» Articles » PMID: 16194737

Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Long-term Survivorship, Functional Outcome, and Quality of Life

Overview
Date 2005 Oct 1
PMID 16194737
Citations 110
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

This study examines long-term outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) via survivorship analysis, patient questionnaires, and minimum 10-year physical examinations. The study group consisted of 320 consecutive TSAs performed in 267 patients between 1974 and 1988. Diagnoses included rheumatoid arthritis (69%), osteoarthritis (22%), and juvenile rheumatoid arthritis (4.7%). Minimum 10-year physical examination follow-up was obtained on a subset of 72 TSAs at a mean (+/- SD) of 14.0 +/- 2.7 years. A Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) questionnaire was obtained from 80 patients with 103 TSAs at a mean of 15.4 +/- 3.4 years after the index procedure (range, 10.4-23.2 years). Kaplan-Meier survivorship rates with revision as the endpoint at 5, 10, 15, and 20 years were 98%, 93%, 88%, and 85%, respectively. Of the shoulders, 22 (6.9%) required a revision, most commonly for loosening of one or both components (15 shoulders). Dislocation occurred earlier than other causes of revision or complication (P < .05, analysis of variance). Minimum 10-year physical examination follow-up revealed lasting, significant improvements in range of motion and strength. The patients' subjective assessments of TSA were favorable in that 92% felt that their shoulder was "much better" or "better" after TSA. The mean DASH score was 49 +/- 25; no significant differences were found among diagnoses. Long-term analysis of the Neer-type TSA revealed survivorship rates comparable to other joint replacements. The significant improvements in relief of pain, shoulder range of motion, and strength are associated with a high degree of patient satisfaction.

Citing Articles

Radiological and Clinical Outcome Differences Between Standard and Short Stem in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

Ciuffreda M, Lentini A, Papalia G, Grasso D, Za P, Papalia R Med Sci (Basel). 2025; 13(1).

PMID: 39982241 PMC: 11843935. DOI: 10.3390/medsci13010016.


Convertible metal-backed glenoid in total shoulder arthroplasty.

Ranieri R, Borroni M, Delle Rose G, Conti M, Garofalo R, Castagna A Bone Jt Open. 2025; 6(1):82-92.

PMID: 39805312 PMC: 11729753. DOI: 10.1302/2633-1462.61.BJO-2024-0118.R1.


Does hand dominance influence clinical outcomes and implant survival in shoulder arthroplasty?.

Hetto P, Wolf M, Tsitlakidis S, Deisenhofer J, Bruckner T, Spranz D J Orthop. 2024; 64:59-63.

PMID: 39691646 PMC: 11648620. DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2024.10.052.


Is revision to anatomic shoulder arthroplasty still an option? A systematic review.

Gulzar M, Welp K, Chang M, Woodmass J, Worden J, Cooke H Shoulder Elbow. 2024; :17585732241284512.

PMID: 39545004 PMC: 11559957. DOI: 10.1177/17585732241284512.


Survivorship analysis of CAD-CAM total shoulder replacement.

Nayar S, Butt D, Prinja A, Rudge W, Majed A, Higgs D Shoulder Elbow. 2024; 16(4):390-396.

PMID: 39318417 PMC: 11418713. DOI: 10.1177/17585732231193285.