Hemiarthroplasty vs total shoulder replacement for rotator cuff intact osteoarthritis: how do they fare after a decade?

Abstract

<h4>Background</h4>We compared hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total shoulder replacement (TSR) for the treatment of osteoarthritis at minimum of 10 years from primary arthroplasty.<h4>Methods</h4>Thirty-three patients (13 HA and 20 TSR) were intraoperatively randomized to HA or TSR after glenoid exposure and were assessed to a minimum of 10 years postoperatively. Apart from those who died, no patients were lost to follow-up.<h4>Results</h4>At 6 months and 1 year, the TSR patients had less pain than the HA patients (P < .05), and this became more apparent at 2 years postoperatively (P < .02). There were no statistically significant differences between the groups at 10 years with respect to pain, function, and daily activities. No patients in the HA group rated their shoulders as pain-free at 10 years; however, 42% of the surviving TSR patients rated their shoulders as pain-free at 10 years. Four HA patients were revised to TSR due to severe pain secondary to glenoid erosion. Two shoulders in the TSR group have been revised. Nine of the 13 HA patients (69%) and 18 of the 20 TSR patients (90%) remained in situ at death or at the 10-year review.<h4>Conclusion</h4>TSR has advantages over HA with respect to pain and function at 2 years, and there has not been a reversal of the outcomes on longer follow-up. This longer-term review does not support the contention that HA will avoid later TSR complications, and in particular, an unacceptable rate of glenoid component failure.