Shoulder Arthroplasty After Previous Nonarthroplasty Surgery
Authors: Mirghaderi Peyman , Azarboo Alireza , Ghaseminejad-Raeini Amirhossein , Eshraghi Nasim , Vahedi Hamed , Namdari Surena 
Published: March 2024

Background:
Many patients who undergo shoulder arthroplasty (SA) have had at least 1 nonarthroplasty shoulder surgery before the surgery. There is conflicting evidence regarding the effects of previous shoulder surgery on the outcome of SA. A systematic review was conducted to compare functional outcomes and complications between SA patients with and without prior non-SA surgery on the ipsilateral shoulder.

Methods:
We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and searched MEDLINE/PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science comprehensively from inception to January 2023. Based on 9,279 records reviewed, 26 comparative studies were included in the meta-analysis consisting of 5,431 shoulders with prior nonarthroplasty procedures (cases) and 55,144 shoulders without previous surgery (controls). Variables such as functional scores, complications, and range of motion were compared between cases and controls using Review Manager Software. In addition, subgroup analysis was conducted based on prior surgery type (rotator cuff repair [RCR], open reduction and internal fixation [ORIF], soft tissue repairs, and not specified) and type of SA (hemiarthroplasty, anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty, and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty [RTSA]). The results were presented as odds ratios (ORs) or standardized mean differences (SMDs).

Results:
Except for a higher rate of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients who had undergone previous arthroscopic surgery (OR, 2.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.66-4.01; p < 0.01), a higher rate of complications was only observed in patients with previous ORIF. These complications included aseptic loosening (OR, 3.43; 95% CI, 2.14-5.50; p < 0.01), shoulder dislocation (OR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.05-4.84; p = 0.04), overall complication (OR, 3.95; 95% CI, 2.38-6.55; p < 0.01), and revision (OR, 2.52; 95% CI, 1.28-4.97; p = 0.01). Patients with a history of previous surgery demonstrated inferior functional outcomes in comparison with the control group, including American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (SMD, −0.39; 95% CI, −0.51 to −0.27; p < 0.01; I2 = 36%), Constant–Murley score (SMD, −0.34; 95% CI, −0.44 to −0.24; p < 0.01; I2 = 0%), abduction (SMD, −0.26; 95% CI, −0.45 to −0.08; p = 0.01; I2 = 54%), and flexion (SMD, −0.33; 95% CI, −0.46 to −0.21; p < 0.01; I2 = 40%). Subgroup analysis by previous type of surgery was not possible regarding functional outcomes.

Conclusion:
Patients who have had prior fracture surgery are at a higher risk of complications, reoperations, and revisions after SA than controls. The normal shoulder anatomy may be disrupted by prior surgery, which makes arthroplasty technically challenging, particularly when it comes to soft tissue balance. On the other hand, RCR before SA did not negatively affect clinical outcomes after RTSA and did not have a higher rate of overall complications (except PJI).

Level of Evidence:

Level III (Treatment Studies). See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.