Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery · 2011
The use of the reverse shoulder arthroplasty for treatment of failed total shoulder arthroplasty.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Walker Matthew, Willis Matthew P, Brooks Jordan P, Pupello Derek, Mulieri Philip J, Frankle Mark A
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the outcomes of patients with failed total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) who were treated with conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective case series of 24 consecutive patients with failed TSA who were treated with conversion to RSA. Twenty-two patients (16 women, 6 men) had a minimum 2-year clinical and radiographic follow-up. The average age at the time of revision was 68 years (range, 51-84 years). Indications for conversion to RSA included failure of TSA from glenohumeral instability in 19, mechanical failure of the humeral or glenoid component in 10, and infection in 2.
RESULTS: The median total American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved from 38.5 preoperatively to 67.5 (P < .001). Visual analog scale pain scores decreased from 5 to 1.5 (P < .001), and function improved from 2 to 6.5 (P < .001). The median Simple Shoulder Test improved from 1 to 5 (P = .006). Forward flexion improved from 50° to 130° (P < .001), abduction from 45° to 100° (P < .001), and external rotation from 12.5° to 49.5° (P = .056). Internal rotation improved from a spinal level of S2 to L3 (P = .064). Fourteen patients rated their outcome as excellent, 3 as good, 3 as satisfactory, and 2 as unsatisfactory. The overall complication rate was 22.7% (5 of 22).
CONCLUSION: RSA can be an effective treatment for failed TSA by decreasing pain and improving shoulder function. However, RSA in the revision setting is associated with a higher complication rate.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective case series of 24 consecutive patients with failed TSA who were treated with conversion to RSA. Twenty-two patients (16 women, 6 men) had a minimum 2-year clinical and radiographic follow-up. The average age at the time of revision was 68 years (range, 51-84 years). Indications for conversion to RSA included failure of TSA from glenohumeral instability in 19, mechanical failure of the humeral or glenoid component in 10, and infection in 2.
RESULTS: The median total American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score improved from 38.5 preoperatively to 67.5 (P < .001). Visual analog scale pain scores decreased from 5 to 1.5 (P < .001), and function improved from 2 to 6.5 (P < .001). The median Simple Shoulder Test improved from 1 to 5 (P = .006). Forward flexion improved from 50° to 130° (P < .001), abduction from 45° to 100° (P < .001), and external rotation from 12.5° to 49.5° (P = .056). Internal rotation improved from a spinal level of S2 to L3 (P = .064). Fourteen patients rated their outcome as excellent, 3 as good, 3 as satisfactory, and 2 as unsatisfactory. The overall complication rate was 22.7% (5 of 22).
CONCLUSION: RSA can be an effective treatment for failed TSA by decreasing pain and improving shoulder function. However, RSA in the revision setting is associated with a higher complication rate.