Home > Journals > Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica > Past Issues > Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2009 April;60(2) > Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2009 April;60(2):173-9





A Journal on Orthopedics and Traumatology

Official Journal of the Piedmontese-Ligurian-Lombard Society of Orthopedics and Traumatology
Indexed/Abtracted in: EMBASE, Scopus, Emerging Sources Citation Index




Minerva Ortopedica e Traumatologica 2009 April;60(2):173-9

language: English

Conventional hemiarthroplasty. Are there still indications?

Sperling J. W., Duncan S. F. M., Antuna S. A.

1 Department of Orthopedic Surgery Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
2 Department of Orthopedic Surgery Mayo Health System, Owatonna, MN, USA
3 Shoulder and Elbow Unit Hospital Universitario La Paz Universidad Autónoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain


The decision between hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty remains a controversial choice for the patient with shoulder arthritis. Multiple factors need to be considered when making the final decision between these two procedures. The process begins with a thorough understanding of the patient’s symptoms, motivation, and ability to comply with postoperative rehabilitation and restrictions. In addition, a thorough history, physical examination and appropriate imaging studies play an important role in helping to guide clinical decision making. One may consider hemiarthroplasty in patients with severe glenoid wear that precludes placement of a glenoid component, rotator cuff arthropathy in the younger patient, as well as those patients who are unwilling to live with the restrictions of having a glenoid component. In the typical patient with an intact rotator cuff and adequate glenoid bone stock, the decision is based primarily on the patient’s activity level and understanding of the trade off of increased activity with a hemiarthroplasty in return for a lower chance at pain relief.

top of page

Publication History

Cite this article as

Corresponding author e-mail