Epidemiology and Demographics of Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

  • Luigi Murena
  • Bramir Hoxhaj
  • Roberto Fattori
  • Gianluca Canton


The number of shoulder arthroplasties implanted has increased rapidly during the past 15 years. Recently accumulative data from different national shoulder arthroplasty registers in Europe, the USA, Australia, and New Zealand recorded a decrease or stable number of shoulder hemiarthroplasty (HA) procedure and an increase of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) implants. Recently, reverse TSA (rTSA) was coded separately from anatomic TSA (aTSA) in many different national arthroplasty registers, giving the opportunity to have more precise outlook on its effective use, disease indications, and patient demographics.

Substantial differences in indications for rTSA implant exist among different countries. In regions and countries like Emilia-Romagna, Australia, the UK, and the USA, rTSA is the most frequently implanted shoulder prosthesis, while HA is more frequently implanted in Sweden and aTSA in Germany. Since the national registry introduction, for rTSA in Norway and New Zealand, a substantial increase from 12% to 52% and 2% to 56%, respectively, was observed, while in Sweden its use remained stable on 6–10%. Moreover, in the rTSA group, a considerable discrepancy between registers can be observed according to different disease indications. Anyway, cuff tear arthropathy and proximal humerus fracture resulted to be the main indications for rTSA in most registers. The vast majority of patients are females and patients aged over 70 years old. The advancing of shoulder arthroplasty registers all over the countries and a standardization of data gathering would enable a better overview on the current situation and clarify indications on implant selection per pathology.


Reverse Shoulder arthroplasty Epidemiology Demographics 


  1. 1.
    Bankes MJ, Emery RJ. Pioneers of shoulder replacement: Themistocles Gluck and Jules Emile P’ean. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1995;4:259–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kim SH, Wise BL, Zhang Y, Szabo RM. Increasing incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011;93:2249–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Glicklich R, Dreyer NA. Registries for evaluating patient outcomes: a user’s guide. Rockville, MD: AHRQ; 2014.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pabinger C, Geissler A. Utilization rates of hip arthroplasty in OECD countries. Osteoarthr Cartil. 2014;22(6):734–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim S. Changes in surgical loads and economic burden of hip and knee replacements in the US: 1997–2004. Arthritis Rheum. 2008;59:481–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guery J, Favard L, Sirveaux F, Oudet D, Mole D, Walch G. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Survivorship analysis of eighty replacements followed for five to ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:1742–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bayona CEA, Somerson JS, Matsen FA. The utility of international shoulder joint replacement registries and databases: a comparative analytic review of two hundred and sixty one thousand, four hundred and eighty four cases. Int Orthop. 2017;42:351. Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sharma S, Dreghorn CR. Registry of shoulder arthroplasty—the Scottish experience. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2006;88(2):122–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Oppermann J, Celik E, Bredow J, Beyer F, Hackl M, Spies CK, Muller LP, Burkhart KJ. Shoulder arthroplasty in Germany: 2005–2012. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2016;136(5):723–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Westermann RW, Pugely AJ, Martin CT, Gao Y, Wolf BR, Hettrich CM. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty in the United States: a comparison of national volume, patient demographics, complications and surgical indications. Iowa Orthop. 2015;J35:1–7.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Norwegian National Advisory Unit on arthroplasty and hip fractures. Accessed 20 Oct 2017.
  12. 12.
    Australian Orthopaedic Association. National Joint Replacement Registry. Accessed 20 Oct 2017.
  13. 13.
    National Joint Registry for England, Wales Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. Accessed 20 Oct 2017.
  14. 14.
    New Zealand Orthopaedic Organisation. New Zealand Joint Registry. Accessed 20 Oct 2017.
  15. 15.
    Lübbeke A, Rees JL, Barea C, Combescure C, Carr AJ, Silman AJ. International variation in shoulder arthroplasty. Acta Orthop. 2017;88:592. Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hyun YS, Huri G, Garbis NG, McFarland EG. Uncommon indications for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Surg. 2013;5:243–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Registro Italiano ArtroProtesi (RIAP). Accessed 20 Oct 2017.
  18. 18.
    Registro dell'implantologia Protesica Ortopedica (Register of the Orthopaedic Prosthetic Implants). R.I.P.O. Accessed 20 Oct 2017.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luigi Murena
    • 1
  • Bramir Hoxhaj
    • 1
  • Roberto Fattori
    • 1
  • Gianluca Canton
    • 1
  1. 1.Orthopaedics and Trumatology unitCattinara Hospital-ASUITSTriesteItaly

Personalised recommendations