Advertisement

Intraoperative Fracture in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

  • Barbara Melis
  • Giuseppe Marongiu
Chapter

Abstract

With the increase in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) rates, the number of perioperative complications, such as periprosthetic fractures, continues to rise. Even if humeral and glenoid fractures are the most frequently observed, further fractures, as acromion or coracoid fracture, can occur. The majority of intraoperative humeral fractures is observed during implantation in primary arthroplasty and, much more frequently, during removal of the primary humeral stem or cement mantle in revision surgery. Whereas, intraoperative glenoid fractures are related to the initial reaming or fixation technique. The treatment depends on the location of the fracture in respect to the prosthetic component and the stability of the component/bone interface. In most cases humeral fractures are nondisplaced or minimally displaced, and the fixation of the stem or cerclage wire allows to achieve a good stability of the implant and the consolidation of the fracture. Glenoid fractures are frequently partial and can be reduced and fixed using the glenoid baseplate and screws of the glenoid component. Although intraoperative fracture in RSA is associated with a high rate of bone healing, there is a substantial rate of associated complications and lower functional result. In order to prevent perioperative fractures, attention has to be paid to bone quality in primary but especially in revision shoulder surgery.

Keywords

Periprosthetic fracture Glenoid Humerus Reverse prosthesis Complication 

References

  1. 1.
    García-Fernández C, Lópiz-Morales Y, Rodríguez A, López-Durán L, Martínez FM. Periprosthetic humeral fractures associated with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: incidence and management. Int Orthop. 2015;39(10):1965–9.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-015-2972-7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sirveaux F, Boudard G, Jacquot A, Molé D. Reverse shoulder prosthesis, intra-operative fractures. In: Shoulder concepts. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Montpellier: Sauramps Medical; 2016. p. 397–401.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wagner ER, Houdek MT, Elhassan BT, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Cofield RH, Sperling JW. What are risk factors for intraoperative humerus fractures during revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty and do they influence outcomes? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2015;473:3228–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chuinard C, Trojani C, Brassart N, Boileau P. Humeral problems in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. In: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Clinical results—complications—revision. Montpellier: Sauramps Medical; 2006. p. 275–88.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zumstein MA, Pinedo M, Old J, Boileau P. Problems, complications, reoperations, and revisions in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2011;20:146–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Molé D, Navez G, Garaud P. Reverse shoulder prosthesis: problems related to the glenoid. In: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Clinical results—complications—revision. Montpellier: Sauramps Medical; 2006. p. 289–301.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wright TW, Cofield RH. Humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:1340–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Campbell JT, Moore RS, Iannotti JP, Norris TR, Williams GR. Periprosthetic humeral fractures: mechanisms of fracture and treatment options. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1998;7:406–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Duncan CP, Haddad FS. The Unified Classification system (UCS): improving our understanding of periprosthetic fractures. Bone Joint J. 2014;96-B:713–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop. 1987;214:160–4.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Walch G, Wall B, Mottier F. Complications and revision of the reverse prosthesis: a multicenter study of 457 cases. In: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Clinical results—complications—revision. Montpellier: Sauramps Medical; 2006. p. 335–52.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Humeral windows in revision shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2005;14(3):258–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wagner ER, Houdek MT, Hernandez NM, Cofield RH, Sánchez-Sotelo J, Sperling JW. Cement-within-cement technique in revision reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg. 2017;26(8):1448–53.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2017.01.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Athwal GS, Sperling JW, Rispoli DM, Cofield RH. Periprosthetic humeral fractures during shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91(3):594–603.  https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.H.00439.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Melis
    • 1
  • Giuseppe Marongiu
    • 1
  1. 1.Unità di Ortopedia e Traumatologia dello SportCasa di Cura “Policlinico Città di Quartu”Quartu Sant’ElenaItaly

Personalised recommendations