Revision Risk Following Primary Anatomic and Reverse TSA with an Exactech Equinoxe Compared with Other Devices: A U.S.-Based Cohort Study.

J Bone Joint Surg Am · Sep 15 2026 · Recent

Prentice HA, Chang RN, Yian E, Navarro RA, Singh A, Chan DP, et al.

Medical Device Surveillance & Assessment, Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego

SUMMARY — THE REDUCTIONCohort study found Exactech Equinoxe anatomic TSA implants had nearly double the revision risk versus other devices, even among non-recalled bags, though no difference was seen for reverse TSA.

Abstract, as published

BACKGROUND: In 2024, Exactech issued a voluntary recall of Equinoxe devices after finding that some devices had been packaged in bags that were non-conforming because a secondary oxygen barrier layer of ethylene vinyl alcohol was missing. We sought to evaluate the revision risk following shoulder arthroplasty using an Exactech Equinoxe device compared with other eligible devices.

METHODS: We conducted a cohort study using data from a U.S. health-care system's shoulder arthroplasty registry. The study included 13,901 adult patients who had undergone primary elective anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (ATSA), elective reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), or RTSA for fracture (2005 to 2023). The mean age for the ATSA cohort (N = 8,707) was 68 years, 53.3% were male, and 84.7% were White. Corresponding values for the elective RTSA cohort (N = 4,374) were 74 years, 41.2% male, and 79.9% White, and those for the RTSA for fracture cohort (N = 820) were 73 years, 16.3% male, and 78.4% White. Multivariable Cox regression with covariate adjustment was used to evaluate all-cause revision risk for Equinoxe devices compared with other devices.

RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, a higher revision risk was observed for ATSAs with Equinoxe versus other devices (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.87, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.33 to 2.62). The higher revision risk was also observed in a subanalysis restricted to ATSAs with Equinoxe devices packaged in non-conforming bags (HR = 1.91, 95% CI = 1.34 to 2.72). No differences were observed in elective RTSAs (HR = 0.71, 95% CI = 0.33 to 1.49) or RTSAs for fracture (HR = 2.30, 95% CI = 0.84 to 6.28) with Equinoxe compared with other devices.

CONCLUSIONS: We observed a higher revision risk with the use of Equinoxe devices in ATSA, but no difference for Equinoxe devices in elective RTSA compared with other devices. While all Equinoxe devices packaged in non-conforming bags were recalled worldwide in 2024, clinicians should be mindful of these findings when a patient had previously received an Equinoxe ATSA device.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Read the article: PubMed · Publisher (DOI)

Featured in the 2026-09-16 issue.

← Heterotopic ossification after complex elbow fracture-disloca…Classification of Forearm Involvement in Multiple Hereditary … →

The Reduction is a free email digest of newly published orthopaedic literature — a handful of new papers in the subspecialties you choose, each summarized like this one. Subscribe free or browse the archive.