• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.105-110
• /
• 2018

Since the introduction of shoulder arthroplasty by Neer in 1974, the design of not only the glenoid component but also the humeral component used in shoulder arthroplasty has continually evolved. Changes to the design of the humeral component include a gradually disappearing proximal fin; diversified surface finishes (such as smooth, grit-blasted, and porous coating); a more contoured stem from the originally straight and cylindrical shape; and the use of press-fit uncemented fixation as opposed to cemented fixation. Despite the evolution of the humeral component for shoulder arthroplasty, however, stem-related complications are not uncommon. Examples of stem-related complications include intraoperative humeral fractures, stem loosening, periprosthetic fractures, and stress shielding. These become much more common in revision arthroplasty, where patients are associated with further complications such as surgical difficulty in extracting the humeral component, proximal metaphyseal bone loss due to stress shielding, intraoperative humeral shaft fractures, and incomplete cement removal. Physicians have made many attempts to reduce these complications by shortening the stem of the humeral component. In this review, we will discuss some of the limitations of long-stem humeral components, the feasibility of replacing them with short-stem humeral components, and the clinical outcomes associated with short-stemmed humeral components in shoulder arthroplasty.

• Hip & pelvis
• /
• v.36 no.3
• /
• pp.179-186
• /
• 2024

Intraoperative acetabular fractures (IAFs), a complication seldomly encountered in total hip arthroplasty, are typically a result of the impact of insertion of a cementless press-fit cup. Factors that contribute to the risk of these types of fractures include poor bone quality, highly sclerotic bone, and the use of a press-fit cup that is excessively large. The approach to management of these fractures is dependent on when they are identified. Immediate stabilization measures should be implemented for management of fractures detected during surgery. When fractures are detected postoperatively, the decision regarding conservative treatment is dependent on the stability of the implant and the specific fracture pattern. In the majority of cases, effective treatment of an acetabular fracture detected intraoperatively can be administered using a multi-hole revision cup along with anchoring screws in the various regions of the acetabulum. Selection of plate osteosynthesis of the posterior column is recommended when there is a large posterior wall fragment or pelvic discontinuity. In cases where anatomical dimensions allow, cup-cage reconstruction may offer a promising alternative to a combined hip procedure. The number of reports addressing the management of IAFs is limited. This review focuses on outlining the strategies that are currently available for management of this seldomly encountered complication.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.244-254
• /
• 2022

Radiographic osteolysis after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) remains a challenging clinical entity, as it may not initially manifest clinically apparent symptoms but can lead to clinically important complications, such as aseptic loosening. A thorough consideration of medical history and physical examination is essential to rule out other causes of symptomatic TSA-namely, periprosthetic joint infection-as symptoms often progress to vague pain or discomfort due to subtle component loosening. Once confirmed, nonoperative treatment of osteolysis should first be pursued given the potential to avoid surgery-associated risks. If needed, the current surgical options include glenoid polyethylene revision and conversion to reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The current article provides a comprehensive review of the evaluation and management of osteolysis after TSA through an evidence-based discussion of current concepts.

• Hip & pelvis
• /
• v.34 no.3
• /
• pp.140-149
• /
• 2022

The increase in the number of primary total hip arthroplasties that will be performed over the next several decades will lead to an increase in the incidence of periprosthetic fractures around the femoral stem. A search of targeted articles was conducted using on-line databases of PubMed (National Library of Medicine) and articles were obtained from January 2008 to November 2021. Reliable prediction of treatment can be achieved using the Vancouver classification; internal fixation is indicated in fractures involving a stable implant and revision arthroplasty is indicated in those with unstable prostheses. To the best of our knowledge, relatively fewer studies regarding periprosthetic proximal femur fractures of cemented stems have been reported. The focus of this review is on the risk factors and strategies for treatment of these fractures for periprosthetic femoral fractures around a cemented hip arthroplasty.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.45 no.3
• /
• pp.280-283
• /
• 2018

Knee revision arthroplasty following peri-prosthetic joint infections is a formidable challenge. Patients are at a high risk of recurrent infection, and the soft tissue over the revised implant is often of questionable quality. Flap reconstruction has improved the salvage rates of infected arthroplasties, and should be considered in all cases of revision arthroplasty. We present a challenging case requiring staged reconstruction with two free latissimus dorsi flaps after the initial use of a medial gastrocnemius flap.

• Hip & pelvis
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.142-146
• /
• 2023

Stenotrophomonas maltophilia, a well-established opportunistic bacterium, primarily impacts healthcare settings. Infection of the musculoskeletal system with this bacterium is rare. We report on the first known case of hip periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) caused by S. maltophilia. The potential for development of a PJI caused by this pathogen should be considered by orthopaedic surgeons, particularly in patients with multiple severe comorbidities.

• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 2007.03a
• /
• pp.155-155
• /
• 2007

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.18-25
• /
• 2024

Background: The Discovery Elbow System (DES) utilizes a polyethylene bearing within the ulnar component. An exchange bearing requires preoperative freezing and implantation within 2 minutes of freezer removal to allow insertion. We report our outcomes and experience using this technique. Methods: This was an analysis of a two-surgeon consecutive series of DES bearing exchange. Inclusion criteria included patients in which exchange was attempted with a minimum 1-year follow-up. Clinical and radiographic review was performed 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 and 10 years postoperative. Outcome measures included range of movement, Oxford Elbow Score (OES), Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), complications and requirement for revision surgery. Results: Eleven DESs in 10 patients were included. Indications were bearing wear encountered during humeral component revision (n=5); bearing failure (n=4); and infection treated with debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR; n=2). Bearing exchange was conducted on the first attempt in 10 cases. One case required a second attempt. One patient developed infection postoperatively managed with two-stage revision. Mean follow-up of the bearing exchange DES was 3 years. No further surgery was required, with no infection recurrence in DAIR cases. Mean elbow flexion-extension and pronosupination arcs were 107°(±22°) and 140° (±26°). Mean OES was 36/48 (±12) and MEPS was 83/100 (±19). Conclusions: Our results support the use of DES bearing exchange in cases of bearing wear with well-fixed stems or acute infection. This series provides surgeons managing DES arthroplasty with management principles, successful and reproducible surgical techniques and expected clinical outcomes in performing DES polyethylene bearing exchange. Level of evidence: IV.

• Hip & pelvis
• /
• v.34 no.3
• /
• pp.161-171
• /
• 2022

Purpose: The number of obese patients seeking total hip arthroplasty (THA) continues to expand despite body mass index (BMI) cutoffs. We sought to determine the outcomes of THA in the morbidly obese patient, and hypothesized they would have comparable outcomes to two cohorts of obese, and normal weight patients. Materials and Methods: THA performed on morbidly obese patients (BMI >40 kg/m²) at a single academic center from 2010 until 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Eighty morbidly obese patients were identified, and matched in a 1:3:3 ratio to control cohorts with BMI 30-40 kg/m² and BMI <30 kg/m². Acute postoperative outcomes and BMI change after surgery were evaluated for clinical significance with univariate and regression analyses. Cox proportional hazard ratio was calculated to evaluate prosthetic joint infection (PJI) and revision surgery through follow-up. Mean follow-up was 3.9 years. Results: In the acute postoperative period, morbidly obese patients trended towards increased hospital length of stay, facility discharge and 90-day hospital returns. At final follow-up, a higher percentage of morbidly obese patients had clinically significant (>5%) BMI loss; however, this was not significant. Cox hazard ratio with BMI <30 kg/m² as a reference demonstrated no significant difference in survival to PJI and all-cause revision in the morbidly obese cohort. Conclusion: Morbidly obese patients (BMI >40 kg/m²) require increased resource expenditure in the acute postoperative period. However, they are not inferior to the control cohorts (BMI <30 kg/m², BMI 30-40 kg/m²) in terms of PJI or all-cause revisions at mid-term follow-up.

• Hip & pelvis
• /
• v.34 no.2
• /
• pp.96-105
• /
• 2022

Purpose: Use of dual mobility (DM) articulations can reduce the risk of instability in both primary and revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Knowledge regarding the impact of this design on patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) is limited. This study aims to compare clinical outcomes between DM and fixed bearing (FB) prostheses following primary THA. Materials and Methods: All patients who underwent primary THA between 2011-2021 were reviewed retrospectively. Patients were separated into three cohorts: FB vs monoblock-D vs modular-DM. An evaluation of PROMs including HOOS, JR, and FJS-12, as well as discharge-disposition, 90-day readmissions, and revisions rates was performed. Propensity-score matching was performed to limit significant demographic differences, while ANOVA and chi-squared test were used for comparison of outcomes. Results: Of the 15,184 patients identified, 14,652 patients (96.5%) had a FB, 185 patients (1.2%) had a monoblock-DM, and 347 patients (2.3%) had a modular-DM prosthesis. After propensity-score matching, a total of 447 patients were matched comparison. There was no statistical difference in the 90-day readmission (P=0.584), revision rate (P=0.265), and 90-day readmission (P=0.365) and revision rate due to dislocation (P=0.365) between the cohorts. Discharge disposition was also non-significant (P=0.124). There was no statistical difference in FJS-12 scores at 3-months (P=0.820), 1-year (P=0.982), and 2-years (P=0.608) between the groups. Conclusion: DM bearings yield PROMs similar to those of FB implants in patients undergoing primary THA. Although DM implants are utilized more often in patients at higher-risk for instability, we suggest that similar patient satisfaction may be attained while achieving similar dislocation rates.