Postoperative Shoulder


Recurrent or persistent pain is a common complaint after shoulder surgery. MRI and ultrasonography (US) are often performed in the postoperative setting as a noninvasive means of determining the etiology of postoperative pain. Numerous surgical and arthroscopic techniques are available to the surgeon, and many of these procedures result in a change to the normal anatomy of the shoulder. An accurate interpretation of a postoperative shoulder MR image requires a thorough understanding of the surgical techniques and their effect on the local anatomy. In this chapter, described are the commonly performed surgical procedures used to treat impingement, rotator cuff disease, and shoulder instability. The normal expected postoperative MR and ultrasound appearance are then described.

Shoulder surgery is usually performed as either an open or an arthroscopic procedure or, occasionally, as a combination procedure referred to as a mini-open procedure. An arthroscopic procedure uses several small incisions as portals for the arthroscopic instruments, whereas an open procedure is much more invasive, typically requiring detachment of the deltoid from the acromion to gain access to the shoulder. The advantages of open surgery over arthroscopy include better long-term results, improved visualization of both the rotator cuff and the subacromial space, and ease of performance for those more familiar with this approach. The disadvantages include increased perioperative morbidity and the need for detachment of the deltoid muscle. Arthroscopic procedures offer the advantage of fewer complications, better intraarticular visualization, and less postoperative pain and morbidity. Mini-open procedures combine elements of both arthroscopy and the open surgical approach and may be used by a surgeon less experienced with the arthroscope in complicated shoulder surgeries that they believe cannot be easily completed with arthroscopy alone ( Tables 107-1 and 107-2 ).

TABLE 107-1
Open Versus Arthroscopic Procedures
Advantages Disadvantages
Open procedures Better long-term results
Improved visualization of cuff and subacromial space
Increased perioperative morbidity
Detachment of deltoid
Ease of performance
Arthroscopic procedures Fewer perioperative complications
Improved intraarticular visualization
Lack of experience on the part of the surgeon
Poorer long-term results
Less perioperative morbidity

TABLE 107-2
Indications for Subacromial Decompression
  • Symptoms and physical signs consistent with impingement

  • Failure of conservative management through rehabilitation

  • Presence of severe coexisting cuff disease requiring subacromial decompression in combination with cuff repair

  • Young active patients may require earlier intervention.

  • Preoperative MRI findings consistent with impingement, including severe acromioclavicular joint degenerative disease, type 3 acromion, and thick coracoacromial ligament

Imaging Techniques

With the use of a dedicated shoulder coil, images are typically acquired in the axial, oblique, coronal, and oblique sagittal planes. Postoperative MRI and MR arthrography protocols from the institutions for a 1.5-tesla magnet are included ( eTables 107-1 to 107-4 ). MR arthrography is performed after the injection of approximately 12 mL of a 1/200 mL gadolinium solution. If infection is suspected, intravenous gadolinium may be used. In situations in which the use of intraarticular gadolinium injection is not feasible, intravenous MRI arthrography may be used as an alternative.

eTABLE 107-1
Routine Postoperative Shoulder Sequences
Plane Sequence TR TE FOV Slice Thickness Slice Spacing Matrix NEX
Axial MPGR 600 22 14 3 0 256 × 160 2
Axial FSE FS dual echo * 2500 17/50 14 4 0.5 320 × 224 2
Sagittal FSE 3000 50 14 4 0.5 320 × 224 2
Coronal FSE FS dual echo * 3000 20/50 14 4 1.0 320 × 224 1
FOV, Field of view; FS, fat suppression; FSE, fast spin-echo; MPGR, multiplanar gradient-recalled-echo sequence; NEX, number of excitations; TE, echo time; TR, repetition time.

* Short tau inversion recovery imaging may be used if fat suppression fails.

eTABLE 107-2
MR Arthrogram Protocol for Labrum Assessment *
Plane Sequence TR TE FOV Slice Thickness Slice Spacing Matrix NEX
Axial FSE FS 500 17 12 3 0.0 256 × 256 2
Coronal FSE FS 4000 35–45 12 3 0.5 384 × 224 2
Sagittal FSE 3000 55 14 3 0.0 320 × 224 2
Axial FSE 600 15 12 2 0.0 512 × 256 2
FOV, Field of view; FS, fat suppression; FSE, fast spin-echo; MR, magnetic resonance; NEX, number of excitations; TE, echo time; TR, repetition time.

* Abduction and external rotation imaging may also be performed with TR/TE 600/15, matrix 256×192, slice thickness 3 mm, NEX 2, and FOV 14.

eTABLE 107-3
MR Arthrogram Protocol for Rotator Cuff Assessment
Plane Sequence TR TE FOV Slice Thickness Slice Spacing Matrix NEX
Axial FSE FS 500 17 12 3 0.0 256 × 256 2
Axial FSE FS 4000 35 12 3 0.5 384 × 224 2
Sagittal FSE 3000 55 14 4 1.0 320 × 224 2
Coronal FSE 600 15 12 2 0.0 512 × 256 2
FOV, Field of view; FS, fat suppression; FSE, fast spin-echo; NEX, number of excitations; TE, echo time; TR, repetition time.

eTABLE 107-4
Relative Contraindications to Subacromial Decompression
  • Advanced age of the patient

  • Minimal activity level

  • Poor surgical candidate

  • Unrealistic patient expectations of surgery

  • Occult instability as etiology of symptoms

Susceptibility artifact from screws, suture anchors, and staples can create a significant artifact. For this reason, gradient-echo sequences tend to have significant blooming artifact ( eFig. 107-1 ). Instead, turbo and fast spin-echo imaging are useful because multiple 180-degree pulses help minimize the degree of magnetic susceptibility artifact. Fat saturation will also tend to be less reliable because of the presence of magnetic susceptibility effects from adjacent metal and therefore reduced magnetic field homogeneity. Fast spin-echo inversion recovery may provide a better solution, in these circumstances. These artifacts will typically be more prominent in the frequency encoding direction, and adjustments should be made according to the area of interest in a particular study.

eFIGURE 107-1, Axial gradient-echo image reveals extensive blooming artifact after rotator cuff repair.

Subacromial Decompression

Description

Through an open or arthroscopic approach, a combination of shavers and burs are used to remove the anteroinferior aspect of the acromion from the level of the acromioclavicular (AC) joint to the level of the deltoid insertion (see eFig. 107-1 ). The subacromial bursa, if inflamed, is often resected at the time of the subacromial decompression. The coracoacromial ligament, if thickened, may be resected at the level of its attachment to the acromion. Many orthopedic surgeons, however, will choose to débride rather than resect the ligament, especially in younger patients, in an attempt to prevent superior migration of the humeral head. In the setting of advanced AC joint degenerative change, the AC joint may be resected along with the distal 2.5 cm of the clavicle, referred to as a Mumford procedure ( Fig. 107-1 ). Prominent osteophytes may also be resected.

FIGURE 107-1, Anterior acromioplasty. A portion of the anterior acromion has been removed along with the attachment of the coracoacromial ligament.

Indications, Contraindications, Purpose, and Underlying Mechanics

The basic goal of subacromial decompression is to treat extrinsic impingement of the rotator cuff by resecting those areas of the osseous outlet and acromion that result in narrowing of the supraspinatus outlet. Pain over the anterolateral and superior aspects of the shoulder may be elicited or exacerbated by passive forward elevation of the arm (Neer sign) or by internal rotation that brings the greater tuberosity beneath the anterior aspect of the acromion (Hawkins sign). The impingement test involves injection of lidocaine into the subacromial space. Significant relief of symptoms after injection is considered specific in ascribing pain to rotator cuff pathology that may benefit from subacromial decompression.

Nonoperative management of overuse syndromes includes rehabilitation, such as capsular stretching, rotator cuff and scapulothoracic strengthening, and patient education with regard to alterations in athletic participation and training or job modification. Modification of activity is geared to reducing repetitive overhead use of the arm. Oral anti-inflammatory agents or corticosteroid injections may help reduce inflammation associated with impingement. Chronic rotator cuff problems often lead to limitations of movement and may require capsular stretching exercises as a prelude to eventual rotator cuff strengthening. Nonoperative management is typically less successful for those younger patients with a rotator cuff tear. Small chronic rotator cuff tears in older, less active patients with normal range of motion may respond more favorably to nonoperative management. Failure to respond to nonoperative management is an indication of subacromial decompression.

Preoperative MR findings of the coracoacromial arch associated with the clinical syndrome of impingement include extensive capsular hypertrophy or a large inferiorly directed osteophyte at the level of the AC joint, resulting in mass effect on the underlying cuff. Anatomic abnormalities of the anterior aspect of the acromion that can be associated with impingement include a subacromial spur or a type 3 acromial configuration. Finally, thickening of the coracoacromial ligament (>3 mm) may also predispose to impingement of the anterior rotator cuff.

Although there are no absolute contraindications to subacromial decompression, some factors, such as age, activity level, general medical condition, patient expectations, and the severity of disease, will determine the likelihood of proceeding to surgery. The partial-thickness tear in a young throwing athlete must be approached cautiously and examined for occult instability leading to eccentric loading of the rotator cuff or internal glenoid impingement. Acromioplasty is not indicated in this patient with occult instability unless bursal pathology is also present (see Tables 107-2 and 107-3 ).

TABLE 107-3
Complications of Subacromial Decompression
  • Inadequate acromioplasty

  • Failure to recognize acromioclavicular joint degenerative change

  • Postoperative scarring interposed between the cuff and acromion

  • Failure to address an os acromiale

  • Unrecognized instability as the cause of symptoms

  • Deltoid detachment

  • General postoperative complications: adhesive capsulitis, synovitis, abscess formation, osteomyelitis, chondrolysis, and hematoma formation

Expected Appearance on Relevant Modalities

Comparison with preoperative imaging studies is of particular importance in accurately assessing the postsurgical changes as they relate to impingement. Understanding of the patient's presurgical anatomy enables the radiologist to give a more accurate description of the changes to the osseous outlet. After acromioplasty, MRI may demonstrate a change from a curved or hooked acromial configuration to a flat undersurface ( Fig. 107-2 ). Low signal artifact from small metal fragments is often present as a result of burring of the acromion, and, typically, the anterior third of the acromion is not visualized because of resection (see eFig. 107-2 ). Residual microscopic metal shavings resulting from burring of the acromion often result in extensive susceptibility artifact on MRI. If AC joint pathology was considered the source of impingement, postoperative changes may include absence of the distal 1.5 to 2.0 cm of the clavicle (Mumford procedure) or widening of the AC joint ( Fig. 107-3 ). Fibrosis often develops at the site of acromioplasty, resulting in low T1- and T2-weighted signal within the remaining acromion (see eFig. 107-3 ).

FIGURE 107-2, A , Preoperative sagittal oblique T1-weighted MR image demonstrates a type 3 acromial configuration. B , After acromioplasty, an oblique sagittal T1-weighted MR image demonstrates conversion to a type 1 acromial configuration (flat undersurface).

FIGURE 107-3, Oblique sagittal proton density–weighted image reveals widening of the acromioclavicular joint after joint excision.

eFIGURE 107-2, A , After acromioplasty, an axial proton density–weighted image shows postsurgical artifact along the anterior aspect of the acromion. B , After acromioplasty, a coronal oblique proton density–weighted image shows absence of the anterior portion of the acromion.

eFIGURE 107-3, Acromion fibrosis. Coronal T1-weighted MR image reveals decreased signal in the acromion as a result of fibrosis after acromioplasty (black arrow). The patient also has a full-thickness tear of the supraspinatus with tendon retraction and fatty atrophy (white arrowhead).

If inflamed, the subacromial/subdeltoid bursa is often resected at the time of acromioplasty, resulting in scar tissue and residual fluid in the region of the bursa. As a result, fluid in the location of the bursa is not a useful secondary sign of cuff injury or bursal inflammation after acromioplasty (see eFig. 107-4 ). The coracoacromial ligament may also be lysed or débrided at the time of the surgery, typically near its attachment to the acromion ( Fig. 107-4 ).

FIGURE 107-4, Postoperative appearance of the coracoacromial ligament. Oblique sagittal fat-saturated proton density–weighted MR image shows resection of the coracoacromial ligament at its distal attachment to the acromion after acromioplasty.

eFIGURE 107-4, Subacromial fluid is noted after acromioplasty on this oblique coronal fat-saturated, T2-weighted MR image. This does not suggest a cuff tear or bursitis—residual fluid (arrowhead).

After subacromial decompression, without rotator cuff repair, there may be slight improvement in the altered MR signal intensity seen within the rotator cuff tendon and peritendinous tissues; however, most changes of tendinosis and additional alterations in the tendon, such as bursal or articular surface fraying or partial tear, usually persist.

Potential Complications and Radiologic Appearance

There are many potential sources of continued or recurrent pain after subacromial decompression. One source of pain is inadequate acromioplasty. Sagittal and coronal MR images are typically most helpful in assessing for the presence of persistent anatomic changes of the osseous outlet that may be associated with continued impingement, such as residual spur formation along the undersurface of the acromion that indents the supraspinatus muscle or tendon (see eFig. 107-5 ). After acromioplasty, the patient may continue to have pain because of osteoarthritis of the AC joint that was not addressed at the time of surgery or progression of disease in the region of the AC joint ( Fig. 107-5 ). An additional cause for persistent impingement would be the formation of extensive postoperative scarring interposed between the cuff tendon and the remaining acromion.

FIGURE 107-5, Post-acromioplasty pain. Oblique coronal T2-weighted, fast spin-echo MR sequence with fat saturation after acromioplasty shows persistent acromioclavicular joint arthritis with marginal edema and joint space fluid. There has also been interval development of a small partial-thickness undersurface tear.

eFIGURE 107-5, Post-acromioplasty pain. Oblique coronal T1-weighted image shows persistent mass effect on the supraspinatus muscle from an osteophyte arising along the undersurface of the clavicle after acromioplasty (arrow).

The persistence or progression of rotator cuff disease is also a common source of pain after acromioplasty (see eFig. 107-6 ). This may occur because of inadequate decompression or the natural progression of cuff disease not treated at the time of acromioplasty. Because many of these patients, to some degree, have coexisting disease of the rotator cuff disease, MRI is indicated in the setting of persistent postoperative symptoms. Clinical findings, such as night pain, loss of motion, and weakness, are not considered to be specific. Rotator cuff tendinosis may progress to a tear, or unrecognized partial or small complete tears may extend (see eFig. 107-6 ).

eFIGURE 107-6, A , Progression of rotator cuff disease after acromioplasty. Oblique coronal T2-weighted fast spin-echo image with fat saturation shows the interval development of an articular surface partial tear after acromioplasty (arrow). B , Progression of rotator cuff disease. Coronal oblique, turbo inversion recovery sequence in another patient. Status post-acromioplasty was the interval development of a full-thickness tear of the supraspinatus tendon anterodistal (arrow).

The assessment of cuff integrity after surgery is complicated by the possibility of a persistent signal in the cuff tendons after acromioplasty. However, MRI remains sensitive but not as specific in this setting for the assessment of cuff tear. It is fairly sensitive (84%) and specific (87%) for residual impingement, according to a study by Magee and colleagues. The typical criteria for a cuff tear in which there is tendon discontinuity and a fluid signal defect on long repetition-time/echo-time sequences still apply. MR arthrography may also be helpful in further evaluating for more subtle cuff tears because contrast agent extravasation through a cuff defect may be more readily apparent.

Another potential cause of unsuccessful acromioplasty is failure to recognize and treat an unstable os acromiale. A persistent unstable os acromiale can lead to continued impingement on the rotator cuff during deltoid contraction and continued symptoms of impingement ( eFig. 107-7 ). Finally, in some patients, symptoms of impingement result from unrecognized glenohumeral instability rather than from extrinsic impingement, and acromioplasty can, in fact, worsen the situation in these patients.

eFIGURE 107-7, A , Persistent os acromiale after acromioplasty. Axial proton density–weighted MR sequence with fat saturation reveals the presence of marginal edema within a previously unrecognized os acromiale after acromioplasty. B , Persistent os acromiale after acromioplasty. Oblique coronal proton density–weighted MR image shows a flat undersurface of the acromion after acromioplasty, but a persistent os acromiale is noted that may contribute to continued impingement.

Open surgical procedures for subacromial decompression and rotator cuff repair carry the risk of deltoid detachment or atrophy because this procedure involves a deltoid takedown in an open approach or a deltoid-splitting procedure in a mini-open approach ( Fig. 107-6 ). The mini-open procedure may carry a lower risk of this complication ( Table 107-3 ). During ultrasound examination of postoperative subacromial decompression, using an open or mini-open approach, a few months after surgery, closure sutures appear in the middle part of the deltoid muscle or in the proximal part of the muscle as small linear or curved hyperechogenic artifacts without shadowing. Residual fluid may persist over the supraspinatus muscle, in cases of subacromial bursectomy ( Fig. 107-7 ).

FIGURE 107-6, Detachment and atrophy of the deltoid muscle after acromioplasty. Oblique coronal proton density–weighted image reveals retraction and fatty atrophy of the deltoid muscle. Deltoid detachment in combination with a large rotator cuff tear and acromioplasty has led to superior migration of the humeral head.

FIGURE 107-7, Residual fluid over supraspinatus muscle after subacromial bursectomy and acromioplasty. Thin hypoechoic fluid collection in place of subacromial burs space two weeks after surgery.

You're Reading a Preview

Become a Clinical Tree membership for Full access and enjoy Unlimited articles

Become membership

If you are a member. Log in here