Outcomes following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty vs operative fixation for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION

Proximal humerus fractures are common in the older population. A consensus on the optimal management of complex fractures requiring surgery has yet to be reached. A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to compare clinical outcomes between reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) and open reduction and internal fixation (ORIF).

METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was undertaken using the Medline®, PubMed, Embase™ and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases. Prospective and retrospective studies comparing clinical and patient reported results as primary outcome measures were included in this review, with secondary outcome measures including complications and revision surgery. A meta-analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

A total of 326 patients from 5 studies were eligible for inclusion in this review. Superior Constant-Murley scores (mean difference [MD]: 13.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 6.2-20.6; p<0.001), Oxford shoulder scores (MD: 4.3, 95% CI: 1.2-7.4; p=0.007), simple shoulder test scores (MD: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.01-1.89; p=0.05) and DASH (Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand) scores (MD: 5.1 [1 study], 95% CI: 2.1-8.1; p=0.034) were noted in patients receiving RTSA. Range of motion and revision surgery rates were also superior in this group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that RTSA affords more favourable outcomes and lower revision rates than ORIF following proximal humerus fractures. Definitive conclusions are precluded, however, owing to small sample sizes and risk of bias in retrospective studies.