Skip to main content
. 2024 Oct 11;16(6):962–970. doi: 10.4055/cios24071

Table 3. Clinical Outcomes According to the HO on Computed Tomography.

Variable Heterotopic ossification on computed tomography p-value
No HO (n = 7) Yes HO (n = 23)
Age (yr) 75.0 ± 5.0 73.2 ± 6.5 0.517
Sex 1.000
Male 1 6
Female 6 17
Primary diagnosis 0.886
CTA or MRCT 4 15
Proximal humerus Fx 2 4
Chronic shoulder D/L with glenoid bone loss 1 2
Osteoarthritis 0 2
Implant system 0.962
Ascend Flex 4 12
DJO 1 5
Equinoxe Eactech 1 4
Aqualis Fx stem 1 2
Follow-up period (mo) 21.0 ± 5.1 24.9 ± 13.9 0.478
VAS pain score 2.2 ± 2.0 2.3 ± 1.8 0.939
ASES score 86.8 ± 9.1 84.5 ± 12.8 0.661
UCLA score 30.4 ± 2.1 27.0 ± 6.8 0.045*
SF-36 MCS 72.0 ± 12.0 69.0 ± 16.2 0.661
SF-36 PCS 70.7 ± 9.5 57.6 ± 21.8 0.034*
FF 118.5 ± 19.7 134.7 ± 24.5 0.123
ER 54.2 ± 16.1 50.0 ± 25.3 0.678
IR 4.2 ± 1.8 4.8 ± 2.7 0.604

Values are presented as mean ± standard deviation.

HO: heterotopic ossification, CTA: cuff tear arthropathy, MRCT: massive rotator cuff tear, Fx: fracture, D/L: dislocation, VAS: visual analog score, ASES: American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, UCLA: University of California, Los Angeles score, SF-36 MCS: short-form 36-item mental component score, SF-36 PCS: short-form 36-item physical component score, FF: forward flexion, ER: external rotation, IR: internal rotation.

*Statistically significant.