Short-term comparative outcomes of LIMA hybrid, metal-backed, and all cemented polyethylene glenoids

Abstract

BackgroundThis study aims to compare short-term functional outcomes and conversion rates to reverse shoulder arthroplasty between patients who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) using a modular metal-backed glenoid component, a hybrid glenoid component, and an all-polyethylene component. MethodsA retrospective review of individuals undergoing TSA between October 2014 and December 2020 was performed. Inclusion criteria included patients undergoing primary TSA for osteoarthritis during this time frame by 1 surgeon. Preoperative and postoperative variables included demographic information, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (ASES), and range of motion. Revision rates were also documented. Summary statistics were performed, using a 1-way analysis of variance with Tukey post hoc pairwise comparisons when the outcome reached significance. ResultsFifty-two patients were included with age averaging 68 ± 8.1 years, with body mass index of 31 ± 5.8. 54% of patients were female with 12% having diabetes and only 2% were smokers. Follow-up averaged 42 months with patients undergoing metal-backed glenoid having longer follow-up at 56.5 months (P < .001). ASES, forward elevation, and external rotation (ER) for every implant type improved significantly postoperatively (P < .001) besides internal rotation and ER within the poly group (P = .072). No difference was found between the 3 groups for preoperative and postoperative ASES scores, forward elevation, internal rotation, and ER (P > .05). Two patients within the poly group required revision due to rotator cuff tear (P = .225). ConclusionAt 2 years, functional outcomes and patient-reported outcomes are similar in all 3 glenoid groups. There were slightly higher revision rates within the all-polyethylene group. If outcomes are similar among all groups, modular implant systems may be favorable to make conversion to revision TSA easier.