Skip to Main Content (Press Enter)

Logo UNIMORE
  • ×
  • Home
  • Corsi
  • Insegnamenti
  • Professioni
  • Persone
  • Pubblicazioni
  • Strutture
  • Terza Missione
  • Attività
  • Competenze

UNI-FIND
Logo UNIMORE

|

UNI-FIND

unimore.it
  • ×
  • Home
  • Corsi
  • Insegnamenti
  • Professioni
  • Persone
  • Pubblicazioni
  • Strutture
  • Terza Missione
  • Attività
  • Competenze
  1. Pubblicazioni

Revision of failed shoulder hemiarthroplasty to reverse total arthroplasty: analysis of 157 revision implants

Articolo
Data di Pubblicazione:
2018
Citazione:
Revision of failed shoulder hemiarthroplasty to reverse total arthroplasty: analysis of 157 revision implants / Merolla, Giovanni; Wagner, Eric; Sperling, John W.; Paladini, Paolo; Fabbri, Elisabetta; Porcellini, Giuseppe. - In: JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY. - ISSN 1058-2746. - 27:1(2018), pp. 75-81. [10.1016/j.jse.2017.06.038]
Abstract:
Background There remains a paucity of studies examining the conversion of failed hemiarthroplasty (HA) to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Therefore, the purpose of this study was to examine a large series of revision HA to RTSA. Methods A population of 157 patients who underwent conversion of a failed HA to a revision RTSA from 2006 through 2014 were included. The mean follow-up was 49 months (range, 24-121 months). The indications for revision surgery included instability with rotator cuff insufficiency (n = 127) and glenoid wear (n = 30); instability and glenoid wear were associated in 38 cases. Eight patients with infection underwent 2-stage reimplantation. Results Patients experienced significant improvements in their preoperative to postoperative pain and shoulder range of motion (P <.0001), with median American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Simple Shoulder Test scores of 60 and 6 points, respectively. There were 11 (7%) repeated revision surgeries, secondary to glenoid component loosening (n = 3), instability (n = 3), humeral component disassembly (n = 2), humeral stem loosening (n = 1), and infection (n = 2). Implant survivorship was 95.5% at 2 years and 93.3% at 5 years. There were 4 reoperations including axillary nerve neurolysis (n = 2), heterotopic ossification removal (n = 1), and hardware removal for rupture of the metal cerclage for an acromial fracture (n = 1). At final follow-up, there were 5 “at-risk” glenoid components. Conclusion Patients experience satisfactory pain relief and recovery of reasonable shoulder function after revision RTSA from a failed HA. There was a relatively low revision rate, with glenoid loosening and instability being the most common causes.
Tipologia CRIS:
Articolo su rivista
Keywords:
failed hemiarthroplasty; glenoid wear; reverse total arthroplasty; revision; rotator cuff; Shoulder; Surgery; Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
Elenco autori:
Merolla, Giovanni; Wagner, Eric; Sperling, John W.; Paladini, Paolo; Fabbri, Elisabetta; Porcellini, Giuseppe
Autori di Ateneo:
PORCELLINI Giuseppe
Link alla scheda completa:
https://iris.unimore.it/handle/11380/1160340
Pubblicato in:
JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY
Journal
  • Dati Generali

Dati Generali

URL

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/10582746
  • Utilizzo dei cookie

Realizzato con VIVO | Designed by Cineca | 26.5.0.0