Advertisement

Archives of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery

, Volume 137, Issue 3, pp 347–355 | Cite as

Towards standardised definitions of shoulder arthroplasty complications: a systematic review of terms and definitions

  • Matthijs Jacxsens
  • Theodor Walz
  • Holger Durchholz
  • Andreas M. Müller
  • Matthias Flury
  • Hans-Kaspar Schwyzer
  • Laurent AudigéEmail author
Trauma Surgery

Abstract

Introduction

A transparent, reliable and accurate reporting of complications is essential for an evidence-based evaluation of shoulder arthroplasty (SA). We systematically reviewed the literature for terms and definitions related to negative events associated with SA.

Materials and methods

Various biomedical databases were searched for reviews, clinical studies and case reports of complications associated with SA. Any general definition of a complication, classification system, all reported terms related to complications and negative events with their definitions were extracted. Terms were grouped and organised in a hierarchical structure. Definitions of negative events were tabulated and compared.

Results

From 1086 initial references published between 2010 and 2014, 495 full-text papers were reviewed. Five reports provided a general definition of the term “surgical complication” and 29 used a classification system of complications. A total of 1399 extracted terms were grouped based on similarities and involved implant or anatomical parts. One hundred and six reports (21.4%) defined at least one negative event for 28 different terms. There were 64 definitions related to humeral or glenoid loosening, and 25 systems documenting periprosthetic radiolucency. Other definitions considered notching, stress shielding, implant failure and tuberosity malposition.

Conclusions

A clear standardised set of SA complication definitions is lacking. Few authors reported complications based on definitions mainly considering radiological criteria without clinical parameters. This review should initiate and support the development of a standardised SA complication core set.

Keywords

Shoulder Arthroplasty Negative events Complications Standardisation Systematic review 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the support of Dr Martina Gosteli, medical librarian at the University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland, for implementing the final literature database search. Melissa Wilhelmi, PhD, medical writer at the Schulthess Clinic, Zurich, Switzerland, is greatly thanked for editing the manuscript and supporting the submission process.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Support for this research was provided by Schulthess Clinic and University Hospital of Basel. On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.

Funding

There is no funding source.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Supplementary material

402_2017_2635_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (186 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 186 KB)
402_2017_2635_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (262 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (PDF 262 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    Spindler KP, Kuhn JE, Dunn W, Matthews CE, Harrell FE Jr, Dittus RS (2005) Reading and reviewing the orthopaedic literature: a systematic, evidence-based medicine approach. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 13:220–229CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Suk M, Norvell DC, Hanson B, Dettori JR, Helfet D (2008) Evidence-based orthopaedic surgery: what is evidence without the outcomes? J Am Acad Orthop Surg 16:123–129CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hall BL, Hamilton BH, Richards K, Bilimoria KY, Cohen ME, Ko CY (2009) Does surgical quality improve in the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program: an evaluation of all participating hospitals. Ann Surg 250:363–376. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b4148f PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Veen EJ, Janssen-Heijnen ML, Bosma E, de Jongh MA, Roukema JA (2012) The accuracy of complications documented in a prospective complication registry. J Surg Res 173:54–59. doi: 10.1016/j.jss.2010.08.042 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    McCulloch P, Altman DG, Campbell WB, Flum DR, Glasziou P, Marshall JC et al (2009) No surgical innovation without evaluation: the IDEAL recommendations. The Lancet 374:1105–1112. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61116-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Inacio MC, Paxton EW, Dillon MT (2016) Understanding orthopaedic registry studies: a comparison with clinical studies. J Bone Joint Surg Am 98:e3. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.N.01332 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sink EL, Leunig M, Zaltz I, Gilbert JC, Clohisy J, Academic Network for Conservational Hip Outcomes Research Group (2012) Reliability of a complication classification system for orthopaedic surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res 470:2220–2226. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2343-2 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Audigé L, Goldhahn S, Daigl M, Goldhahn J, Blauth M, Hanson B (2014) How to document and report orthopedic complications in clinical studies? A proposal for standardization. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 134:269–275. doi: 10.1007/s00402-011-1384-4 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zorzela L, Loke YK, Ioannidis JP, Golder S, Santaguida P, Altman DG, Moher D, Vohra S, PRISMAHarms Group (2016) PRISMA harms checklist: improving harms reporting in systematic reviews. BMJ 352:i157. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i157 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goldhahn S, Sawaguchi T, Audige L, Mundi R, Hanson B, Bhandari M, Goldhahn J (2009) Complication reporting in orthopaedic trials. A systematic review of randomized controlled trials. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91:1847–1853. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.01455 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Harris DY, McAngus JK, Kuo YF, Lindsey RW (2015) Correlations between a dedicated orthopaedic complications grading system and early adverse outcomes in joint arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 473:1524–1531. doi: 10.1007/s11999-014-4058-z CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zumstein MA, Pinedo M, Old J, Boileau P (2011) Problems, complications, reoperations, and revisions in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20:146–157. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.08.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Horan TC, Andrus M, Dudeck MA (2008) CDC/NHSN surveillance definition of health care-associated infection and criteria for specific types of infections in the acute care setting. Am J Infect Control 36:309–332. doi: 10.1016/j.ajic.2008.03.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McKay SD, MacDermid JC, Roth JH, Richards RS (2001) Assessment of complications of distal radius fractures and development of a complication checklist. J Hand Surg Am 26:916–922. doi: 10.1053/jhsu.2001.26662 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Healy WL, Della Valle CJ, Iorio R, Berend KR, Cushner FD, Dalury DF, Lonner JH (2013) Complications of total knee arthroplasty: standardized list and definitions of the Knee Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:215–220. doi: 10.1007/s11999-012-2489-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mirza SK, Deyo RA, Heagerty PJ, Turner JA, Lee LA, Goodkin R (2006) Towards standardized measurement of adverse events in spine surgery: conceptual model and pilot evaluation. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 7:53. doi: 10.1186/1471-2474-7-53 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Audigé L, Blum R, Muller AM, Flury M, Durchholz H (2015) Complications following arthroscopic rotator cuff tear repair: a systematic review of terms and definitions with focus on shoulder stiffness. Orthop J Sports Med 3:2325967115587861. doi: 10.1177/2325967115587861 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Audigé L, Flury M, Müller AM, ARCR CES Consensus Panel, Durchholz H (2016) Complications associated with arthroscopic rotator cuff tear repair: definition of a core event set by Delphi consensus process. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 25(12):1907–1917. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.04.036 Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Page RS, Navarro RA, Salomonsson B (2014) Establishing an international shoulder arthroplasty consortium. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23:1081–1082. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.04.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG, Group P (2010) Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg 8:336–341. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Koster J (2014) PubReMiner. http://hgserver2.amc.nl/cgi-bin/miner/miner2.cgi. Accessed 08 Aug 2016
  22. 22.
    Harris PA, Taylor R, Thielke R, Payne J, Gonzalez N, Conde JG (2009) Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J Biomed Inform 42:377–381. doi: 10.1016/j.jbi.2008.08.010 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gupta AK, Chalmers PN, Rahman Z, Bruce B, Harris JD, McCormick F, Abrams GD, Nicholson GP (2014) Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients of varying body mass index. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23:35–42. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2013.07.043 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Chalmers PN, Gupta AK, Rahman Z, Bruce B, Romeo AA, Nicholson GP (2014) Predictors of early complications of total shoulder arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 29:856–860. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2013.07.002 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Saltzman BM, Chalmers PN, Gupta AK, Romeo AA, Nicholson GP (2014) Complication rates comparing primary with revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23:1647–1654. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.04.015 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Silliman JF, Hawkins RJ (1994) Complications following shoulder arthroplasty. In: Friedman RJ (ed) Arthroplasty of the shoulder. Thieme, St Louis, pp 242–253Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Molé D, Roche ON, Riand N, Lévigne C, Walch G (1999) Cemented glenoid components: results in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. In: Walch G, Boileau P (eds) Shoulder arthroplasty. Springer, Berlin, pp 163–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Lazarus MD, Jensen KL, Southworth C, Matsen FA 3rd (2002) The radiographic evaluation of keeled and pegged glenoid component insertion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A:1174–1182CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Franklin JL, Barrett WP, Jackins SE, Matsen FA 3rd (1988) Glenoid loosening in total shoulder arthroplasty. Association with rotator cuff deficiency. J Arthroplasty 3:39–46CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Rowland CM (1998) Neer hemiarthroplasty and Neer total shoulder arthroplasty in patients fifty years old or less. Long-term results. J Bone Joint Surg Am 80:464–473CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Sperling JW, Cofield RH, O’Driscoll SW, Torchia ME, Rowland CM (2000) Radiographic assessment of ingrowth total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 9:507–513CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC (1979) “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 141:17–27Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    O’Driscoll SW, Wright TW, Cofield RH, Ilstrup D, Mansat P (1999) Problèmes glénoïdiens: Évaluation radiographique du composant glénoïdien dans les prothèses totales d’épaule. In: Mansat M (ed) Prothèses d’épaule. Cahiers d’enseignement de la SOFCOT, No. 68. Expansion Scientifique Publications, Paris, pp 337–344Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    MacDonald DA (1993) The shoulder and elbow. In: Pynsent PB, Fairbank JC, Carr A (eds) Outcome measures in orthopaedics. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford, pp 144–173Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Lévigne C (2006) Scapular notching in reverse arthroplasty. In: Walch G, Boileau P, Molé D, Favard L, Lévigne L, Sirveaux F (eds) Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty. Nice Shoulder Course. Sauramps Médical, Montpellier, pp 353–372Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lévigne C, Nérot C, Boileau P, Sirveaux F, Molé D, Favard L (2007) Scapular notching. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 93:3S74–73S81CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Florence MN, Crosby LA (2010) Complications after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: one door closes, another opens. Semin Arthroplasty 21:199–203CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Boileau P, Moineau G, Roussanne Y, O’Shea K (2011) Bony increased-offset reversed shoulder arthroplasty: minimizing scapular impingement while maximizing glenoid fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:2558–2567. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-1775-4 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Nicholson GP, Strauss EJ, Sherman SL (2011) Scapular notching: recognition and strategies to minimize clinical impact. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:2521–2530. doi: 10.1007/s11999-010-1720-y CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kowalsky MS, Galatz LM, Shia DS, Steger-May K, Keener JD (2012) The relationship between scapular notching and reverse shoulder arthroplasty prosthesis design. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21:1430–1441. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.08.051 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Day JS, MacDonald DW, Olsen M, Getz C, Williams GR, Kurtz SM (2012) Polyethylene wear in retrieved reverse total shoulder components. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21:667–674. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.03.012 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Florie EE, Crosby LA (2013) Scapular notching: danger ahead? Semin Arthroplasty 24:24–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Phipatanakul WP, Norris TR (2009) Complications and treatment of reverse shoulder prosthesis. In: Dines D, Williams G, Laurencin C (eds) Arthritis and arthroplasty: the shoulder. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 242–251Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Kempton LB, Balasubramaniam M, Ankerson E, Wiater JM (2011) A radiographic analysis of the effects of prosthesis design on scapular notching following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20:571–576. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.08.024 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Kempton LB, Balasubramaniam M, Ankerson E, Wiater JM (2011) A radiographic analysis of the effects of glenosphere position on scapular notching following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20:968–974. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.11.026 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Roche CP, Marczuk Y, Wright TW, Flurin PH, Grey S, Jones R, Routman HD, Gilot G, Zuckerman JD (2013) Scapular notching and osteophyte formation after reverse shoulder replacement: radiological analysis of implant position in male and female patients. Bone Joint J 95-B:530–535. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B4.30442 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Paisley KC, Kraeutler MJ, Lazarus MD, Ramsey ML, Williams GR, Smith MJ (2014) Relationship of scapular neck length to scapular notching after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty by use of plain radiographs. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23:882–887. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2013.09.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Levy J, Blum S (2009) Inferior scapular notching following encore reverse shoulder prosthesis. Orthopedics. doi: 10.3928/01477447-20090818-23 Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    De Biase CF, Ziveri G, Delcogliano M, de Caro F, Gumina S, Borroni M, Castagna A, Postacchini R (2013) The use of an eccentric glenosphere compared with a concentric glenosphere in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: two-year minimum follow-up results. Int Orthop 37:1949–1955. doi: 10.1007/s00264-013-1947-9 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Sumner DR, Turner TM, Igloria R, Urban RM, Galante JO (1998) Functional adaptation and ingrowth of bone vary as a function of hip implant stiffness. J Biomech 31:909–917CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Turner TM, Sumner DR, Urban RM, Igloria R, Galante JO (1997) Maintenance of proximal cortical bone with use of a less stiff femoral component in hemiarthroplasty of the hip without cement. An investigation in a canine model at six months and two years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 79:1381–1390CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Van Rietbergen B, Huiskes R, Weinans H, Sumner DR, Turner TM, Galante JO (1993) ESB Research Award 1992. The mechanism of bone remodeling and resorption around press-fitted THA stems. J Biomech 26:369–382CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Johnson CC, Sodha S, Garzon-Muvdi J, Petersen SA, McFarland EG (2014) Does preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists score relate to complications after total shoulder arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res 472:1589–1596. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-3400-1 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Leroux TS, Basques BA, Frank RM, Griffin JW, Nicholson GP, Cole BJ, Romeo AA, Verma NN (2016) Outpatient total shoulder arthroplasty: a population-based study comparing adverse event and readmission rates to inpatient total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.04.006 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Ponce BA, Oladeji LO, Rogers ME, Menendez ME (2015) Comparative analysis of anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: in-hospital outcomes and costs. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 24:460–467. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.08.016 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Matsen FA 3rd, Li N, Gao H, Yuan S, Russ SM, Sampson PD (2015) Factors affecting length of stay, readmission, and revision after shoulder arthroplasty: a population-based study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:1255–1263. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.N.01107 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Schairer WW, Zhang AL, Feeley BT (2014) Hospital readmissions after primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23:1349–1355. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2013.12.004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Clavien PA, Strasberg SM (2009) Severity grading of surgical complications. Ann Surg 250:197–198. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b6dcab CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Raiss P, Bruckner T, Rickert M, Walch G (2014) Longitudinal observational study of total shoulder replacements with cement: fifteen to twenty-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 96:198–205. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.M.00079 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Vavken P, Sadoghi P, von Keudell A, Rosso C, Valderrabano V, Muller AM (2013) Rates of radiolucency and loosening after total shoulder arthroplasty with pegged or keeled glenoid components. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95:215–221. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.L.00286 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Torchia ME, Cofield RH, Settergren CR (1997) Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis: long-term results. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 6:495–505CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Yian EH, Werner CM, Nyffeler RW, Pfirrmann CW, Ramappa A, Sukthankar A, Gerber C (2005) Radiographic and computed tomography analysis of cemented pegged polyethylene glenoid components in total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:1928–1936. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02675 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Neer CS 2nd, Watson KC, Stanton FJ (1982) Recent experience in total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 64:319–337CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Mileti J, Boardman ND 3rd, Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Torchia ME, O’Driscoll SW, Rowland CM (2004) Radiographic analysis of polyethylene glenoid components using modern cementing techniques. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 13:492–498. doi: 10.1016/S1058274604000813 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Rasmussen JV, Brorson S, Hallan G, Dale H, Aarimaa V, Mokka J, Jensen SL, Fenstad AM, Salomonsson B (2016) Is it feasible to merge data from national shoulder registries? A new collaboration within the Nordic Arthroplasty Register Association. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.02.034 Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Matthijs Jacxsens
    • 1
  • Theodor Walz
    • 1
  • Holger Durchholz
    • 2
  • Andreas M. Müller
    • 1
    • 2
  • Matthias Flury
    • 3
  • Hans-Kaspar Schwyzer
    • 3
  • Laurent Audigé
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and TraumatologyUniversity Hospital of BaselBaselSwitzerland
  2. 2.Research and Development, Schulthess ClinicZurichSwitzerland
  3. 3.Upper Extremities, Schulthess ClinicZurichSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations