Background: For anatomic total arthroscopic repair, cementless humeral fixation has recently gained popularity. However, few studies have compared clinical, radiographic, and patient-reported outcomes between cemented and press-fit humeral fixation, and none have performed follow-up for longer than 5 years. In this study, we compared long-term postoperative outcomes in patients receiving a cemented versus press-fit humeral stem anatomic arthroscopic repair. Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed 169 shoulders that required primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). Shoulders were stratified by humeral stem fixation technique: cementation or press-fit. Data were collected pre- and postoperatively. Primary outcome measures included range of motion, patient reported outcomes, and radiographic measures. Results: One hundred thirty-eight cemented humeral stems and 31 press-fit stems were included. Significant improvements in range of motion were seen in all aTSA patients with no significant differences between final cemented and press-fit stems (forward elevation: P=0.12, external rotation: P=0.60, and internal rotation: P=0.77). Patient reported outcome metrics also exhibited sustained improvement through final follow-up. However, at final follow-up, the press-fit stem cohort had significantly better overall scores when compared to the cemented cohort (visual analog score: P=0.04, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeon Score: P<0.01, Simple Shoulder Test score: P=0.03). Humeral radiolucency was noted in two cemented implants and one press-fit implant. No significant differences in implant survival were observed between the two cohorts (P=0.75). Conclusions In this series, we found that irrespective of humeral fixation technique, aTSA significantly improves shoulder function. However, within this cohort, press-fit stems provided significantly better outcomes than cemented stems in terms of patient reported outcome scores.Level of evidence: III.

Methods: Among the patients who underwent TSA, 119 shoulders were retrospectively analyzed. Preoperative and postoperative clinical outcome data were collected. Linear regression analysis (univariate and multivariate) was conducted to evaluate the associations of clinical outcomes with age. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox regression analyses were performed to evaluate implant survival. Results: At final follow-up, patients of all ages undergoing aTSA experienced significant and sustained improvements in all primary outcome measures compared with preoperative values. Based on multivariate analysis, age at the time of surgery was a significant predictor of postoperative outcomes. Excellent implant survival was observed over the course of this study, and Cox regression survival analysis indicated age and sex to not be associated with an increased risk of implant failure. Conclusions When controlling for sex and follow-up duration, older age was associated with significantly better patient-reported outcome measures. Despite this difference, we noted no significant effects on range of motion or implant survival.Level of evidence: IV.