EC Orthopaedics

Introduction: Shoulder hemiarthroplasty has produced satisfactory, repeatable, and durable results in the treatment of conditions such as glenohumeral arthritis, avascular necrosis, and rheumatoid arthritis of the shoulder joint.

Method: We have evaluated the functional outcome of ten patients with proximal humerus pathologies requiring hemiarthroplasty. Standard deltopectoral approach was performed in beach chair position. Patients were followed at regular intervals and statistical analysis was done using SPSS software.

Results: Seven patients had excellent to good results, two patients had fair results, and one patient had poor result. In our series, one case of superficial infection treated with oral antibiotics was observed. The result from Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty in this study has been assessed utilizing the Constant Murley score (CMS) to assess individual patient results. In our review, we have found excellent to good results in 7 patients (68 ± 7), 2 patients had fair results (39 ± 5) and 1 patient had poor result (29).

Conclusion: There were no significant differences in functional outcome between different sexes, age groups, and those who experienced radiologically higher prosthesis migration. However, there was a statistically significant difference in functional outcome between patients with poor quality or high quality rotator cuff, indicating that rotator cuff quality is an important predictor of functional outcome.

 Keywords: Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty; Simple Shoulder Test; Constant-Murley Score; Oxford Shoulder Score; Rotator Cuff; Glenohumeral Arthritis

1. Neer CS. “Displaced proximal humeral fractures part II: treatment of three-part and four-part displacement”. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American Volume6 (1970): 1090-103.
2. Boileau P., et al. “Tuberosity malposition and migration: reasons for poor outcome after hemiarthroplasty for displaced fractures of the proximal humerus”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery5 (2002): 401-412.
3. Lin DJ., et al. “Shoulder arthroplasty, from indications to complications: what the radiologist needs to know”. Radiographics 1 (2016): 192-208.
4. Matsen, Frederick A III., et al. “Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty with Nonprosthetic Glenoid Arthroplasty: The Ream-and-Run Procedure”. JBJS Reviews8 (2021): e20.00243.
5. Wirth MA and Rockwood CA Jr. “Complications of shoulder arthroplasty”. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 307 (1994): 47-69.
6. Beredjiklian PK., et al. “Operative treatment of malunion of a fracture of the proximal aspect of the humerus”. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American Volume10 (1998): 1484-1497.
7. Herschel R., et al. “Risk factors for glenoid erosion in patients with shoulder hemiarthroplasty: an analysis of 118 cases”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery2 (2017): 246-252.
8. Matsen FA., et al. “Humeral fixation by press-fitting of a tapered metaphyseal stem: a prospective radiographic study”. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American Volume 85-A.2 (2003): 304-308.
9. Sanchez-Sotelo J., et al. “Radiographic assessment of cemented humeral components in shoulder arthroplasty”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery6 (2001): 526-531.
10. Schnetzke M., et al. “Radiologic bone adaptations on a cementless short-stem shoulder prosthesis”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery4 (2016): 650-657.
11. Verborgt O., et al. “Long-term results of uncemented humeral components in shoulder arthroplasty”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery3 (2007): S13-S18.
12. McLendon PB., et al. “Survival of the pegged glenoid component in shoulder arthroplasty: part II”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery8 (2017): 1469-1476.
13. Brorson S., et al. “Revision after shoulder replacement for acute fracture of the proximal humerus”. Acta Orthopaedica 4 (2017): 446-450.
14. Bryant D., et al. “A comparison of pain, strength, range of motion, and functional outcomes after hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery American Volume9 (2005): 1947-1956.
15. Clinton J., et al. “Nonprosthetic glenoid arthroplasty with humeral hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty yield similar self-assessed outcomes in the management of comparable patients with glenohumeral arthritis”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery5 (2007): 534-538.
16. Mighell MA., et al. “Outcomes of hemiarthroplasty for fractures of the proximal humerus”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery6 (2003): 569-577.
17. Demirhan M., et al. “Prognostic factors in prosthetic replacement for acute proximal humerus fractures”. Journal of Orthopaedic Trauma3 (2003): 181-188.
18. Zyto K., et al. “Outcome after hemiarthroplasty for three- and four-part fractures of the proximal humerus”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery2 (1998): 85-89.
19. Anjum SN and Butt MS. “Treatment of comminuted proximal humerus fractures with shoulder hemiarthroplasty in elderly patients”. Acta Orthopaedica Belgica4 (2005): 388-395.
20. Prakash U., et al. “Hemiarthroplasty for severe fractures of the proximal humerus”. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery5 (2002): 428-430.