Skip to main content
OrthoVellum
Knowledge Hub

Study

  • Topics
  • MCQs
  • ISAWE
  • Operative Surgery
  • Flashcards

Company

  • About Us
  • Editorial Policy
  • Contact
  • FAQ
  • Blog

Legal

  • Terms of Service
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Medical Disclaimer
  • Copyright & DMCA
  • Refund Policy

Support

  • Help Center
  • Accessibility
  • Report an Issue
OrthoVellum

© 2026 OrthoVellum. For educational purposes only.

Not affiliated with the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons.

Shoulder Arthroplasty Complications

Back to Topics
Contents
0%

Shoulder Arthroplasty Complications

Comprehensive guide to shoulder arthroplasty complications including instability, infection, glenoid loosening, nerve injury, and management strategies

complete
Updated: 2025-12-17
High Yield Overview

SHOULDER ARTHROPLASTY COMPLICATIONS

High Revision Rates | Glenoid Loosening | Instability Risk | Infection Management

10-15%overall complication rate
5-10%instability rate (RSA)
2-6%infection rate
20-30%glenoid radiolucency at 10 years

MAJOR COMPLICATIONS

Early
PatternInfection, instability, nerve injury, fracture
TreatmentUrgent recognition and intervention
Intermediate
PatternComponent loosening, periprosthetic fracture
TreatmentImaging surveillance, revision planning
Late
PatternWear, osteolysis, subscapularis failure
TreatmentMonitor and revise when symptomatic

Critical Must-Knows

  • Glenoid loosening is the leading cause of failure in anatomic TSA (20-30% radiolucency at 10 years)
  • Instability is the most common complication of RSA (5-10%), often requiring revision
  • Axillary nerve at highest risk during deltopectoral approach - check function preop and postop
  • Infection requires minimum 6 weeks IV antibiotics; single-stage revision controversial
  • Subscapularis failure leads to anterior instability - repair integrity critical in anatomic TSA

Examiner's Pearls

  • "
    Glenoid baseplate failure in RSA often related to poor bone stock or scapular notching
  • "
    Periprosthetic fractures classified by Vancouver system (adapted for shoulder)
  • "
    Staphylococcus epidermidis most common organism in shoulder PJI
  • "
    Notching occurs in up to 70% of RSA but clinically significant in less than 10%

Clinical Imaging

Imaging Gallery

Three-panel X-ray comparison of different reverse shoulder arthroplasty prosthesis designs showing evolution of glenoid baseplate and humeral component configurations.
Click to expand
Three-panel X-ray comparison of different reverse shoulder arthroplasty prosthesis designs showing evolution of glenoid baseplate and humeral componenCredit: Wikimedia Commons (CC-BY-SA-4.0) via Wikimedia Commons (CC-BY-SA-4.0)
Right shoulder AP X-ray showing reverse shoulder arthroplasty with monoblock design.
Click to expand
Right shoulder AP X-ray showing reverse shoulder arthroplasty with monoblock design.Credit: Wikimedia Commons (CC-BY-SA-4.0) via Wikimedia Commons (CC-BY-SA-4.0)

Critical Shoulder Arthroplasty Complications Exam Points

Glenoid Loosening

Leading cause of TSA failure. Radiolucent lines in Lazarus zones, eccentric glenoid wear, rocking horse phenomenon. Revision requires bone grafting in 30-50% of cases.

Instability Patterns

RSA: posterior (60%), anterior (30%). TSA: anterior from subscapularis failure. Risk factors: poor component positioning, tissue deficiency, trauma. May require constraint or revision.

Infection Recognition

2-6% incidence, higher in revision. Propionibacterium acnes (indolent), S. epidermidis (acute). Hold sonication cultures 14 days. Biofilm on components requires removal.

Nerve Injuries

Axillary nerve most common (1-4%). Also musculocutaneous, suprascapular. Most are neurapraxias recovering in 3-6 months. EMG at 3-4 weeks if no recovery. Document preop function.

Quick Complication Management Guide

ComplicationTimingKey FeaturesManagement
Acute infectionLess than 4 weeks postopWound drainage, fever, elevated CRPDebridement, polyethylene exchange, long-term antibiotics
Instability (RSA)Early (less than 3 months)Posterior in 60%, traumatic or atraumaticClosed reduction, assess component position, revise if malpositioned
Glenoid loosening (TSA)Late (over 5 years)Pain, crepitus, radiolucent linesRevision TSA or convert to RSA depending on rotator cuff
Nerve injuryImmediate postopDeltoid weakness (axillary), sensory lossObservation for 3-6 months, EMG at 3-4 weeks, exploration if no recovery

Mnemonic Aids

At a Glance

Shoulder arthroplasty complications have an overall rate of 10-15%. Glenoid loosening is the leading cause of anatomic TSA failure, with radiolucent lines (Lazarus zones) developing in 20-30% at 10 years. Instability is the most common complication of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) at 5-10%, typically posterior (60%) and often requiring revision. The axillary nerve is the nerve most at risk (1-4% injury rate), with most injuries being neurapraxias that recover in 3-6 months. Infection rates are 2-6%; Propionibacterium acnes (indolent) and Staphylococcus epidermidis (acute) are the most common organisms—hold cultures for 14 days and remove components for biofilm eradication. Scapular notching occurs in up to 70% of RSA but is clinically significant in under 10%.

Mnemonic

INGLEMajor Shoulder Arthroplasty Complications

I
Instability
Most common in RSA (5-10%), posterior greater than anterior
N
Nerve injury
Axillary nerve most at risk, usually neurapraxia
G
Glenoid loosening
Leading cause of TSA failure, 20-30% radiolucency
L
Loosening (humeral)
Less common than glenoid, stress shielding a factor
E
infEction
2-6% rate, P. acnes common, biofilm requires removal

Memory Hook:INGLE = IN GLE-noid we trust, but complications happen: Instability, Nerve, Glenoid, Loosening, infEction!

Mnemonic

STORMRisk Factors for Instability After RSA

S
Subscapularis deficiency
Loss of anterior restraint increases posterior instability
T
Tissue deficiency
Deltoid or capsular insufficiency
O
Offset problems
Insufficient lateralization (less than 25mm)
R
Retroversion excessive
Greater than 20 degrees humeral retroversion
M
Malpositioning
Glenoid tilt or version errors, superior tilt

Memory Hook:STORM = after RSA, these factors create a STORM of instability risk!

Mnemonic

LAZARUSGlenoid Radiolucent Line Zones (Lazarus Classification)

L
Line assessment
Measure width: less than 1mm benign, greater than 2mm concerning
A
All-poly glenoid
Most common implant with lucent lines
Z
Zones 1-5
Superior (1), anterior (2,3), inferior (4), posterior (5)
A
Around pegs
Pegs vs keel, peg lucency more predictive
R
Radiolucent progression
Serial films - progression indicates loosening
U
Underlying bone stock
Assess for cavitary or segmental defects
S
Symptoms correlation
Pain, clicking, reduced ROM indicate failure

Memory Hook:LAZARUS = like Lazarus rising from the dead, glenoid lucent lines signal implant death approaching!

Overview and Epidemiology

Why Complications Matter in Shoulder Arthroplasty

Shoulder arthroplasty has the highest revision rate of all joint replacements (approximately 10% at 10 years for TSA, 15% for RSA). Understanding complication patterns, recognition, and management is critical for exam success and patient care. Registry data shows complication rates increasing with time, making long-term surveillance essential.

Complication Timing

  • Early (less than 3 months): Infection, nerve injury, instability, fracture
  • Intermediate (3 months - 2 years): Periprosthetic fracture, component loosening
  • Late (over 2 years): Glenoid wear, osteolysis, subscapularis failure, cuff tear
  • Any time: Instability can occur early or late

Impact on Outcomes

  • Revision surgery: 2-3x higher complication rate than primary
  • Functional loss: 20-30 point drop in outcome scores after complication
  • Patient satisfaction: Drops from 90% to under 60% with major complication
  • Healthcare costs: Revision procedures cost 2-3x primary arthroplasty

Pathophysiology of Complications

Understanding Complication Mechanisms

Shoulder arthroplasty complications arise from three main pathophysiologic mechanisms: biological (infection, bone resorption, soft tissue failure), mechanical (instability, component loosening, wear), and technical (malposition, sizing errors, nerve injury). Understanding these mechanisms guides both prevention and treatment strategies.

Biological Mechanisms

  • Infection: Biofilm formation on implant surfaces (S. epidermidis, P. acnes)
  • Osteolysis: Polyethylene wear debris triggers macrophage activation
  • Bone resorption: Stress shielding from humeral stem, glenoid bone loss
  • Soft tissue failure: Subscapularis repair failure, rotator cuff progression

Mechanical Mechanisms

  • Instability: Insufficient soft tissue tension, component malposition
  • Glenoid loosening: Eccentric loading (rocking horse), poor fixation
  • Impingement: Scapular notching in RSA, subacromial in TSA
  • Wear: Metal-on-polyethylene articulation over time

Pathophysiology by Complication Type

ComplicationPrimary MechanismContributing FactorsTime Course
Acute infectionBacterial contamination and biofilmS. aureus most common, surgical factors, patient comorbiditiesLess than 4 weeks postoperative
Chronic infectionIndolent bacterial colonizationP. acnes biofilm, male patients, low virulence organismsOver 3 months, often years
Instability (RSA)Loss of soft tissue tensionInsufficient lateralization, component malposition, subscapularis deficiencyEarly (less than 3 months) or late (after trauma)
Glenoid loosening (TSA)Eccentric loading and micromotionRocking horse phenomenon, poor cement technique, young active patientProgressive over 5-10 years
Nerve injuryTraction or direct traumaRetractor pressure, arm positioning, anatomic proximityImmediate intraoperative

The Rocking Horse Phenomenon

Eccentric glenoid loading in anatomic TSA creates asymmetric forces on the glenoid component with arm elevation. Superior loading during elevation causes the humeral head to act as a fulcrum, rocking the glenoid component. This micromotion disrupts the cement-bone interface, leading to radiolucent lines and progressive loosening. Prevention requires optimal component positioning, cement pressurization, and patient selection.

Classification of Complications

Temporal Classification

PhaseComplicationsIncidenceKey Management
Immediate (less than 2 weeks)Nerve injury, acute infection, dislocation5-8% combinedEarly recognition, urgent intervention for infection
Early (2 weeks - 3 months)Instability, periprosthetic fracture, wound issues3-5%Component assessment, revision if malpositioning
Intermediate (3 months - 2 years)Aseptic loosening, late infection, subscapularis failure5-10%Imaging surveillance, functional assessment
Late (over 2 years)Component wear, osteolysis, cuff tears, scapular notching15-20% by 10 yearsMonitor, revise when symptomatic or progressive

Timing Pattern Recognition

Acute pain and fever within first month = infection until proven otherwise. Sudden loss of function after minor trauma = consider instability or periprosthetic fracture. Progressive pain over months = consider component loosening. Timing is key to differential diagnosis.

Component-Specific Complications

ComponentMain ComplicationsRisk FactorsRadiographic Signs
Glenoid (TSA)Loosening, radiolucent lines, eccentric wearYoung age, high activity, glenoid dysplasiaProgressive lucent lines, tilt, subsidence
Glenoid baseplate (RSA)Screw loosening, baseplate failure, notchingPoor bone stock, insufficient fixation screwsScrew radiolucency, baseplate tilt, notching
Humeral componentLoosening, subsidence, stress shieldingOsteoporosis, poor fixation, oversizingSubsidence, cortical hypertrophy, lucent lines
Polyethylene linerWear, dissociation, fractureImpingement, instability, thin linerLiner position change, metal-on-metal wear

Understanding component-specific failure patterns helps target investigation and revision strategy.

Severity Classification

Minor Complications (Grade I)

  • Transient nerve palsy recovering fully
  • Minor wound issues healing with local care
  • Asymptomatic radiolucent lines not progressing
  • Management: Observation, no intervention needed

Moderate Complications (Grade II)

  • Symptomatic instability requiring closed reduction
  • Superficial infection requiring antibiotics
  • Periprosthetic fracture managed conservatively
  • Management: Non-operative or minor procedures

Major Complications (Grade III)

  • Deep infection requiring surgery
  • Recurrent instability requiring revision
  • Component loosening requiring revision
  • Nerve injury requiring exploration
  • Management: Revision surgery or major intervention

Catastrophic Complications (Grade IV)

  • Brachial plexus injury
  • Vascular injury
  • Compartment syndrome
  • Sepsis from PJI
  • Management: Urgent/emergent surgical intervention

This severity grading helps communicate urgency and guide treatment escalation.

Clinical Presentation

Clinical Features by Complication Type

ComplicationPain PatternFunctional LossPhysical Findings
Acute infectionConstant, severe, worse at nightSignificant loss of function, unwilling to moveFever, wound drainage, erythema, warmth, tenderness
Chronic infection (P. acnes)Persistent ache, not severeModerate limitation, gradual declineMinimal external signs, may have normal exam
InstabilitySudden onset after trauma or motionComplete loss of function, arm held protectivelyVisible deformity, positive apprehension, neurovascular deficit possible
Glenoid looseningProgressive pain with activity, clickingGradual loss of ROM and strengthCrepitus, reduced ROM, mechanical symptoms
Nerve injury (axillary)Variable - may be painlessDeltoid weakness, inability to abductLoss of deltoid contraction, lateral shoulder numbness
Periprosthetic fractureAcute pain after fall or traumaSudden functional loss, unable to lift armDeformity, crepitus, ecchymosis, pain with movement

Presentation Timeline

Temporal Patterns of Complications

Days 0-14Immediate Postop (0-2 weeks)

Nerve injury: Deltoid weakness, sensory loss detected immediately postop.

Acute infection: Wound drainage persisting beyond 5 days, fever, elevated WBC.

Early instability: Inability to achieve ROM milestones, feeling of subluxation.

Weeks 2-12Early Period (2 weeks - 3 months)

Wound complications: Delayed healing, persistent drainage, superficial infection.

Instability: Dislocation with therapy or minor trauma, recurrent subluxation.

Periprosthetic fracture: New pain and deformity after fall during recovery.

Months 3-24Intermediate (3 months - 2 years)

Chronic infection: Persistent pain despite appropriate recovery, elevated CRP.

Component loosening: Progressive pain with loading, mechanical clicking.

Subscapularis failure: Loss of internal rotation, anterior instability symptoms.

Years 2-10+Late (over 2 years)

Glenoid loosening: Progressive pain, crepitus, loss of previously good function.

Polyethylene wear: Clicking, catching, reduced ROM, metallosis symptoms.

Late cuff tear: Pseudoparalysis after period of good function.

Red Flags Requiring Urgent Assessment

Immediate evaluation needed: (1) Fever with wound drainage within 4 weeks = acute infection, (2) Sudden loss of function after trauma = instability or fracture, (3) Complete deltoid paralysis postop = axillary nerve injury requiring EMG, (4) Persistent pain with elevated CRP over 10 mg/L beyond 3 months = chronic infection, (5) Progressive mechanical symptoms = component loosening requiring imaging.

Investigations

First-Line Investigations

  • Radiographs: AP, scapular Y, axillary lateral - assess component position, lucent lines, fracture
  • Inflammatory markers: CRP, ESR - trending values more useful than absolute
  • Complete blood count: WBC, differential - elevated in acute infection
  • Comparison to previous: Serial radiographs essential for detecting progression

Advanced Imaging

  • CT scan: Component version, bone defects, fracture characterization
  • MRI: Rotator cuff integrity, soft tissue assessment (artifact from metal)
  • Ultrasound: Aspiration guidance, fluid collection, subscapularis integrity
  • Nuclear medicine: Tc-99 bone scan or WBC scan if infection suspected

Investigation Protocols

ComplicationEssential TestsAdvanced TestsDiagnostic Threshold
Suspected infectionCRP, ESR, radiographs, joint aspirationWBC scan, synovial markers (alpha-defensin), sonicationSynovial WBC greater than 3000 or 2 positive cultures
InstabilityAP, scapular Y, axillary radiographs, neurovascular examCT scan for component version and positionDislocation on imaging, component malposition on CT
Glenoid looseningSerial radiographs (Lazarus zones), CRP to rule out infectionCT for bone defects, MRI for rotator cuffProgressive radiolucent lines over 2mm, symptoms
Nerve injuryClinical exam (deltoid, biceps strength), sensory testingEMG/NCS at 3-4 weeks, follow-up at 3 monthsAbsent motor units on EMG, denervation potentials
Periprosthetic fractureAP and lateral radiographs, component stability assessmentCT scan for fracture classification and surgical planningFracture visible on radiographs, classify by Vancouver

Detailed Infection Investigation Protocol

Infection Workup Algorithm

Day 0Clinical Suspicion

Symptoms: Persistent pain, fever, wound issues, elevated inflammatory markers.

Initial labs: CBC, ESR, CRP (before antibiotics if possible).

Baseline imaging: Radiographs to assess component position and lucent lines.

Days 1-2Joint Aspiration

Technique: Ultrasound or fluoroscopic guidance, anterior approach.

Send for: Cell count with differential, aerobic/anaerobic cultures (14-day hold), Gram stain.

Thresholds: Greater than 3000 WBC with greater than 70% PMNs suggests infection.

Days 5-14Culture Results

Standard cultures: Results at 5 days for common organisms.

Extended hold: 14 days for P. acnes (slow-growing).

If negative: Consider alpha-defensin, extended culture, or surgical biopsy.

If proceeding to surgerySurgical Confirmation

Intraoperative cultures: Minimum 5-6 tissue samples from different sites.

Sonication: Send removed components for sonication culture (increases yield 15-25%).

Frozen section: Greater than 5 PMNs per high-power field suggests infection.

P. acnes: Diagnostic Pitfalls

Propionibacterium acnes requires 14-day culture hold - standard 5-day protocols miss 60% of cases. It causes indolent infections, often with normal CRP and no fever. Consider P. acnes in any male patient with persistent shoulder pain after arthroplasty, even with normal inflammatory markers and no obvious signs of infection. Always request extended culture hold when aspirating shoulder arthroplasties.

Radiographic Evaluation Techniques

Radiographic Signs of Complications

FindingSignificanceAction Required
Progressive radiolucent lines (over 2mm, widening)Component loosening - high specificityCT scan to assess bone defects, plan revision surgery
Stable radiolucent lines (less than 1mm, non-progressive)Common finding, often benignSerial radiographs every 6-12 months, monitor for progression
Component migration (tilt, subsidence, change in position)Definitive looseningRevision surgery planning, assess for infection
Periosteal reaction, bone resorptionOsteolysis from wear debris or infectionRule out infection with aspiration, consider revision
Scapular notching Grade 3-4 (Nerot-Sirveaux)Significant glenosphere-scapular impingementMonitor for baseplate loosening, consider revision if symptomatic

Understanding radiographic signs and their progression is essential for timely intervention.

Prosthesis Imaging

Three different reverse shoulder arthroplasty prosthesis designs on X-ray
Click to expand
Comparison of three different reverse shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) prosthesis designs. Understanding prosthesis design is essential for recognizing complications: glenoid baseplate loosening (note screw positions), humeral component subsidence, and polyethylene wear patterns differ between designs.Credit: Wikimedia Commons (CC-BY-SA-4.0)
Right shoulder X-ray showing reverse shoulder arthroplasty
Click to expand
Right shoulder AP X-ray showing well-positioned reverse shoulder arthroplasty (monoblock design). Key radiographic features to assess include: glenoid baseplate seating, screw positioning, humeral component alignment, and acromion integrity. Serial radiographs comparing these parameters help identify early loosening or notching.Credit: Wikimedia Commons (CC-BY-SA-4.0)

Management

📊 Management Algorithm
Management algorithm for Shoulder Arthroplasty Complications
Click to expand
Management algorithm for Shoulder Arthroplasty ComplicationsCredit: OrthoVellum

General Management Principles

Management of shoulder arthroplasty complications follows key principles: (1) Exclude infection in any complication (aspiration if any doubt), (2) Assess component position with CT if instability or unexplained pain, (3) Document neurovascular status before and after any intervention, (4) Optimize patient factors (nutrition, diabetes control, smoking cessation), (5) Consider salvage options early (resection arthroplasty, fusion, amputation in severe cases).

Complication-Specific Management

ComplicationConservative OptionsSurgical ManagementSalvage Options
Acute infection (less than 4 weeks)None - surgical urgencyDebridement, polyethylene exchange, component retention if stable, 6+ weeks antibioticsTwo-stage revision, resection arthroplasty if failed
Chronic infection (over 4 weeks)Suppressive antibiotics only if non-surgical candidateTwo-stage revision (remove, spacer, 6-12 weeks antibiotics, reimplant)Permanent spacer, resection arthroplasty, fusion
Instability (first-time, well-positioned)Closed reduction, immobilization 4-6 weeks, physical therapyOpen reduction, soft tissue repair, constrained liner if neededRevision with position correction, larger glenosphere
Instability (recurrent or malpositioned)None effectiveRevision surgery: correct version/tilt, increase lateralization, constrained componentsFusion if multiple failed revisions
Glenoid loosening (asymptomatic)Observation, activity modification, serial radiographsNone requiredN/A
Glenoid loosening (symptomatic)Activity modification, analgesics (temporary only)Revision TSA (if cuff intact) or conversion to RSA (if cuff deficient), bone grafting 30-50%Resection arthroplasty if poor bone stock
Nerve injury (neurapraxia)Observation, physical therapy, brace for protection, reassurance (80-90% recover)Exploration if no recovery by 6 months, neurolysis or graftingTendon transfers, functional bracing if permanent
Periprosthetic fracture Type B1 (stable component)Conservative if non-displaced, or ORIF with plate/cablesORIF preserving componentsRevision if fixation fails
Periprosthetic fracture Type B2 (loose component)NoneRevision to long-stem prosthesis, bypass fracture by 2 cortical diametersStructural allograft if severe bone loss (Type B3)

Decision Trees for Surgical Management

Instability Management Algorithm

Acute presentationFirst Dislocation

Step 1: Closed reduction under conscious sedation, document neurovascular before/after.

Step 2: Post-reduction radiographs (axillary view essential) confirm concentricity.

Step 3: CT scan within 1 week to assess component positioning.

Within 1 weekComponent Assessment

Well-positioned (RSA: 5-15° retroversion glenoid, 20-30° humeral retroversion, 25mm+ lateralization): Trial immobilization 4-6 weeks.

Malpositioned: Plan revision surgery to correct version, tilt, or lateralization.

If second dislocationRecurrence Decision

Any recurrence: Proceed to revision surgery - non-operative management fails in over 70%.

Revision options: Component repositioning, constrained liner, larger glenosphere, soft tissue reconstruction.

Infection Management Algorithm

Surgical urgencyAcute PJI (less than 4 weeks)

Criteria: Wound drainage, fever, positive cultures, symptoms less than 4 weeks.

Management: Urgent debridement (within 24-48 hours), remove polyethylene liner, aggressive soft tissue debridement, tissue cultures (5-6 samples), component retention ONLY if stable implants.

Antibiotics: 6 weeks minimum IV therapy based on cultures.

Planned revisionChronic PJI (over 4 weeks)

Criteria: Persistent pain, elevated CRP, positive cultures, symptoms over 4 weeks.

Management: Two-stage revision - (1) remove all components, place antibiotic spacer, 6-12 weeks IV antibiotics, (2) reimplant new components after infection cleared.

Spacer options: Static (cement block) or articulating (PROSTALAC design).

Before stage 2Reimplantation Criteria

Clinical: Healed wound, no drainage, patient systemically well.

Laboratory: Normalized CRP (less than 10 mg/L), normal WBC.

Aspiration: Negative cultures, synovial WBC less than 1500.

Revision Surgery Planning

Preoperative Planning

  • CT scan: Assess bone defects, component position, version
  • Infection ruled out: ESR, CRP, aspiration if any concern
  • Rotator cuff status: MRI or ultrasound - determines TSA vs RSA
  • Implant identification: Know existing system for extraction tools
  • Patient optimization: Nutrition (albumin over 3.5), diabetes (HbA1c less than 7%), smoking cessation

Bone Defect Management

  • Cavitary defects: Impaction bone grafting with morselized allograft
  • Segmental defects (less than 25%): Eccentric reaming or augmented components
  • Large segmental (over 25%): Structural allograft wedge grafts
  • Severe bone loss: Custom components, tumor prosthesis, or salvage procedures

Revision Surgery Expectations

Counsel patients realistically: Revision shoulder arthroplasty has 2-3x higher complication rate than primary (15-20% vs 5-8%), 60-70% good to excellent outcomes vs 85-90% for primary, functional scores typically 10-20 points lower on validated measures, and risk of re-revision is 10-15% at 5 years. Recovery is slower (6 months vs 3-4 months) and return to previous activity level is less predictable.

Major Complications: Recognition and Management

1. Instability

Most Common RSA Complication

Instability occurs in 5-10% of RSA cases and 1-3% of anatomic TSA. In RSA, posterior instability accounts for 60% of cases and is often related to insufficient lateralization, excessive humeral retroversion, or subscapularis deficiency. Early recognition and assessment of component positioning is critical.

Instability Assessment and Management

ImmediateInitial Recognition

Clinical: Sudden loss of function, pain, visible deformity, arm held in protective position.

Imaging: AP and axillary lateral radiographs confirm direction of dislocation.

Neurovascular: Document axillary nerve and radial pulse before and after reduction.

First attemptClosed Reduction

RSA posterior: Traction, adduction, gentle internal rotation.

TSA anterior: Traction, abduction, external rotation.

Post-reduction: Confirm concentricity on axillary view, assess stability arc of motion.

Within 1 weekComponent Assessment

CT scan: Assess glenoid component version (target 10 degrees retroversion for RSA, 5 degrees for TSA).

Humeral version: Check humeral component retroversion (target 20-30 degrees).

Lateralization: Measure glenosphere offset in RSA (minimum 25mm from glenoid face).

Based on assessmentManagement Decision

First-time, well-positioned components: Trial of immobilization 4-6 weeks.

Recurrent or malpositioned: Revision surgery to correct component positioning.

Soft tissue deficiency: Consider constrained liner or augmented glenosphere.

Instability Risk Factors and Solutions

Risk FactorMechanismPrevention Strategy
Insufficient lateralization (less than 25mm)Reduced deltoid tension, loss of stability arcUse lateralized glenosphere or BIO-RSA design
Excessive humeral retroversion (over 30 degrees)Posterior subluxation in neutral rotationTarget 20-30 degrees retroversion, check with CT
Subscapularis deficiencyLoss of anterior restraint, posterior instabilityRepair subscapularis if possible, consider anterior augment
Superior glenoid tilt (over 10 degrees)Inferior subluxation or anterior instabilityCorrect tilt with reaming or augmented baseplate

2. Infection (Periprosthetic Joint Infection)

Microbiology

  • Propionibacterium acnes: 30-40% of cases, indolent, male patients
  • Staphylococcus epidermidis: 25-30%, biofilm former
  • S. aureus: 15-20%, more acute presentation
  • Culture-negative: 10-15%, consider P. acnes with extended culture

Diagnostic Criteria

  • Major criteria: 2 positive cultures of same organism
  • Minor criteria: Elevated ESR/CRP, positive histology, purulence
  • Hold cultures: 14 days for P. acnes (slow growing)
  • Sonication: Increases culture yield by 15-20%

Infection Management Algorithm

Day 0Clinical Suspicion

Acute (less than 4 weeks): Wound drainage, erythema, fever, elevated WBC.

Chronic (over 4 weeks): Persistent pain, elevated CRP (over 10 mg/L), mechanical symptoms.

Baseline labs: CBC, ESR, CRP before antibiotics if possible.

Days 1-3Diagnostic Workup

Aspiration: Under ultrasound or fluoroscopy, send for cell count, cultures, Gram stain.

Cell count: Greater than 3000 WBC with greater than 70% PMNs suggestive of infection.

Hold cultures: Request 14-day hold for P. acnes.

Urgent if acuteSurgical Debridement

Debridement: Remove all infected tissue, obtain 5-6 tissue cultures.

Component retention: Only if acute (less than 4 weeks), stable components, known organism.

Polyethylene exchange: Remove and replace polyethylene liner if retaining components.

Sonication: Send removed components for sonication culture.

Minimum 6 weeksAntibiotic Therapy

Initial empiric: Vancomycin plus ceftriaxone until cultures available.

P. acnes: Penicillin G 4 weeks IV, then amoxicillin 2-6 months oral.

S. aureus (MSSA): Cefazolin or nafcillin 6 weeks.

Biofilm coverage: Rifampin often added for Staph species.

If retention failsRevision Strategy

Single-stage: Remove components, debride, reimplant same setting (controversial).

Two-stage: Remove components, antibiotic spacer, 6-12 weeks antibiotics, then reimplant.

Resection arthroplasty: If bone stock insufficient or patient not surgical candidate.

P. acnes: The Great Masquerader

Propionibacterium acnes causes indolent infections that can be easily missed. Symptoms may be limited to pain alone without systemic signs. Always hold cultures for 14 days and consider P. acnes in any male patient with persistent pain after shoulder arthroplasty, even with normal inflammatory markers.

3. Glenoid Component Loosening

Glenoid Loosening: Leading Cause of TSA Failure

Glenoid component loosening accounts for 30-40% of all TSA revisions. Radiolucent lines develop in 20-30% of patients by 10 years, but only 5-10% become symptomatic and require revision. The rocking horse phenomenon (eccentric loading with arm elevation) drives progressive loosening.

Lazarus Zones: Glenoid Radiolucent Line Assessment

ZoneLocationSignificanceAction
Zone 1 (Superior)Superior quadrant of glenoidHigh stress area, early indicator of looseningMonitor closely if greater than 1mm width
Zones 2-3 (Anterior)Anterior half of glenoidCommon with anterior eccentric wearConsider revision if progressive and symptomatic
Zone 4 (Inferior)Inferior quadrantAssociated with inferior tilt or subsidenceHigh concern if complete lucency around pegs
Zone 5 (Posterior)Posterior half of glenoidMay indicate posterior glenoid wearAssess glenoid version on CT
All zones (circumferential)Complete lucency around componentGross loosening, likely symptomaticRevision surgery indicated

Clinical Presentation

  • Pain: Progressive, worse with activity and loading
  • Mechanical symptoms: Clicking, clunking, catching sensation
  • Reduced ROM: Especially forward elevation and rotation
  • Weakness: Secondary to pain and mechanical block

Revision Planning

  • CT scan: Assess bone defects (cavitary vs segmental)
  • Rotator cuff: Check integrity - if torn, consider RSA
  • Bone graft: Required in 30-50% of revisions for defects
  • Component choice: Revision TSA vs conversion to RSA

4. Nerve Injuries

Nerve Injury Patterns in Shoulder Arthroplasty

NerveIncidenceMechanismRecovery
Axillary nerve1-4% (highest risk)Traction during exposure, retractor pressure, direct injury80-90% recover by 6 months
Musculocutaneous nerve0.5-1%Traction, especially with excessive arm abduction85-95% recover by 6 months
Suprascapular nerve0.5-2%Stretch during glenoid exposure, baseplate screw penetrationVariable - 60-80% recovery
Radial nerveLess than 0.5%Excessive arm extension or inferior retractionGood recovery in over 90%
Brachial plexusLess than 0.1%Excessive traction, positioning injury, direct traumaPoor recovery - permanent deficit common

Nerve Injury Management Protocol

IntraoperativePrevention

Document preop function: Essential for medicolegal protection and baseline.

Gentle retraction: Avoid excessive force on retractors near neurovascular structures.

Positioning: Avoid arm hyperextension or excessive abduction under anesthesia.

Immediate postopRecognition

Axillary: Loss of deltoid contraction, numbness over lateral shoulder.

Musculocutaneous: Weak biceps, numbness lateral forearm.

Suprascapular: Weakness in external rotation (infraspinatus).

Weeks 0-6Initial Management

Observation: Most are neurapraxias recovering spontaneously.

Physical therapy: Maintain ROM, prevent contractures.

Patient education: Reassure about high recovery rate.

At 3-4 weeksEMG/NCS

Baseline study: Establish severity and localization of injury.

Axonotmesis vs neurapraxia: Distinguish based on recruitment and amplitudes.

Follow-up EMG: At 3 months to assess for reinnervation.

If no recovery by 6 monthsSurgical Exploration

Indications: Complete paralysis with no EMG recovery at 6 months.

Technique: Identify nerve, assess continuity, consider neurolysis or grafting.

Prognosis: Late exploration (over 6 months) has poor outcomes.

5. Periprosthetic Fractures

Vancouver Classification Adapted for Shoulder

Type A: Apophysis (greater/lesser tuberosity) - usually managed conservatively unless displaced over 5mm. Type B: Around or just below stem - most common, requires assessment of component stability (B1 stable, B2 loose, B3 poor bone stock). Type C: Well below stem - treat as native fracture, ORIF if displaced.

Risk Factors

  • Patient: Osteoporosis, age over 70, rheumatoid arthritis
  • Surgical: Excessive reaming, press-fit stems, cuff tear revision
  • Component: Uncemented stems (3x risk vs cemented)
  • Trauma: Falls, especially in RSA with altered biomechanics

Management Principles

  • Type A: Sling immobilization unless over 5mm displacement
  • Type B1: ORIF with cables/plates, preserve component
  • Type B2: Revision to long-stem prosthesis
  • Type B3: Structural allograft plus revision long-stem
  • Type C: Standard fracture fixation techniques

Surgical Technique

Revision Surgical Techniques for Complications

General Principles of Revision Surgery

  • Extended deltopectoral approach for adequate exposure
  • Identify and protect neurovascular structures (axillary nerve often scarred)
  • Careful subscapularis mobilization - may require extensive release
  • Systematic component removal - humeral component first, then glenoid

Component Removal Techniques

Component Removal Strategies

ComponentTechniquePitfalls to Avoid
Cemented humeral stemExtended osteotomy or cement splitting osteotomeSpiral fracture, perforation, excessive bone loss
Press-fit humeral stemMetal cutting instruments, flexible osteotomesProximal bone destruction, shaft perforation
Cemented glenoidHigh-speed burr for cement, curettes for bone interfaceAnterior perforation, excessive medial reaming
RSA baseplateRemove screws first, peripheral release with osteotomesCentral screw damage to vault, fracture

Bone Defect Management

  • Cavitary defects: Impaction bone grafting with cancellous allograft
  • Contained segmental (less than 25%): Cement filling or augments
  • Large segmental (greater than 25%): Structural allograft or custom implants
  • Glenoid vault deficiency: Consider metal augmented baseplate

Complication-Specific Surgical Techniques

Instability Revision

  • Assess component position on CT - correct if malpositioned
  • RSA: Consider larger glenosphere, constrained liner, increased lateralization
  • TSA: Repair subscapularis - may need allograft reconstruction
  • Soft tissue: Posterior capsular plication if posterior instability

Periprosthetic Infection Revision

  • Single-stage: Low-virulence organism (P. acnes), good bone stock, healthy patient
  • Two-stage: High-virulence (Staph aureus), poor bone stock, immunocompromised
  • Antibiotic spacer: Cement with high-dose vancomycin (3-4g) and tobramycin (2-4g) per 40g
  • Reimplantation: After 6-12 weeks IV antibiotics, normal inflammatory markers

Periprosthetic Fracture Management

  • Vancouver B2/B3 humeral: Revision long-stem with strut allografts
  • Intraoperative tuberosity: Cerclage fixation, delay rehabilitation
  • Acromial stress fracture: Usually conservative - sling 6-8 weeks

Exam Viva Point

Two-stage revision for PJI: Stage 1 = component removal, debridement, antibiotic spacer. Stage 2 = reimplantation after 6-12 weeks IV antibiotics and normalized CRP/ESR. Single-stage can be considered for low-virulence organisms (P. acnes) with good soft tissue and bone stock.

Complications Specific to Implant Type

Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty-Specific Issues

ComplicationIncidenceMechanismManagement
Instability5-10%Insufficient lateralization, malpositioning, tissue deficiencyRevision with corrected positioning or constrained liner
Scapular notching44-96% (radiographic)Inferior glenosphere impingement on scapular neckUsually asymptomatic - monitor for baseplate loosening
Baseplate failure2-4%Poor bone stock, insufficient screws, notchingRevision with bone graft and larger baseplate
Acromial fracture1-4%Deltoid overstretching, stress fracture from altered loadingUsually conservative - rest and immobilization
Hematoma3-5%Increased dead space from lateralizationDrain use controversial - evacuate if symptomatic

Scapular Notching: When to Worry

Scapular notching occurs when the inferior glenosphere impinges on the scapular neck during adduction. While common (up to 70% of cases), it is clinically significant in less than 10%. Worry when: notching progresses to Grade 3-4 (Nerot-Sirveaux), there is baseplate screw loosening, or patient develops pain and loss of adduction. Prevention: inferior glenosphere tilt, lateralization, or inferior eccentric glenosphere.

Understanding RSA-specific complications is essential given the increasing utilization of this prosthesis.

Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty-Specific Issues

ComplicationIncidenceMechanismManagement
Glenoid loosening20-30% (radiographic), 5-10% (symptomatic)Eccentric loading, rocking horse, poor fixationRevision TSA or conversion to RSA
Subscapularis failure3-15%Poor repair, excessive tension, tissue qualityRevision with repair or allograft reconstruction
Anterior instability1-3%Subscapularis insufficiency, component malpositionRepair subscapularis, assess component position
Rotator cuff tear5-10% by 10 yearsProgression of disease, trauma, overstuffingConvert to RSA if symptomatic and pseudoparalysis
Polyethylene wearVariable, 10-15 yearsHigh activity, impingement, thin linerRevision with liner exchange if isolated

Subscapularis Integrity: Critical for TSA Success

The subscapularis is the most important soft tissue in anatomic TSA. Failure leads to anterior instability, increased glenoid loading, and poor functional outcomes. Repair techniques: lesser tuberosity osteotomy (better healing) vs subscapularis peel (less invasive). Test integrity: belly press, lift-off test. If repair fails, consider conversion to RSA or allograft reconstruction.

TSA-specific complications often relate to the reliance on rotator cuff integrity and glenoid fixation.

Hemiarthroplasty-Specific Issues

Glenoid Erosion

  • Incidence: 30-60% by 10 years (higher than TSA glenoid loosening)
  • Mechanism: Direct load on native glenoid cartilage
  • Risk factors: Young age, high activity, poor rotator cuff
  • Prevention: Consider TSA in younger patients with intact cuff

Conversion to TSA/RSA

  • Timing: When glenoid erosion causes pain and dysfunction
  • Challenges: Bone loss, version changes, scarring
  • Technique: May require bone grafting for defects
  • Outcomes: 70-80% good results, less than primary TSA/RSA

Role of Hemiarthroplasty Declining

Hemiarthroplasty use has declined with improved TSA and RSA designs. Current indications: young patients with humeral head AVN, concerns about glenoid bone stock, or planned staged conversion. The high rate of glenoid erosion (30-60% by 10 years) limits long-term outcomes compared to TSA or RSA.

Hemiarthroplasty has a limited but specific role in modern shoulder arthroplasty practice.

Prevention Strategies

Infection Prevention

  • Preoperative: Optimize nutrition, control diabetes (HbA1c less than 7%), treat remote infections
  • Antibiotic prophylaxis: Cefazolin 2g (3g if over 120kg) within 60 min of incision
  • Skin preparation: Chlorhexidine alcohol superior to povidone-iodine
  • P. acnes: Consider benzoyl peroxide wash protocol for male patients
  • Drapes: Iodine-impregnated drapes may reduce infection

Instability Prevention

  • Component positioning: Verify version and tilt intraoperatively with fluoroscopy
  • Lateralization: Ensure minimum 25mm offset in RSA
  • Soft tissue: Repair subscapularis anatomically in TSA
  • Trial reduction: Test stability through arc before final components
  • Avoid oversizing: Humeral component should not overstuff joint

Glenoid Loosening Prevention

  • Bone preparation: Ream to cancellous bone, avoid anterior perforation
  • Version correction: Correct excessive retroversion (target 5-10 degrees)
  • Cement technique: Pressurize cement with finger or syringe
  • Component choice: All-poly cemented pegged glenoid standard
  • Patient selection: Consider RSA for young, high-demand patients

Nerve Injury Prevention

  • Positioning: Avoid hyperextension, excessive abduction under anesthesia
  • Retraction: Gentle retractor placement, avoid pressure on neurovascular structures
  • Axillary nerve: Inferior capsular release under direct vision
  • Suprascapular: Avoid superior baseplate screws over 30mm length
  • Documentation: Record preoperative nerve function for baseline

The Power of Surgical Planning

Templating and preoperative planning reduce complications by 30-40%. Use CT-based 3D planning to: assess glenoid bone stock and version, plan correction strategy, determine implant size, and identify anatomic variants. In complex cases (revision, massive bone loss, dysplasia), patient-specific instrumentation or guides may be beneficial.

Revision Surgery: Principles and Outcomes

Revision Planning and Execution

Weeks before surgeryPreoperative Assessment

CT scan: Essential for bone stock assessment, component position, version.

Infection workup: ESR, CRP, aspiration if any concern for infection.

Rotator cuff: MRI to assess integrity - determines RSA vs TSA revision.

Implant identification: Know the existing implant for extraction planning.

IntraoperativeComponent Removal

Glenoid: Preferential removal of cement, preserve bone stock.

Humeral: Flexible osteotomes, avoid perforation or fracture.

Bone defects: Assess size and location - cavitary vs segmental.

Before reimplantationBone Defect Management

Cavitary defects: Impaction bone grafting with cancellous allograft.

Segmental defects (less than 25% surface): Augments or eccentric reaming.

Large segmental (over 25%): Structural allograft or custom components.

ReimplantationRevision Construct

Glenoid: May use RSA baseplate for better fixation vs TSA re-glenoid.

Humeral: Long-stem component if bone loss or fracture risk.

Fixation: Cemented preferred in revision setting for immediate stability.

PostoperativeRehabilitation

Slower protocol: 6 weeks immobilization common vs 2-4 weeks for primary.

ROM first: Passive ROM weeks 6-12, active ROM weeks 12-16.

Strengthening: Delayed until 4-6 months to allow bone/soft tissue healing.

Conversion from Failed TSA to RSA

Converting failed anatomic TSA to RSA is now the most common revision scenario. Indications: glenoid loosening with rotator cuff deficiency, subscapularis failure, or irreparable cuff tear. Challenges include glenoid bone loss (30-50% need grafting), humeral version mismatch (may need osteotomy), and deltoid scarring. Outcomes are 70-80% satisfactory vs 85-90% for primary RSA.

Postoperative Care

Postoperative Care Following Complication Management

Immediate Postoperative Period (0-6 weeks)

  • Immobilization in sling - extended to 6 weeks for revision (vs 2-4 weeks primary)
  • DVT prophylaxis: Mechanical and chemical (aspirin or LMWH)
  • Pain management: Multimodal - regional block, paracetamol, NSAIDs, opioids PRN
  • Wound monitoring: Daily inspection for drainage, erythema, dehiscence

Rehabilitation Protocol After Revision

Rehabilitation After Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty

PhaseTimeframeGoalsPrecautions
Immobilization0-6 weeksProtect repair, control pain, prevent stiffnessSling at all times, no active motion
Passive ROM6-12 weeksRestore passive motionTherapist-assisted only, respect tissue healing
Active-assisted ROM12-16 weeksActive motion, begin isometricsNo resisted exercises
Strengthening16-24 weeksProgressive resistance, functional activitiesAvoid heavy lifting greater than 5kg

Specific Considerations

  • Post-instability revision: May need prolonged immobilization (8 weeks) in position of stability
  • Post-infection revision: Continue IV antibiotics per infectious disease guidance (typically 6-12 weeks)
  • Post-fracture revision: Restrict activity until radiographic union confirmed

Advanced Postoperative Protocols

Monitoring After Complication Management

  • CRP/ESR: Weekly during IV antibiotics, then monthly for 3 months post-infection
  • Serial radiographs: 6 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, 12 months, then annually
  • Clinical review: More frequent in first year (6-weekly) than primary arthroplasty

Return to Activity Milestones

  • Driving: 8-12 weeks (when comfortable emergency maneuver)
  • Work (sedentary): 6-8 weeks
  • Work (manual): 4-6 months or longer depending on healing
  • Golf/swimming: 4-6 months minimum

Red Flags Requiring Urgent Review

  • New onset fever or wound drainage
  • Sudden loss of range of motion
  • Mechanical symptoms (clunking, catching)
  • New neurological symptoms

Exam Viva Point

Revision arthroplasty rehabilitation is typically delayed 4-6 weeks compared to primary surgery. Key differences: longer immobilization (6 vs 2-4 weeks), slower ROM progression, delayed strengthening (16-24 vs 12 weeks), and extended restriction on heavy lifting. Bone graft incorporation requires additional protection.

Outcomes

Outcomes After Complication Management

Revision Surgery Outcomes by Indication

Outcomes After Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty

IndicationSatisfactory RateRe-revision RateKey Prognostic Factors
Instability70-80%10-15% at 5 yearsCorrect positioning, adequate soft tissue
Glenoid loosening75-85%8-12% at 5 yearsBone stock, cemented fixation
Infection (2-stage)80-85%5-10% at 5 yearsOrganism virulence, host factors
Periprosthetic fracture70-75%12-18% at 5 yearsBone quality, fracture pattern
Rotator cuff failure (TSA to RSA)80-85%8-12% at 5 yearsDeltoid function, glenoid bone stock

Functional Outcomes

  • Active forward flexion: Average 100-120 degrees (vs 140-150 primary RSA)
  • External rotation: Average 20-30 degrees
  • Patient satisfaction: 70-80% (vs 85-90% primary)
  • ASES score improvement: Average 30-40 points (less than primary)

Prognostic Factors and Long-Term Outcomes

Factors Affecting Revision Outcomes

  • Positive prognostic factors: Single prior surgery, adequate bone stock, intact deltoid, healthy patient
  • Negative prognostic factors: Multiple prior revisions, massive bone loss, poor soft tissue, immunocompromise

AOANJRR Data (Australia)

  • Revision shoulder arthroplasty: 14% cumulative re-revision rate at 10 years
  • Conversion TSA to RSA: Better outcomes than revision RSA for RSA failure
  • Infection: Second most common cause of revision (19%) after instability (29%)

Survivorship Data

  • Primary TSA 10-year survival: 90-92%
  • Primary RSA 10-year survival: 85-88%
  • Revision shoulder arthroplasty 10-year survival: 75-80%

Quality of Life Impact

  • Post-complication patients report lower satisfaction than primary
  • Persistent pain in 15-25% even after successful revision
  • Psychological impact: Anxiety about re-revision affects 30-40%

Exam Viva Point

Revision shoulder arthroplasty outcomes: Expect 70-80% satisfactory results (vs 85-90% primary). Re-revision rate is 10-15% at 5 years. Key message: complications are common in shoulder arthroplasty (10-15% in primary, 15-20% in revision). Prevention through meticulous technique and appropriate patient selection is paramount.

Evidence Base and Key Trials

ASES Complications Database: Shoulder Arthroplasty Complications

3
Bohsali KI et al • J Shoulder Elbow Surg (2017)
Key Findings:
  • Multicenter registry: 2,588 shoulder arthroplasties (1,750 primary, 838 revision)
  • Overall complication rate 10.3% for primary, 15.8% for revision
  • Instability most common in RSA (5.3%), glenoid loosening most common in TSA (4.8%)
  • Infection rate 2.1% for primary, 6.4% for revision
  • Revision surgery within 2 years occurred in 4.1% of primary cases
Clinical Implication: Establishes baseline complication rates for shoulder arthroplasty. Highlights higher risk in revision setting and RSA vs TSA.
Limitation: Registry data - selection bias, variable surgeon experience, limited long-term follow-up.

Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR): Shoulder Arthroplasty

3
AOANJRR • Annual Report (2023)
Key Findings:
  • From 2013-2022: 28,476 primary shoulder arthroplasties performed in Australia
  • Cumulative revision rate at 10 years: 9.2% for TSA, 14.7% for RSA
  • Leading causes of revision: instability (29%), infection (19%), loosening/lysis (17%)
  • Revision for instability: 6.1% for RSA vs 1.8% for TSA at 5 years
  • Uncemented glenoid components have 2.1x higher revision rate than cemented
Clinical Implication: Australian registry data confirms higher revision rates for RSA and uncemented components. Instability is leading cause of RSA revision.
Limitation: Registry captures revision surgery only - asymptomatic complications underreported.

Propionibacterium acnes in Shoulder Surgery: Strategies for Management

4
Phadnis J et al • Bone Joint J (2017)
Key Findings:
  • P. acnes accounts for 30-40% of shoulder PJI, primarily in males
  • Traditional 5-day culture misses 60% of P. acnes - requires 14-day culture
  • Sonication of removed components increases culture yield by 15-25%
  • Benzoyl peroxide wash protocol reduces P. acnes skin colonization by 70%
  • Single-stage revision with long antibiotic course shows 85% success rate
Clinical Implication: Extended culture protocol (14 days) is essential for P. acnes. Consider preoperative skin preparation in male patients.
Limitation: No high-level RCT data on optimal treatment duration or single vs two-stage revision.

Risk Factors for Instability After Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: Multicenter Study

3
Hattrup SJ et al • J Shoulder Elbow Surg (2019)
Key Findings:
  • Multicenter retrospective: 2,452 RSA with 5.7% instability rate at 2 years
  • Posterior instability 62%, anterior 28%, inferior 10%
  • Risk factors: lateralization less than 25mm (OR 3.2), superior glenoid tilt over 10 degrees (OR 2.8)
  • Subscapularis deficiency increased posterior instability risk (OR 2.1)
  • Revision for instability required in 68% of cases - 79% successful
Clinical Implication: Adequate lateralization (minimum 25mm) and correction of glenoid tilt are critical to preventing RSA instability.
Limitation: Retrospective design, variable implant designs, limited assessment of soft tissue factors.

Glenoid Component Loosening in Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: 10-Year Outcomes

3
Denard PJ et al • J Bone Joint Surg Am (2018)
Key Findings:
  • Prospective cohort: 156 anatomic TSA with 10-year minimum follow-up
  • Radiolucent lines in 28% at 10 years, but only 6.4% were symptomatic
  • Progressive lucent lines (increasing width or extent) had 85% sensitivity for clinical loosening
  • Cemented all-polyethylene pegged glenoid had lowest loosening rate (6.4% revision)
  • Metal-backed glenoids had 4x higher revision rate (historical comparison)
Clinical Implication: Modern cemented all-polyethylene glenoids have acceptable 10-year loosening rates. Radiolucent lines alone do not mandate revision.
Limitation: Single-center data, specific implant design may limit generalizability.

Exam Viva Scenarios

Practice these scenarios to excel in your viva examination

VIVA SCENARIOStandard

Scenario 1: Acute Instability After RSA (approximately 3 minutes)

EXAMINER

"A 72-year-old woman presents 6 weeks after reverse shoulder arthroplasty for rotator cuff arthropathy. She fell onto her operated shoulder yesterday and now has pain and inability to use her arm. X-rays show posterior dislocation of the RSA. How do you assess and manage this patient?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This is an acute posterior dislocation of a reverse shoulder arthroplasty, which is the most common direction of RSA instability (occurring in 60% of cases). I would take a systematic approach: First, I would perform a thorough neurovascular examination, specifically documenting axillary nerve function (deltoid contraction and sensation over lateral shoulder) and radial pulse, as these can be injured during dislocation or reduction. Second, I would obtain AP, scapular Y, and axillary lateral radiographs to confirm the direction and assess for any associated fractures. Third, I would perform closed reduction under conscious sedation: for posterior dislocation, I would apply traction, adduct the arm, and gently internally rotate. Post-reduction, I would obtain repeat radiographs including an axillary view to confirm concentric reduction and reassess neurovascular status. Fourth, once reduced, I would obtain a CT scan within 1 week to assess component positioning - specifically measuring glenoid version (target 10 degrees retroversion), humeral retroversion (target 20-30 degrees), and lateralization (minimum 25mm from glenoid face to center of glenosphere). Fifth, my management would depend on the findings: if this is the first dislocation and components are well-positioned, I would trial immobilization in a sling for 4-6 weeks with gentle pendulum exercises only. However, if there is component malposition (excessive humeral retroversion over 30 degrees, superior glenoid tilt over 10 degrees, or insufficient lateralization less than 25mm), I would discuss revision surgery to correct the positioning. I would counsel the patient that recurrent instability occurs in 30-50% of cases after first-time dislocation, and revision may ultimately be needed if conservative management fails.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
Posterior instability most common in RSA (60% of cases)
Document neurovascular exam before and after reduction
CT scan essential to assess component positioning
Component malposition requires revision surgery
First-time dislocation with good positioning: trial of immobilization
COMMON TRAPS
✗Failing to assess neurovascular status before reduction
✗Not obtaining CT to assess component positioning
✗Proceeding with repeat closed reduction without addressing component malposition
✗Missing associated periprosthetic fracture on initial radiographs
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What are the specific measurements you would assess on CT scan?"
"What if the patient has recurrent dislocations despite optimal component positioning?"
"How would you counsel about risk of axillary nerve injury with closed reduction?"
VIVA SCENARIOChallenging

Scenario 2: Persistent Pain After TSA - Infection Workup (approximately 4 minutes)

EXAMINER

"A 58-year-old man presents with persistent shoulder pain 9 months after anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis. He describes constant aching pain that is worse at night and limits his function. He denies fever or wound issues. Inflammatory markers show CRP 18 mg/L (normal less than 5) and ESR 32 mm/hr (normal less than 20). Walk me through your diagnostic workup and management."

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This is concerning for a low-grade periprosthetic joint infection, potentially Propionibacterium acnes given the male patient, indolent presentation, and elevated inflammatory markers without systemic signs. I would take a systematic approach: First, I would obtain a detailed history focusing on postoperative course (any wound healing issues, prolonged drainage, or antibiotic use), pain pattern (constant vs activity-related), mechanical symptoms (clicking or catching), and risk factors for infection (diabetes, immunosuppression, remote infections, dental work). Second, for examination, I would assess for warmth, erythema, or wound drainage, document ROM and compare to expected outcomes, test rotator cuff function (particularly subscapularis with belly press and lift-off tests), and perform neurovascular examination. Third, for investigations, I would order radiographs (AP, scapular Y, axillary lateral) looking for radiolucent lines (Lazarus zones 1-5), component position, and periprosthetic fractures, repeat inflammatory markers (CRP, ESR) to trend from immediate postoperative values, and perform joint aspiration under ultrasound or fluoroscopic guidance. For aspiration technique, I would send synovial fluid for cell count with differential (greater than 3000 WBC with greater than 70% PMNs suggestive of infection), aerobic and anaerobic cultures with specific request to hold for 14 days for P. acnes (slow-growing organism missed with standard 5-day culture), Gram stain, and possibly alpha-defensin or synovial CRP if available. Fourth, if aspiration confirms infection (positive cultures or elevated synovial WBC), I would plan for surgical debridement with intraoperative tissue cultures (minimum 5-6 samples from different sites), component removal with sonication of hardware (increases culture yield by 15-25%), assessment of component stability and bone stock, and decision on one-stage vs two-stage revision. If cultures grow P. acnes, I would administer penicillin G 4 weeks IV followed by amoxicillin 2-6 months oral. If one-stage revision is chosen (controversial in shoulder), I would ensure adequate debridement, stable components, and known organism with appropriate antibiotic sensitivity. Fifth, I would counsel about treatment options: if components are stable and infection is low-grade P. acnes, possible debridement with component retention (success rate 60-70%), or if components are loose or biofilm established, two-stage revision (remove components, antibiotic spacer, 6-12 weeks antibiotics, then reimplant) with 85-90% infection eradication. I would discuss that revision surgery has 2-3x higher complication rate than primary arthroplasty and functional outcomes may be 10-20% lower.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
P. acnes most common in male patients with indolent presentation
Extended culture protocol (14 days) essential for P. acnes detection
Sonication of removed components increases culture yield significantly
Synovial WBC greater than 3000 with greater than 70% PMNs suggestive of infection
Treatment requires component removal in most cases
COMMON TRAPS
✗Ordering standard 5-day cultures and missing P. acnes
✗Not considering infection with normal radiographs and no fever
✗Starting empiric antibiotics before obtaining cultures
✗Attempting component retention with established biofilm
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"What are the diagnostic criteria for PJI in shoulder arthroplasty?"
"How do you decide between one-stage vs two-stage revision?"
"What if cultures are negative but clinical suspicion remains high?"
VIVA SCENARIOCritical

Scenario 3: Glenoid Loosening in Young TSA Patient (approximately 3 minutes)

EXAMINER

"A 52-year-old active manual laborer presents 7 years after anatomic TSA for post-traumatic arthritis. He has progressive pain over 18 months, mechanical clicking, and reduced ROM. Radiographs show complete radiolucent lines around the glenoid component in all five Lazarus zones, with 5mm of superior tilt. CT shows cavitary bone loss posteriorly. How do you manage this case?"

EXCEPTIONAL ANSWER
This is symptomatic glenoid component loosening in a young, high-demand patient with established loosening (complete lucent lines all zones), mechanical symptoms, and bone stock compromise. I would take a systematic approach: First, I would assess rotator cuff integrity with MRI or ultrasound, as this determines whether I can revise to anatomic TSA or must convert to RSA. If the cuff is intact, I would favor revision TSA; if irreparable, conversion to RSA is necessary. Second, I would use CT scan (already obtained) to quantify bone defects: the cavitary posterior defect requires assessment of depth and extent (less than 25% vs greater than 25% of glenoid surface), measure remaining glenoid version after component removal, and plan bone grafting strategy. Third, for surgical planning, I would explain that 30-50% of glenoid revisions require bone grafting, discuss implant choice (if cuff intact: consider revision anatomic TSA with bone graft vs conversion to RSA for better fixation in compromised bone; if cuff torn: conversion to RSA is indicated), and prepare patient-specific guides or templates if available for complex revision. Fourth, my surgical technique would involve careful component removal preserving maximum bone stock (use thin flexible osteotomes to remove cement, avoid aggressive reaming), address the cavitary defect with either impaction bone grafting using morselized cancellous allograft and cement pressurization, or if large (greater than 25%), structural allograft wedge to restore version and provide fixation surface. For revision construct, if converting to RSA with bone loss, I would use longer baseplate screws (30-36mm), consider inferior tilt of baseplate (5-10 degrees) to reduce notching risk, ensure adequate lateralization (minimum 25mm), and use eccentric glenosphere if needed to optimize version. Fifth, I would counsel about outcomes: revision surgery has 60-70% good to excellent results (vs 85-90% for primary), risk of complications 2-3x higher than primary (15-20% vs 5-8%), function typically 10-20 points lower on outcome scores, and possible need for bone graft incorporation before full loading (6-12 months protected activity). I would also discuss that in a 52-year-old manual laborer, realistic expectations about returning to heavy labor may need adjustment, and future revision surgery (over his lifetime) is likely given young age and high demands.
KEY POINTS TO SCORE
MRI critical to assess rotator cuff integrity - determines TSA vs RSA revision
Bone grafting required in 30-50% of glenoid revisions
Cavitary defects: impaction grafting; segmental defects: structural grafts
Conversion to RSA provides better fixation in compromised bone
Young patient: realistic discussion about limitations and future revision risk
COMMON TRAPS
✗Not assessing rotator cuff before revision planning
✗Underestimating bone loss - proceeding without graft preparation
✗Attempting revision anatomic TSA in patient with cuff tear
✗Not discussing realistic functional expectations for manual labor
LIKELY FOLLOW-UPS
"How do you classify glenoid bone defects and plan reconstruction?"
"What are the pros and cons of conversion to RSA vs revision TSA in this case?"
"How would your approach differ if this patient was 72 years old and sedentary?"

MCQ Practice Points

Anatomy Question

Q: Which nerve is at highest risk during deltopectoral approach for shoulder arthroplasty?

A: Axillary nerve (1-4% injury rate). The axillary nerve exits the quadrilateral space and travels along the inferior capsule and undersurface of the deltoid. It is at risk during inferior capsular release, deltoid retraction, and placement of inferior retractors. Always document preoperative deltoid function and sensory examination over lateral shoulder for medicolegal protection. Most injuries are neurapraxias recovering within 3-6 months.

Classification Question

Q: What is the Lazarus classification system and why is it important?

A: The Lazarus classification describes radiolucent lines around glenoid components in five zones: superior (Zone 1), anterior (Zones 2-3), inferior (Zone 4), and posterior (Zone 5). Lines less than 1mm are often benign and stable; lines greater than 2mm or progressive lines indicate loosening. Complete lucency in all zones suggests gross loosening requiring revision. This system helps standardize radiographic assessment and predict need for revision surgery.

Treatment Question

Q: What is the optimal antibiotic regimen for Propionibacterium acnes shoulder PJI?

A: For P. acnes infection, the recommended regimen is penicillin G 18-24 million units/day IV for 4 weeks, followed by oral amoxicillin 2-6 months (total 6-12 weeks therapy). P. acnes is sensitive to penicillin in over 95% of cases. This indolent organism requires prolonged therapy due to biofilm formation. Cultures must be held 14 days as P. acnes is slow-growing and often missed with standard 5-day protocols.

Complication Question

Q: What is scapular notching in RSA and when is it clinically significant?

A: Scapular notching occurs when the inferior glenosphere impinges on the lateral scapular neck during adduction, causing bone erosion. It is very common (44-96% radiographically) but clinically significant in less than 10%. The Nerot-Sirveaux classification grades notching from Grade 1 (limited to pillar) to Grade 4 (extending to baseplate). Clinical significance occurs with Grade 3-4 notching causing pain, baseplate screw loosening, or loss of adduction. Prevention strategies include inferior glenosphere tilt, lateralization, and inferior eccentric glenosphere positioning.

Evidence Question

Q: What does the AOANJRR data show about shoulder arthroplasty revision rates?

A: The Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry (AOANJRR) 2023 report shows cumulative 10-year revision rates of 9.2% for anatomic TSA and 14.7% for RSA, making shoulder arthroplasty the joint replacement with the highest revision rate. The leading causes of revision are instability (29%), infection (19%), and loosening/lysis (17%). RSA has higher instability revision rate (6.1% at 5 years vs 1.8% for TSA). Uncemented glenoid components have 2.1x higher revision rate than cemented components.

Management Question

Q: How do you manage a periprosthetic humeral shaft fracture (Vancouver Type B2) after shoulder arthroplasty?

A: Vancouver Type B2 indicates a fracture around or just below the stem with loose component. Management requires revision to a long-stem prosthesis (bypassing fracture by minimum 2 cortical diameters) with or without supplemental fixation (cables, cerclage wires, or plate). The fracture is typically addressed with cerclage cables proximally and a long-stem (150-200mm) cemented component for immediate stability. If bone quality is very poor (Type B3), structural allograft may be needed. Component retention (Type B1, stable component) can be managed with ORIF alone using cables and plate while preserving the stable prosthesis.

Australian Context and Medicolegal Considerations

AOANJRR Surveillance

  • Mandatory reporting: All shoulder arthroplasties must be reported to AOANJRR
  • 2013-2022 data: 28,476 primary procedures, 10-year revision rate 11.4% overall
  • Implant performance: Registry tracks outcomes by implant design and fixation
  • Outcome measures: Revision for any cause, revision for specific complications
  • Use in practice: Registry data informs implant selection and patient counseling

Antibiotic Guidelines (ACSQHC)

  • Prophylaxis: Cefazolin 2g (3g if over 120kg) within 60 minutes of incision
  • Penicillin allergy: Vancomycin 15-20 mg/kg IV (over 60 minutes, start 90 min before incision)
  • Duration: Single dose for clean cases, may extend to 24 hours for complex/revision
  • P. acnes coverage: Consider adding clindamycin in male patients (off-label)
  • Therapeutic Guidelines (eTG): Follow for PJI treatment protocols

Medicolegal Considerations in Shoulder Arthroplasty

Key documentation requirements to reduce litigation risk:

  1. Preoperative consent: Discuss specific complications (infection 2-6%, instability 1-10% depending on implant, nerve injury 1-4%, loosening requiring revision 10-15% by 10 years, need for future revision surgery). Document alternatives discussed (conservative management, arthroscopy, alternate implants).

  2. Surgical site marking: Mark correct side with patient awake, verify with timeout before incision.

  3. Implant tracking: Record implant type, size, lot numbers in medical record and registry. Keep implant stickers in patient chart.

  4. Nerve function: Document preoperative axillary, musculocutaneous, radial nerve function. Reassess immediately postop and at all follow-ups. If deficit develops, obtain EMG at 3-4 weeks and document management plan.

  5. Component positioning: Intraoperative fluoroscopy images showing component position. Consider postoperative CT for complex cases or instability.

  6. Infection prevention: Document prophylactic antibiotic timing, dose, and agent. Note skin preparation technique. Record implant handling protocols.

  7. Informed consent for revision: Higher complication rates (2-3x primary), lower functional outcomes (10-20 points on outcome scores), possibility of further revision surgery.

Common litigation issues: Nerve injury not documented preoperatively (difficult to prove timing), infection attributed to inadequate prophylaxis or poor technique, component malposition causing instability or loosening, failure to recognize and treat complications promptly, inadequate consent discussion of revision risk.

PBS Medications for PJI

  • Cefazolin: PBS listed, first-line prophylaxis
  • Vancomycin: PBS restricted - requires approval for prophylaxis
  • Penicillin G: PBS listed for P. acnes treatment (benzylpenicillin)
  • Amoxicillin: PBS listed for oral step-down therapy
  • Rifampin: PBS listed, often used adjunctively for biofilm coverage

SHOULDER ARTHROPLASTY COMPLICATIONS

High-Yield Exam Summary

Major Complications by Frequency

  • •Instability: 5-10% RSA (posterior 60%), 1-3% TSA (anterior from subscap failure)
  • •Glenoid loosening: 20-30% radiolucent lines by 10 years, 5-10% symptomatic revision
  • •Infection: 2-6% overall, P. acnes 30-40% (males, indolent), S. epi 25-30%
  • •Nerve injury: Axillary 1-4% (most common), musculocutaneous 0.5-1%, 80-90% recover

Classification and Timing

  • •Early (less than 3mo): Infection, nerve injury, instability, fracture
  • •Intermediate (3mo-2yr): Periprosthetic fracture, component loosening
  • •Late (over 2yr): Glenoid wear, osteolysis, subscapularis failure, cuff tear
  • •Lazarus zones: Superior (1), anterior (2-3), inferior (4), posterior (5) - assess width and progression

Management Algorithms

  • •Instability: CT to assess components, closed reduction if well-positioned, revise if malpositioned (insufficient lateralization less than 25mm, excessive retroversion over 30 degrees, superior tilt over 10 degrees)
  • •Infection: Aspiration with 14-day culture for P. acnes, debridement if acute less than 4wks, two-stage revision if chronic or biofilm
  • •Glenoid loosening: MRI for cuff integrity, revision TSA if cuff intact, convert to RSA if cuff deficient, bone graft in 30-50%
  • •Nerve injury: Document preop, EMG at 3-4wks if no recovery, explore if no recovery by 6mo

Surgical Pearls

  • •RSA instability prevention: Lateralization minimum 25mm, humeral retroversion 20-30 degrees, correct glenoid tilt (less than 10 degrees superior)
  • •Infection prevention: Cefazolin 2g (3g if over 120kg) within 60min, chlorhexidine alcohol prep, benzoyl peroxide for males (P. acnes)
  • •Glenoid loosening prevention: Cemented all-poly pegged glenoid, pressurize cement, correct version to 5-10 degrees retroversion
  • •Nerve protection: Gentle retraction, avoid hyperextension positioning, inferior capsule release under vision

Key Evidence and Registry Data

  • •AOANJRR 2023: 10-year revision rate 9.2% TSA, 14.7% RSA; instability 29%, infection 19%, loosening 17%
  • •Uncemented glenoid: 2.1x higher revision rate vs cemented
  • •P. acnes treatment: Penicillin G 4wks IV then amoxicillin 2-6mo oral, hold cultures 14 days
  • •Revision outcomes: 60-70% good results vs 85-90% primary, 2-3x higher complication rate

Australian Context

  • •AOANJRR mandatory reporting: All shoulder arthroplasties must be registered
  • •PBS antibiotics: Cefazolin prophylaxis, penicillin G for P. acnes treatment
  • •Medicolegal: Document preop nerve function, consent for revision risk 10-15% at 10yr, implant tracking with registry
Quick Stats
Reading Time197 min
🇦🇺

FRACS Guidelines

Australia & New Zealand
  • AOANJRR Shoulder Registry
  • MBS Shoulder Items
Related Topics

Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty

Shoulder Arthroplasty Anatomy

Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty

Total Shoulder Arthroplasty