A comparative study of the outcomes of primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty and revision procedure after treatment failure of complex proximal humerus fractures in elderly patients
10.3760/cma.j.cn121113-20241224-00753
- VernacularTitle:老年复杂肱骨近端骨折治疗失败后反置式全肩关节置换术翻修和初次置换疗效比较
- Author:
Bingshan YAN
1
;
Ming XIANG
;
Lei HAN
;
Junyang LIU
;
Bo ZHANG
;
Xu TIAN
;
Lintao LIU
;
Jingming DONG
Author Information
1. 天津市天津医院（天津大学天津医院）创伤上肢二病区，天津 300211
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Aged;
Shoulder fractures;
Arthroplasty, replacement, shoulder
- From:
Chinese Journal of Orthopaedics
2025;45(15):984-992
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To evaluate the clinical outcomesof primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) and revision procedure with RTSA after treatment failure of complex proximal humeral fractures in the elderly.Methods:A retrospective analysis was conductedon 24 elderly patients with Neer three- or four-part proximal humeral fractures who underwent RTSA revision after treatment failure (RTSA revision group) from January 2017 to June 2022. There were 7 males and 17 females included, with a mean age of 78.23±5.78 years (range, 67-86 years). Forty-eight patients who underwent primary RTSA (primary RTSA group) during the same time period were selected by propensity score matchingin a 1∶2 ratio as controls, based on age, dominanthand, etiology, Neer typing, glenohumeral joint dislocation, rotator cuff integrity, and osteoporosis T-score. The primary RTSA group included 12 males and 36 females, with a mean age of 76.38±6.15 years (range, 65-87 years). Clinical indicators including demographic characteristics, healing rate of the greater tuberosity, visual analogue score (VAS), Constant-Murley score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES), shoulder range of motion (ROM), patient satisfaction, and complication rate were collected and analyzed.Results:The mean follow-up duration was 40(32, 60) months (range, 25-72 months) in the primary RTSA group and 38(30, 61) months (range, 24-68 months) in RTSA revision group. There was no significant difference (χ 2=5.058, P=0.168) in the healing rate of the greater tuberosity between the primary RTSA group (41/48, 85.4%) and the RTSA revision group (15/24, 62.5%). Compared with preoperative status, the ROM of anterior elevation, abduction supination, external rotation, VAS score, Constant-Murley score, and ASES score were significantly improved at the last follow-up (all P<0.05) in the RTSA revision group. The anterior elevation (123.74°± 16.57°), abduction supination (113.73°±16.42°), and external rotation (36.45°±10.36°) in the primary RTSA group were superior to those in the RTSA revision group (109.43°±18.75°, 98.64°±15.47°, 30.47°±10.64°, respectively), the difference was statistically significant ( P<0.05). No statistical difference of ROM of internal rotation between the two groups was found (χ 2=4.034, P=0.133). At the last follow-up, the Constant-Murley scores (75.47±11.66) and ASES scores (73.58±15.72) of the primary RTSA group were higher than those in the RTSA revision group (60.43±10.24 and 63.28±18.77, respectively), and the differences were statistically significant ( P<0.05). In terms of VAS (1.66±0.93 vs. 2.02±1.15) and patient satisfaction [83%(40/48) vs. 88%(21/24)], no statistical difference was identified ( P>0.05). The complication rate were 10.4% (5/48) in the primary RTSA group and 20.8% (5/24) in the RTSA revision group (χ 2=1.452, P=0.285), with no serious complications requiring revision surgery in either group. Conclusions:For elderly patients with proximal humeral fractures after failed operation, RTSA revision might effectively improve the limb function and alleviatepain. However, compared with RTSA revision, primary RTSA demonstrated superiorearly clinical outcomes in shoulder ROM and functional recovery.
