Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Resurfacing hemiarthroplasty compared to stemmed hemiarthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis: a randomised clinical trial

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The aim of this study was to conduct a randomised, clinical trial comparing stemmed hemiarthroplasty and resurfacing hemiarthroplasty in the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

Methods

A total of 40 shoulders (35 patients) were randomised to stemmed hemiarthroplasty or resurfacing hemiarthroplasty and evaluated three and 12 months postoperatively using the Constant-Murley score (CMS) and Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in age, gender or pre-operative scores except for WOOS at baseline. Two patients were lost to follow-up. Significant improvements in CMS and WOOS were observed at one year after both arthroplasty designs. At one year, the mean CMS was 48.9 (range 6–80) after resurfacing hemiarthroplasty and 59.1 (range 0–88) after stemmed hemiarthroplasty {mean difference 10.2 [95 % confidence interval (CI) −3.3 to 23.6], P = 0.14}. The mean WOOS was 59.2 (range 5.2–100.0) and 79.4 (range 12.8–98.6), respectively [mean difference 20.2 (95 % CI 3.4–36.9), P = 0.02]. No major complications occurred and there were no revisions.

Conclusions

The effects of resurfacing hemiarthroplasty tended to be inferior to those of stemmed hemiarthroplasty. It is unclear whether this reflects a real difference in effect or baseline differences due to the limited number of randomised patients. We suggest there is a need for a larger, more definitive trial.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Neer CS (1974) Replacement arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 56(1):1–13

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bishop JY, Flatow EL (2005) Humeral head replacement versus total shoulder arthroplasty: clinical outcomes–a review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(1 Suppl S):141S–146S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Boileau P, Sinnerton RJ, Chuinard C, Walch G (2006) Arthroplasty of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88(5):562–575

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Edwards TB, Kadakia NR, Boulahia A, Kempf JF, Boileau P, Némoz C et al (2003) A comparison of hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: results of a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 12(3):207–213

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Godenèche A, Boileau P, Favard L, Le Huec JC, Lévigne C, Nové-Josserand L et al (2002) Prosthetic replacement in the treatment of osteoarthritis of the shoulder: early results of 268 cases. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11(1):11–18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Hammond G, Tibone JE, McGarry MH, Jun BJ, Lee TQ (2012) Biomechanical comparison of anatomic humeral head resurfacing and hemiarthroplasty in functional glenohumeral positions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(1):68–76. doi:10.2106/JBJS.I.00171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Norris TR, Iannotti JP (2002) Functional outcome after shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis: a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11(2):130–135

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Singh JA, Sperling J, Buchbinder R, McMaken K (2011) Surgery for shoulder osteoarthritis: a Cochrane systematic review. J Rheumatol 38(4):598–605. doi:10.3899/jrheum.101008

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Copeland S (2006) The continuing development of shoulder replacement: “reaching the surface”. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88(4):900–905

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Levy O, Copeland SA (2001) Cementless surface replacement arthroplasty of the shoulder. 5- to 10-year results with the Copeland mark-2 prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br 83(2):213–221

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Levy O, Copeland SA (2004) Cementless surface replacement arthroplasty (Copeland CSRA) for osteoarthritis of the shoulder. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 13(3):266–271

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Thomas SR, Sforza G, Levy O, Copeland SA (2005) Geometrical analysis of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty in relation to normal anatomy. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(2):186–192

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Al-Hadithy N, Domos P, Sewell MD, Naleem A, Papanna MC, Pandit R (2012) Cementless surface replacement arthroplasty of the shoulder for osteoarthritis: results of fifty Mark III Copeland prosthesis from an independent center with four-year mean follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21(12):1776–1781. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2012.01.024

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Mechlenburg I, Amstrup A, Klebe T, Jacobsen SS, Teichert G, Stilling M (2013) The Copeland resurfacing humeral head implant does not restore humeral head anatomy. A retrospective study. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 133(5):615–619. doi:10.1007/s00402-013-1715-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bailie DS, Llinas PJ, Ellenbecker TS (2008) Cementless humeral resurfacing arthroplasty in active patients less than fifty-five years of age. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90(1):110–117. doi:10.2106/JBJS.F.01552

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mansat P, Coutié AS, Bonnevialle N, Rongières M, Mansat M, Bonnevialle P (2012) Resurfacing humeral prosthesis: do we really reconstruct the anatomy? J Shoulder Elbow Surg 22(5):612–619. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2012.07.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Mullett H, Levy O, Raj D, Even T, Abraham R, Copeland SA (2007) Copeland surface replacement of the shoulder. Results of an hydroxyapatite-coated cementless implant in patients over 80 years of age. J Bone Joint Surg Br 89(11):1466–1469

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Raiss P, Pape G, Becker S, Rickert M, Loew M (2010) Cementless humeral surface replacement arthroplasty in patients less than 55 years of age. Orthopade 39(2):201–208. doi:10.1007/s00132-009-1525-4

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Thomas SR, Wilson AJ, Chambler A, Harding I, Thomas M (2005) Outcome of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(5):485–491

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Burgess DL, McGrath MS, Bonutti PM, Marker DR, Delanois RE, Mont MA (2009) Shoulder resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91(5):1228–1238. doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.01082

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Constant CR, Gerber C, Emery RJ, Søjbjerg JO, Gohlke F, Boileau P (2008) A review of the Constant score: modifications and guidelines for its use. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 17(2):355–361. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2007.06.022

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kukkonen J, Kauko T, Vahlberg T, Joukainen A, Aärimaa V (2013) Investigating minimal clinically important difference for Constant score in patients undergoing rotator cuff surgery. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 22(12):1650–1655. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2013.05.002

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lo IK, Griffin S, Kirkley A (2001) The development of a disease-specific quality of life measurement tool for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index. Osteoarthritis Cartilage 9(8):771–778

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Rasmussen JV, Jakobsen J, Olsen BS, Brorson S (2013) Translation and validation of the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index - the Danish version. Patient Relat Outcome Meas 4:49–54. doi:10.2147/PROM.S50976

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Polk A, Rasmussen JV, Brorson S, Olsen BS (2013) Reliability of patient-reported functional outcome in a joint replacement registry. A comparison of primary responders and non-responders in the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry. Acta Orthop 84(1):12–17. doi:10.3109/17453674.2013.765622

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pritchett JW (2011) Long-term results and patient satisfaction after shoulder resurfacing. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20(5):771–777. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2010.08.014

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Fevang BT, Lygre SH, Bertelsen G, Skredderstuen A, Havelin LI, Furnes O (2013) Pain and function in eight hundred and fifty nine patients comparing shoulder hemiprostheses, resurfacing prostheses, reversed total and conventional total prostheses. Int Orthop 37(1):59–66. doi:10.1007/s00264-012-1722-3

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Rasmussen JV, Polk A, Brorson S, Sørensen AK, Olsen BS (2014) Patient-reported outcome and risk of revision after shoulder replacement for osteoarthritis. 1,209 cases from the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry, 2006–2010. Acta Orthop 85(2):117–122. doi:10.3109/17453674.2014.893497

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rasmussen JV, Polk A, Sorensen AK, Olsen BS, Brorson S (2014) Outcome, revision rate and indication for revision following resurfacing hemiarthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: 837 operations reported to the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry. Bone Joint J 96-B(4):519–525. doi:10.1302/0301-620X.96B4.31850

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Tobias Wirenfeldt Klausen for statistical advice and the shoulder surgeons at our department for their commitment.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Herlev University Hospital, Herlev Ringvej 75, 2730, Herlev, Denmark

    Jeppe V. Rasmussen, Bo S. Olsen, Anne Kathrine Sorensen & Stig Brorson

  2. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Rigshospitalet, Department 7811, Blegdamsvej 9, 2100, Copenhagen, Denmark

    Asbjørn Hróbjartsson

Authors
  1. Jeppe V. Rasmussen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bo S. Olsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Anne Kathrine Sorensen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Asbjørn Hróbjartsson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stig Brorson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeppe V. Rasmussen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rasmussen, J.V., Olsen, B.S., Sorensen, A.K. et al. Resurfacing hemiarthroplasty compared to stemmed hemiarthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis: a randomised clinical trial. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 39, 263–269 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2505-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2505-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation