid revision surgery will often lead to pain relief and patient satisfaction. There is a slight clinical benefit to reimplanting a glenoid component whenever structurally possible. Positive cultures in revision surgery are common, with uncertain clinical significance.

Primary Osteoarthritis of the Elbow: Current Treatment Options

Abstract In the elbow, as in other joints, primary osteoarthritis is characterized by pain, stiffness, mechanical symptoms, and weakness. But primary osteoarthritis of the elbow is unique in that there is relative preservation of articular cartilage and maintenance of joint space, with hypertrophic osteophyte formation and capsular contracture. Medical treatment and physical therapy may be initiated in the early stages of the disease process. Surgical treatment options include arthroscopic osteocapsular débridement, open ulnohumeral arthroplasty, distraction interposition arthroplasty, and total elbow arthroplasty. The potential for instability and loosening following total elbow arthroplasty in the setting of primary osteoarthritis limits the clinical application of this procedure. This patient population is generally younger than that recommended for total elbow arthroplasty, and their higher functional demands have limited the long‐term success of this treatment option. The improvement in arthroscopic débridement techniques is perhaps the greatest advancement in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the elbow in recent years.

Reimplantation of a total elbow prosthesis following resection arthroplasty for infection.

BACKGROUND The best approach for treatment of infection after total elbow arthroplasty is not clearly defined. The purpose of this study was to report our experience with reimplantation of a total elbow prosthesis following a prior resection arthroplasty to treat infection. METHODS Between 1976 and 2003 at our institution, twenty-nine patients were treated with reimplantation of a total elbow prosthesis after a prior resection arthroplasty following a deep periprosthetic infection. Eleven of the twenty-nine patients had had at least one procedure performed on the elbow prior to the primary arthroplasty. The mean time interval between the resection arthroplasty and the reimplantation was 72.5 weeks. Patients were followed for an average of 7.4 years after the reimplantation. All patients were assessed clinically, and their medical records were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS The mean total Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS) was 35.5 points (range, 15 to 60 points) before the reimplantation and 66.3 points (range, 20 to 100 points) postoperatively (p < 0.001). The most common infecting organism was Staphylococcus epidermidis, which was present in thirteen (45%) of the twenty-nine elbows, followed by methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus, which was present in seven (24%). The infection was not eradicated in eight elbows (28%). CONCLUSIONS Reimplantation of a total elbow prosthesis after a prior resection arthroplasty is a reasonable option for the treatment of infection. Improvement in function can be expected in most patients. However, the chance of the infection recurring and requiring additional revision surgery is high.

Treatment of periprosthetic humerus fractures associated with shoulder arthroplasty.

Abstract The incidence of periprosthetic humerus fracture associated with shoulder arthroplasty is approximately 0.6% to 3%. Fractures of the humerus occur most often intraoperatively and are more common during total shoulder arthroplasty than hemiarthroplasty because of difficulties in gaining access to the glenoid. Osteopenia, advanced age, female sex, and rheumatoid arthritis are medical comorbid factors that may contribute to humerus fractures and associated delayed healing and poorer function. When the humeral prosthetic component is loose or the fracture line overlaps the majority of the length of the prosthesis, revision with a long‐stem implant should be considered. When the fracture overlaps the tip of the prosthesis and extends distally, open reduction and internal fixation is recommended. When the fracture is completely distal to the prosthesis and satisfactory alignment at the fracture site can be maintained with a fracture brace, then a trial of nonsurgical treatment is recommended. The primary goals of treatment are fracture union and pain relief. Loss of glenohumeral motion has limited the successful treatment of this challenging problem.

Surgical Approaches to the Elbow

&NA; Surgical exposures for complex injuries about the elbow are technically demanding because of the high density of neurologic, vascular, and ligamentous elements around the elbow. The posterior approaches (ie, olecranon osteotomy, triceps‐reflecting, triceps‐splitting, triceps‐reflecting anconeus pedicle flap, paratricipital) include techniques used to navigate the area around the triceps tendon and anconeus muscle. These approaches may be extended to gain access to the entire joint. The ulnar nerve, the anterior and posterior capsules, and the coronoid process are addressed by means of a medial approach. Lateral approaches are useful in addressing pathology at the radial head, capitellum, coronoid process, and anterior and posterior capsules. These approaches may be combined to address complex pathology in the setting of fracture fixation, arthroplasty, and capsular release.

Reimplantation of a glenoid component following component removal and allogenic bone-grafting.

BACKGROUND Glenoid component loosening has been a leading cause of failure of total shoulder arthroplasty. In the present study, we evaluated the outcome of reimplantation of a new glenoid component following removal of the previous glenoid component and placement of an allograft in order to determine the results, risk factors for an unsatisfactory outcome, and rate of failure associated with this procedure. METHODS We reviewed the data on seven shoulders in seven patients. At the time of glenoid component reimplantation, two shoulders received a cemented all-polyethylene glenoid component, three received a bone-ingrowth metal-backed component with columns and screws, and two received a bone-ingrowth metal-backed component with columns and screws augmented with bone cement. The average duration of follow-up was seventy-nine months. At the time of the latest follow-up, all patients were evaluated clinically and radiographically, patient satisfaction was assessed, and the result was graded according to a modified Neer rating system. RESULTS Two patients had positive growth of Propionibacterium acnes on culture of intraoperative specimens obtained at the time of revision surgery and had continuing pain, and both underwent repeat revision. The remaining five patients expressed satisfaction with the procedure and stated that they felt better following surgery. The mean preoperative pain score for these five patients (on a scale from 1 to 5) was 4.6, and the mean postoperative pain score was 2.4 (p = 0.0042). Range of motion, however, did not improve. The Neer rating of the result (determined for the five patients who did not undergo repeat revision) was excellent for one patient, satisfactory for one, and unsatisfactory (because of limitation of motion) for three. CONCLUSIONS Reimplantation of a glenoid component into a previously grafted bed can provide pain relief for most patients, but motion cannot be reliably improved.

Complications of hinged external fixators of the elbow

Despite the growing use of hinged external fixators of the elbow, there are no studies regarding the complications associated with their application. The purpose of this study is to report our experience with complications with this procedure. Between 1998 and 2005, we reviewed the records of 100 consecutive patients who were treated with hinged external fixators (including 433 pin sites). Complications specifically related to pin placement were recorded. There were 15 patients with minor complications (15%) involving 21 pins (4.8%) and 10 patients with major complications (10%) involving 29 pins (6.7%). Minor complications included local erythema and nonpurulent drainage lasting greater than 5 days in 9 patients (21 pins) and the need for skin release to decrease tension adjacent to pins in 6 patients (9 pins). Major complications included purulent pin site drainage in 1 patient (2 pins), fixator malalignment in 1, pin loosening in 4 (11 pins), and deep infection in 4. There were no fractures around the pin sites or nerve injuries associated with pin placement. With care, articulated external fixators can be used without a high incidence of major complications. Most of the complications were attributed to local pin site infection. Factors clinically associated with an increased risk of deep infection include a history of prior procedures in the post-traumatic elbow and the complexity of the operative technique.