Objektive und subjektive Kurzzeitergebnisse von Patienten nach Schulterarthroplastik

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund: Studien zum Einsatz von Schulterarthroplastiken erzielten gute Resultate bezüglich der Wiederherstellung der Schulterfunktion. Der kurzfristige Rehabilitationsverlauf ist bisher jedoch kaum untersucht.

Ziel: Primäres Ziel war die Untersuchung objektiver und subjektiver Ergebnisse innerhalb der ersten 6 Monate nach Implantation einer Schulterarthroplastik, sekundäres Ziel die Evaluation der individuellen Heilungsverläufe von Patienten mit anatomischer versus inverser Arthroplastik.

Methode: Prospektiv wurden 19 Patienten nach Schulterarthroplastik mit einem Durchschnittsalter von 72 Jahren eingeschlossen. Die Erhebung subjektiver Parameter mithilfe des Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) und objektiver Parameter mit dem Constant Murley Score erfolgte präoperativ, nach 6 Wochen sowie nach 3 und 6 Monaten.

Ergebnisse: Alle Patienten verbesserten sich bezüglich aller Parameter signifikant zwischen der präoperativen Untersuchung und dem Follow-up nach 6 Monaten (p ≤ 0,05). Patienten mit einer inversen Schulterarthroplastik zeigten präoperativ eine deutlich bzw. teilweise signifikant schlechtere Funktion als die mit einer anatomischen Arthroplastik. Nach 6 Monaten waren jedoch keine funktionellen Unterschiede zwischen den beiden Gruppen feststellbar (p ≥ 0,05).

Schlussfolgerung: Die Heilungsverläufe von Patienten mit anatomischer versus inverser Schulterarthroplastik unterscheiden sich in den ersten Monaten. Nach einem halben Jahr sind ähnliche Ergebnisse zu erwarten.

Abstract

Background: Studies dealing with the implementation of shoulder arthroplasty achieved good results with regard to shoulder function restoration. To date the short-term rehabilitation process is poorly investigated.

Objective: Primary objective was the evaluation of both objective and subjective shoulder function in patients following shoulder arthroplasty within the first 6 months after implantation. Secondly, the healing process of the anatomic versus reverse arthroplasty was investigated.

Method: Prospectively 19 shoulder arthroplasty patients with a mean age of 72 years were included. Subjective function using the Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI) as well as objective parameters using the Constant Murley Score were recorded preoperatively, after 6 weeks as well as 3 and 6 months postoperatively.

Results: All patients improved significantly in all parameters between preoperative investigation and 6 months’ follow-up (p ≤ 0,05). Preoperatively reverse arthroplasty patients showed distinct and partially restricted function compared to anatomic arthroplasty patients. However, after 6 months there were no functional differences between the two groups (p ≥ 0,05).

Conclusion: Healing processes of patients with anatomic versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty differed during the first months. After 6 months similar results are to be expected.

Schlüsselwörter

Schulter - Arthroplastik - Physiotherapie

Key words

shoulder - arthroplasty - physiotherapy

• Literatur

• 1 Angst F, Goldhahn J, Pap G et al. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability and validity of the German Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI). Rheumatology 2007; 46: 87-92
• 2 Boileau P, Watkinson DJ, Hatzidakis AM et al. Grammont reverse prosthesis: design, rationale, and biomechanics. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 2005; 14: 147S-161S
• 3 Brems JJ. Rehabilitation following total shoulder arthroplasty. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1994; 307: 70
• 4 Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 1987; 214: 160-164
• 5 Day JS, Lau E, Ong KL et al. Prevalence and projections of total shoulder and elbow arthroplasty in the United States to 2015. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 2010; 19: 1115-1120
• 6 De Wilde L, Mombert M, van Petegem P et al. Revision of shoulder replacement with a reversed shoulder prosthesis (Delta III): report of five cases. Acta Orthopaedica Belgica 2001; 67: 348-353
• 7 Von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Mayr HO, Hinterwimmer S et al. Simultaneous 3D assessment of glenohumeral shape, humeral head centering, and scapular positioning in atraumatic shoulder instability: a magnetic resonance-based in vivo analysis. The American Journal of Sports Medicine 2010; 38: 375-382
• 8 Flury MP, Frey P, Goldhahn J et al. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty as a salvage procedure for failed conventional shoulder replacement due to cuff failure – midterm results. International Orthopaedics 2011; 35: 53-60
• 9 Herrmann S, Konig C, Heller M et al. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty leads to significant biomechanical changes in the remaining rotator cuff. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 2011; 6: 42
• 10 Jacobs R, Debeer P, de Smet L. Treatment of rotator cuff arthropathy with a reversed Delta shoulder prosthesis. Acta Orthopaedica Belgica 2001; 67: 344-347
• 11 Jain NB, Higgins LD, Guller U et al. Trends in the epidemiology of total shoulder arthroplasty in the United States from 1990–2000. Arthritis and Rheumatism 2006; 55: 591-597
• 12 Kolling C, Schwyzer HK, Simmen BR et al. Standardisierte Outcome-Messungen bei Patienten mit Implantation einer Schulterprothese erlauben detaillierte Analysen der funktionellen und subjektiven Operationsergebnisse. Obere Extremität 2010; 5: 186-191
• 13 Kontaxis A, Johnson GR. The biomechanics of reverse anatomy shoulder replacement – a modelling study. Clinical Biomechanics 2009; 24: 254-260
• 14 Lehmann LJ, Mauerman E, Strube T et al. Modified minimally invasive latissimus dorsi transfer in the treatment of massive rotator cuff tears: a two-year follow-up of 26 consecutive patients. International Orthopaedics 2010; 34: 377-383
• 15 Levine WN, Djurasovic M, Glasson JM et al. Hemiarthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis: results correlated to degree of glenoid wear. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 1997; 6: 449-454
• 16 Matsen FA. Early effectiveness of shoulder arthroplasty for patients who have primary glenohumeral degenerative joint disease. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 1996; 78: 260-264
• 17 Mulieri PJ, Holcomb JO, Dunning P et al. Is a formal physical therapy program necessary after total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis?. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 2010; 19: 570-579
• 18 Naveed MA, Kitson J, Bunker TD. The Delta III reverse shoulder replacement for cuff tear arthropathy: a single-centre study of 50 consecutive procedures. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2011; 93: 57-61
• 19 Ogston JB, Ludewig PM. Differences in 3-dimensional shoulder kinematics between persons with multidirectional instability and asymptomatic controls. The American Journal of Sports Medicine 2007; 35: 1361-1370
• 20 Rocourt M, Radlinger L, Kalberer F et al. Evaluation of intratester and intertester reliability of the Constant-Murley shoulder assessment. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 2008; 17: 364-369
• 21 Sirveaux F, Favard L, Oudet D et al. Grammont inverted total shoulder arthroplasty in the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis with massive rupture of the cuff. Results of a multicentre study of 80 shoulders. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery 2004; 86: 388-395
• 22 Sperling J, Kaufman K, Schleck C et al. A biomechanical analysis of strength and motion following total shoulder arthroplasty. International Journal of Shoulder Surgery 2008; 2: 1-3
• 23 Steenbrink F, de Groot JH, Veeger HEJ et al. Glenohumeral stability in simulated rotator cuff tears. Journal of Biomechanics 2009; 42: 1740-1745
• 24 Wilcox RB, Arslanian LE, Millett P. Rehabilitation following total shoulder arthroplasty. The Journal of Orthopaedic and Sports Physical Therapy 2005; 35: 821-836