Advertisement
Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery

The subscapularis-sparing windowed anterior technique for total shoulder arthroplasty

Published:April 19, 2021DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2021.03.150

      Background

      Traditionally, total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) involves detaching the subscapularis tendon through either tenotomy or lesser tuberosity osteotomy. A subscapularis-sparing approach avoids detachment but may make re-creation of the anatomy more difficult because of limited exposure. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the ability to re-create the proximal humeral geometry and assess for osteophyte removal with this technique. The secondary aim was to assess for complications or an inability to complete the procedure with this technique.

      Methods

      We performed a retrospective review of a consecutive series of 47 patients (100% with osteoarthritis; 59% Walch type A and 41% Walch type B; 50% male and 50% female patients; and average body mass index, 28.21 ± 4.6) who underwent the subscapularis-sparing windowed anterior technique for TSA. The ability to reconstruct the proximal humeral geometry and remove the inferior osteophytes was assessed by 2 independent observers using the center-of-rotation difference (ΔCOR) between the native and prosthetic humeral heads. The ability to complete the procedure was recorded, and a chart review was performed to assess for complications.

      Results

      The procedure was successfully completed in 44 of the 47 patients. Radiographic review demonstrated an average ΔCOR of 2.28 mm (range, 0.2-6.05 mm; intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.971), below the previously reported acceptable ΔCOR of 3 mm. The ΔCOR was >3 mm in 31.8% of patients (14 of 44; 8 Walch type A and 6 Walch type B; 9 male and 5 female patients). There was no difference in ΔCOR based on Walch type (P = .824). Male patients on average showed a higher ΔCOR (2.62 mm) than female patients (1.94 mm) (P = .099) and more commonly had a ΔCOR > 3 mm (P = .195). Body mass index was not significantly correlated with ΔCOR (r = 0.077, P = .619). For all cases in which the ΔCOR was >3 mm, the prosthetic humeral head was undersized. Osteophytes were successfully removed in 75% of cases (33 of 44) and had no effect on average ΔCOR (P = .468). No revisions or mechanical failures in the early postoperative period were identified in the treatment group of 44 patients (range, 3-15 months). In the group with unsuccessful treatment, there was 1 case of infection treated with 1-stage revision reverse TSA.

      Discussion

      The subscapularis-sparing windowed anterior technique is an effective approach to TSA that allows for early unrestricted motion. Over 90% of cases can be completed using this technique. Radiographic analysis demonstrated that this approach can be used successfully without compromising anatomic reconstruction of the proximal humerus. Further study is necessary to identify patient factors that would favor a traditional deltopectoral approach and to assess the functional outcomes of this technique.

      Level of evidence

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic and Personal
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Adkison D.P.
        • Hudson P.W.
        • Worthen J.V.
        • Moon A.S.
        • Pinto M.C.
        • Momaya A.
        • et al.
        Subscapularis-sparing rotator interval approach for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.
        JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2019; 9: e42https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.ST.18.00115
        • Alolabi B.
        • Youderian A.R.
        • Napolitano L.
        • Szerlip B.W.
        • Evans P.J.
        • Nowinski R.J.
        • et al.
        Radiographic assessment of prosthetic humeral head size after anatomic shoulder arthroplasty.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014; 23: 1740-1746https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.013
        • Armstrong A.
        • Lashgari C.
        • Teefey S.
        • Menendez J.
        • Yamaguchi K.
        • Galatz L.M.
        Ultrasound evaluation and clinical correlation of subscapularis repair after total shoulder arthroplasty.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006; 15: 541-548https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2005.09.013
        • Cox R.M.
        • Sholder D.
        • Stoll L.
        • Abboud J.A.
        • Williams Jr., G.R.
        • Ramsey M.L.
        • et al.
        Radiographic humeral head restoration after total shoulder arthroplasty: does the stem make a difference?.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2021; 30: 51-56https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2020.04.014
        • Ding D.Y.
        • Mahure S.A.
        • Akuoko J.A.
        • Zuckerman J.D.
        • Kwon Y.W.
        Total shoulder arthroplasty using a subscapularis-sparing approach: a radiographic analysis.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015; 24: 831-837https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2015.03.009
        • Iannotti J.P.
        • Gabriel J.P.
        • Schneck S.L.
        • Evans B.G.
        • Misra S.
        The normal glenohumeral relationships. An anatomical study of one hundred and forty shoulders.
        J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992; 74: 491-500
        • Ives E.P.
        • Nazarian L.N.
        • Parker L.
        • Garrigues G.E.
        • Williams G.R.
        Subscapularis tendon tears: a common sonographic finding in symptomatic postarthroplasty shoulders.
        J Clin Ultrasound. 2013; 41: 129-133https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.21980
        • Jackson J.D.
        • Cil A.
        • Smith J.
        • Steinmann S.P.
        Integrity and function of the subscapularis after total shoulder arthroplasty.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010; 19: 1085-1090https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.04.001
        • Lafosse L.
        • Schnaser E.
        • Haag M.
        • Gobezie R.
        Primary total shoulder arthroplasty performed entirely thru the rotator interval: technique and minimum two-year outcomes.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009; 18: 864-873https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2009.03.017
        • Levine W.N.
        • Djurasovic M.
        • Glasson J.M.
        • Pollock R.G.
        • Flatow E.L.
        • Bigliani L.U.
        Hemiarthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis: results correlated to degree of glenoid wear.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1997; 6: 449-454
        • Liem D.
        • Kleeschulte K.
        • Dedy N.
        • Schulte T.L.
        • Steinbeck J.
        • Marquardt B.
        Subscapularis function after transosseous repair in shoulder arthroplasty: transosseous subscapularis repair in shoulder arthroplasty.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012; 21: 1322-1327https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.09.022
        • Miller B.S.
        • Joseph T.A.
        • Noonan T.J.
        • Horan M.P.
        • Hawkins R.J.
        Rupture of the subscapularis tendon after shoulder arthroplasty: diagnosis, treatment, and outcome.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005; 14: 492-496https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2005.02.013
        • Miller S.L.
        • Hazrati Y.
        • Klepps S.
        • Chiang A.
        • Flatow E.L.
        Loss of subscapularis function after total shoulder replacement: a seldom recognized problem.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2003; 12: 29-34https://doi.org/10.1067/mse.2003.128195
        • Pinto M.C.
        • Archie A.T.
        • Mosher Z.A.
        • Ransom E.F.
        • McGwin G.
        • Fehringer E.V.
        • et al.
        Radiographic restoration of native anatomy: a comparison between stemmed and stemless shoulder arthroplasty.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2019; 28: 1595-1600https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2019.01.015
        • Ransom E.F.
        • Adkison D.P.
        • Woods D.P.
        • Pinto M.C.
        • He J.K.
        • Vann Worthen J.
        • et al.
        Subscapularis sparing total shoulder arthroplasty through a superolateral approach: a radiographic study.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2020; 29: 814-820https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2019.08.009
        • Savoie III, F.H.
        • Charles R.
        • Casselton J.
        • O'Brien M.J.
        • Hurt III, J.A.
        The subscapularis-sparing approach in humeral head replacement.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015; 24: 606-612https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.07.020
        • Scalise J.J.
        • Iannotti J.P.
        Superior instrumentation through the rotator cuff defect from a deltopectoral approach for hemiarthroplasty for cuff tear arthropathy.
        Tech Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006; 7: 160-167
        • Simovitch R.W.
        • Nayak A.
        • Scalise J.
        • Boudreaux R.
        • Olmscheid N.
        • Worhacz K.
        • et al.
        Biomechanical characteristics of subscapularis-sparing approach for anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018; 27: 133-140https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2017.08.022
        • Walch G.
        • Badet R.
        • Boulahia A.
        • Khoury A.
        Morphologic study of the glenoid in primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis.
        J Arthroplasty. 1999; 14: 756-760
        • Youderian A.R.
        • Ricchetti E.T.
        • Drews M.
        • Iannotti J.P.
        Determination of humeral head size in anatomic shoulder replacement for glenohumeral osteoarthritis.
        J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014; 23: 955-963https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2013.09.005