Shoulder replacement in cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) is an unsolved challenge. CTA poses a soft tissue deficiency in an arthritic glenohumeral joint which the anatomical total shoulder replacement and hemiarthroplasty cannot reliably provide stability, range of movement, function or satisfactory long term outcome. In the past two decades since the introduction of the reverse shoulder replacement, the prosthesis has evolved and has shown promising results. It is a partially constraint joint by virtue of its design features. The reversal of the concavity and convexity of the joint to the proximal humerus and the glenoid, respectively, also shifts and improves its center of rotation onto the osseous surface of the glenoid with less exposure to shear stress. It is a successful pain relieving procedure, offering good outcome in patients with irreparable massive rotator cuff tear with or without osteoarthritis. Consequently, this has led to wider use and expansion of its indication to include more complex elective and trauma cases. Whereas originally used in the more elderly patients, there is increasingly more demand in the younger patients. It is important to have good quality long term data to support these increasing indications. Therefore, we review the literature on the concepts of reverse shoulder replacement and the contemporary evidence.

Revision total hip replacement following a fractured ceramic bearing component presents a challenge in the choice of the new bearing implant. A femoral head made of equal or harder material should be implanted to prevent catastrophic wear. Despite this, patients and surgeons must be wary of potential complications.

No abstract

a b s t r a c tThis article describes the presentation of a patient with knee swelling following injury. It tests and explains the various clinical aspects that are important for a resident to know in assessment, diagnosis and management of this presentation.

CorrespondenceThe Editors welcome topical correspondence from readers relating to articles published in the Journal. Responses should be sent electronically via the BJS website (www.bjs.co.uk). All letters will be reviewed and, if approved, appear on the website. A selection of these will be edited and published in the Journal. Letters must be no more than 250 words in length. SirWe thank Mr Lee for his comments and were delighted to hear that our work might potentially impact on his future practice. One need only look at the