Glenoid loosening and failure in anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty: is revision with a reverse shoulder arthroplasty a reliable option?

Introduction: Our purpose was to evaluate if, in case of aseptic glenoid loosening and failure in anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), revision by a reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is a reliable therapeutic option. Methods: Retrospective multicenter cohort study of 37 consecutive anatomical TSA revised by RSA for aseptic glenoid loosening or failure. The decision to implant a RSA was related to the presence of associated complications: rotator cuff tears (n = 24), subscapularis insufficiency (n = 29), prosthetic instability (n = 13), and glenoid bone deficiency (n = 37). The patients were reviewed clinically and radiographically at a mean follow-up of 47 months (range, 24-104). Results: Eighty-six percent of the patients were satisfied or very satisfied. The average Constant score increased from 24 to 55 pts (P < .0001) and active anterior elevation from 68 degrees to 121 degrees (P < .0001). Twenty-two of the 29 (76%) associated bone grafts were incorporated in the glenoid. Eight patients (21%) needed a subsequent reoperation because of recurrent or new complications: glenoid loosening (n = 3), prosthetic anterior instability (n = 3), and humeral subsidence (n = 2); the reverse prosthesis had to be converted to a hemiarthroplasty in 1 patient and removed in another. Conclusion: Revision with a RSA is a reliable therapeutic option which provides the double benefit of glenoid bone stock reconstruction by fixing the bone graft with the help of the baseplate and screws and of solving the problem of soft tissue insufficiency and prosthetic instability. However, surgeons should be aware that the rate of postoperative complications and subsequent reoperations is high, and that the surgical technique is demanding. Level of evidence: Level IV, Case Series, Treatment Study. (C) 2012 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees.