Glenoid Implants Research Articles

Computer-Assisted Preoperative Planning and Patient-Specific Instrumentation for Glenoid Implants in Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Glenoid component positioning affects implant survival after total shoulder arthroplasty, and accurate glenoid-component positioning is an important technical aspect. The use of virtual planning and patient-specific instrumentation has been shown to produce reliable implant placement in the laboratory and in some clinical studies. Currently available preoperative planning software programs employ different techniques to generate 3-dimensional models and produce anatomic measurements potentially affecting clinical decisions. There are no published data, to our knowledge, on the effect of preoperative computer planning and patient-specific instrumentation on long-term clinical outcomes.

Minimum five-year outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using a trabecular metal glenoid base plate

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) using trabecular metal (TM)-backed glenoid implants has been introduced with the aim to increase implant survival. Only short-term reports on the outcomes of TM-RTSA have been published to date. We aim to present the seven-year survival of TM-backed glenoid implants along with minimum five-year clinical and radiological outcomes. All consecutive elective RTSAs performed at a single centre between November 2008 and October 2014 were reviewed. Patients who had primary TM-RTSA for rotator cuff arthropathy and osteoarthritis with deficient cuff were included. A total of 190 shoulders in 168 patients (41 male, 127 female) were identified for inclusion at a mean of 7.27 years (SD 1.4) from surgery. The primary outcome was survival of the implant with all-cause revision and aseptic glenoid loosening as endpoints. Secondary outcomes were clinical, radiological, and patient-related outcomes with a five-year minimum follow-up. The implant was revised in ten shoulders (5.2%) with a median time to revision of 21.2 months (interquartile range (IQR) 9.9 to 41.8). The Kaplan-Meier survivorship estimate at seven years was 95.9% (95% confidence interval (CI) 91.7 to 98; 35 RTSAs at risk) for aseptic mechanical failure of the glenoid and 94.8% (95% CI 77.5 to 96.3; 35 RTSAs at risk) for all-cause revision. Minimum five-year clinical and radiological outcomes were available for 103 and 98 RTSAs respectively with a median follow-up time of six years (IQR 5.2 to 7.0). Median postoperative Oxford Shoulder Score was 38 (IQR 31 to 45); median Constant and Murley score was 60 (IQR 47.5 to 70); median forward flexion 115° (IQR 100° to 125°); median abduction 95° (IQR 80° to 120°); and external rotation 25° (IQR 15° to 40°) Scapular notching was seen in 62 RTSAs (63.2%). We present the largest and longest-term series of TM-backed glenoid implants demonstrating 94.8% all-cause survivorship at seven years. Specifically pertaining to glenoid loosening, survival of the implant increased to 95.9%. In addition, we report satisfactory minimum five-year clinical and radiological outcomes. Cite this article: Bone Joint J2021;103-B(8):1333-1338.

Stemmed versus stemless total shoulder arthroplasty: a comparison of operative times

BackgroundTotal shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is the gold standard treatment of end-stage glenohumeral osteoarthritis. TSA with stemless humeral implants have shown comparable rates of success to stemmed components. Prolonged operative time is associated with increased cost, surgical, and medical complications, and higher rates of infection. Therefore, the goal of this study was to evaluate operative time with stemless TSA compared to stemmed TSA. We hypothesize that stemless TSA will be associated with less operative than stemmed TSA. MethodsIn this retrospective case-control study of 80 consecutive patients, 40 patients underwent stemless TSA and 40 patients underwent stemmed TSA. To eliminate potential bias due to individual surgeons surgical techniques, the cohorts were matched by surgeon in a 1:1 ratio. Only primary TSA, without augmented glenoid implants, were included. We evaluated the difference in operative time between groups. Operative time was defined as time from incision to commencement of wound closure. ResultsOur sample included 62.5% and 55% females in the stemmed and stemless cohorts respectively. Patients in the stemless group were noted to be younger with a mean age of 61 compared to 68 in the stemmed group (P < .01). The BMI between both cohorts were comparable at 29.72 and 30.04 in the stem and stemless cohorts, respectively (P = .84). Operative time was noted to be significantly less in the stemless TSA cohort. Specifically, a 13.53 minutes difference was noted with a mean time of 100.35 vs. 86.82 minutes (P = .04). ConclusionIn this case-control study, matched by surgeon to avoid technique bias, evaluating stemmed and stemless humeral components for anatomic TSA, we noted a significantly shorter operative time in favor of stemless TSA. The clinical and economic impact of this difference remains unclear. Level of evidenceLevel III, retrospective case-control study.

Scapular spine load-bearing strut in custom-made reverse shoulder arthroplasty - clinical and radiological follow-up of an index case

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty allows surgeons to effectively treat complex primary and salvage cases that were previously difficult to manage. Revision shoulder arthroplasty provides a unique challenging environment to both surgeon and patient alike, with the variability of bone stock in the shoulder girdle offering unique tests to existing surgical methods and techniques. Following severe glenoid erosion, custom-made implants have a role in restoring optimal anatomy for the shoulder arthroplasty to be effective. The case described illustrates the challenges of reconstructing a glenoid with significant bone loss. Currently, there is no evidence concerning the outcomes of specific scapular spine strut supports in custom-made glenoid implants. The authors highlight an innovative design for the custom glenoid baseplate with the addition of a strut which allows for supplementary load-bearing through the scapular spine. Implant stability, as well as the satisfactory medium-term clinical and radiological outcomes of such a construct, are also demonstrated.

A “Floating Glenoid” after a Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Case Report with Literature Review

A shoulder replacement for cuff tear arthropathy was the original indication of the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). However, over time, this particular concept of shoulder arthroplasty has found new indications for other pathologies such as complex proximal humeral fractures and irreparable rotator cuff tears with rotator cuff arthropathy. Retensioning of the deltoid muscle is a vital step during this procedure in order to restore active elevation however, this can be potentially problematic since it results in anatomical changes and often times increases the stress forces across the acromion. We experienced a rare case of an 84-year-old female presenting with an extensive fracture resulting in a “floating glenoid” after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty via a deltopectoral approach. In our case, the patient presented with gradual onset pain in the posterior shoulder with point tenderness over the acromion, which worsened during active joint movement. The patient was definitively managed with surgical removal of the glenoid implants and conversion to a hemiarthroplasty. While there are existing strategies for preventing fractures of this nature, further research is still necessary to establish best management guidelines of these fracture complications associated with rTSA in order to achieve optimal outcomes.

Early experience with force-space navigated robotics for glenoid implantation during total shoulder arthroplasty

In this paper passive Infrared sensor “PIR” based security system is introduced. With this sensor we can save power, and effective management at low cost and requires small memory space.

The study of 2-dimensional computed tomography scans of the glenoid anatomy in relation to reverse shoulder arthroplasty in the Southern Chinese population.

BackgroundReverse shoulder arthroplasty is becoming an increasingly common surgical procedure in Hong Kong, as well as in many other countries worldwide. The aim of this study is to describe the glenoid anatomy in the Southern Chinese population. We are interested to know whether commercially available glenoid implants are suitable for this population and whether there are any steps or precautions we can take during surgery to optimize the clinical outcome for these patients.MethodA total of 244 shoulders of Southern Chinese patients were analyzed using 2-dimensional computed tomography, formatted to align along the scapular axis. The anatomic parameters analyzed included the shape, axial configuration, maximum width, maximum height, version, and presence of bone defect.ResultsIn our study, 76.6% of glenoids were pear-shaped, 23.0% were elliptical, and only 0.4% were inverted pear in shape. Of all glenoids, 95.1% of glenoids had posterior-prominent axial configuration, whereas 4.9% had neutral axial configuration. The mean maximum glenoid height for both genders was 33.8 mm, whereas the mean maximum glenoid height was 32.2 mm for women and 36.6 mm for men. The mean maximum glenoid width for both genders was 25.8 mm, whereas the mean maximum glenoid width was 24.8 mm for women and 27.3 mm for men. The differences in measurements between genders were statistically significant. Of all glenoids, 46.3% of the glenoids were retroverted, whereas 53.7% of the glenoids were anteverted. The mean version for both genders was 0.77 degrees anteversion. The mean version was 1.16 degrees anteversion for women and 0.10 degrees anteversion for men. Of the 244 glenoids, 4 had bone defects. In our study, 39.8% of patients had mean maximum glenoid widths that were less than 25 mm, which is the smallest size available for most conventional glenoid baseplates.ConclusionA significant portion of the Southern Chinese population has glenoid widths that are smaller than the smallest commercially available glenoid baseplates. Understanding the glenoid anatomy is crucial in the case of reverse shoulder arthroplasty, as it has significant implications in implant design, operative planning, and surgical outcomes.

Biomechanical comparison of zoned-conformity glenoid versus standard glenoid in total shoulder arthroplasty: impact on rotator cuff strain and glenohumeral translation.

Current standard total shoulder arthroplasty glenoid implants allow for high levels of glenohumeral mismatch and associated high levels of humeral head translation to improve range of motion and reduce rim stresses on the glenoid. However, high levels of glenohumeral mismatch could also increase glenoid edge loading, eccentric wear, and rotator cuff strain. A zoned-conformity glenoid may be able to reduce the forces on the rotator cuff and glenoid. We compared rotator cuff strain and glenohumeral translation between a standard glenoid (SG) with moderate glenohumeral mismatch and a zoned-conformity glenoid (conforming glenoid [CG]) that limits mismatch. We hypothesized that the CG would have lower levels of strain on the rotator cuff and lower levels of humeral head translation compared with the SG. Eight fresh frozen cadaveric shoulders, aged 72 years (range, 67-76 years), were used in this biomechanical study. The specimens were first tested in the intact state. We cycled them 3 times from 0° to 60° of abduction and measured the superiorly-inferiorly and anteriorly-posteriorly directed forces at the joint, compressive forces applied to the glenoid, and humeral head translation. The specimens were then implanted with a standard press-fit humeral component and a polyethylene glenoid with 3 peripherally cemented pegs and a central press-fit peg. Testing was repeated. Finally, the SG was removed, the CG was implanted, and each specimen was tested a third time. The average superiorly directed force at the glenohumeral joint was significantly lower in the intact and CG groups (18.1 ± 18.6 N and 19.8 ± 16.2 N, respectively) than in the SG group (29.3 ± 21.9 N, P = .024). The maximum force directed against the glenoid was also significantly lower in the CG group (87.6 ± 11.7 N) than in the SG (96.0 ± 7.3 N) and intact (98.9 ± 16.5 N) groups (P = .035). No difference was observed in humeral head translation in the anterior-posterior plane from 0° to 60° of abduction (P = .998) or in the superior-inferior plane (P = .999). A zoned-conformity glenoid was associated with similar humeral head translation but significantly lower superior forces against the rotator cuff and a significantly lower maximum force against the glenoid compared with an SG implant. These biomechanical findings suggest that a zoned-conformity implant warrants further study in the effort to maintain humeral head translation while reducing rotator cuff and glenoid forces for successful outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty.

Defining deformity thresholds for the use of augmented glenoids in arthritic shoulders with posterior glenoid bone loss

BackgroundDespite increasing utilization, little guidance is offered regarding appropriate indications for posterior augmented glenoid implants. The purpose of this study is to virtually assess the effect of implant selection on glenoid resurfacing and joint line restoration in osteoarthritic shoulders with posterior glenoid wear. MethodsThirty-three CT scans were randomly selected from a cohort of osteoarthritic shoulders with Walch B2 or B3 deformities. Imascap SAS (Wright Medical, Memphis, TN) was used to assess bony deformities and plan glenoid resurfacing. Implants simulated included: standard Pegged Cortiloc, and 15° and 25° half-wedge augments. Each component was planned for a version correction to neutral and 10° retroversion, inclination was maintained within 5° of neutral and the component was medialized until bony support reached 80%. Implantation failure was defined as: greater than 20% cancellous bone support, central peg perforation, or joint line medialization relative to the pathologic joint (accounting for polyethylene thickness). Excessive lateralization was defined as creation of a joint-line >4 mm lateral to the pathologic joint-line. ResultsThe mean retroversion deformity in this cohort was 23.7° (range: 13°-37°). When correcting to neutral, the corrective reaming alone failed in 72.7% (24/33) of cases compared to 15.2% (5/33) when correcting to 10° of implant retroversion. When correcting to neutral version failure was decreased with a 15° (27.3%; 9/33; P < .001) and 25° augment (15.2%; 5/33; P < .001). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis found that an augment is useful to resolve standard implant failure for retroversion deformities greater than 27° (area under the curve [AUC] = 0.91) and 22° (AUC = 0.77) for correcting version to neutral and 10° retroversion, respectively. When placing a 25° augment, there was high risk of overstuffing the joint for both correction to neutral (27.3%) and 10° retroversion (66.7%). Overstuffing was likely to occur when correcting deformities less than 19° (AUC = 0.96) to neutral with a 25° augment. Likewise, implanting 15° or 25° augmented glenoids in 10° of retroversion is likely to overstuff the joint for pathologic retroversion deformities smaller than 18° (AUC = 0.94) and 28° (AUC = 0.69), respectively. ConclusionThis study helps to clarify the severity of glenoid deformities more appropriately addressed with the use of a half-wedged augmented glenoid. Both the severity of glenoid deformity and the desired implant version affect appropriate indications for the use of augmented glenoids. The risk of excessive joint-line lateralization in shoulders with less severe deformities should not be ignored. These considerations, in addition to individual soft tissue tension should be considered when planning and performing glenoid resurfacing. Level of evidenceLevel III; Treatment Study

Is preoperative glenoid bone mineral density associated with aseptic glenoid implant loosening in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty?

BackgroundAseptic loosening of glenoid implants is the primary revision cause in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). While supported by biomechanical studies, the impact of glenoid bone quality, more specifically bone mineral density (BMD), on aseptic glenoid loosening remains unclear. We hypothesized that lower preoperative glenoid BMD was associated with aseptic glenoid implant loosening in aTSA.MethodsWe retrospectively included 93 patients (69 females and 24 males; mean age, 69.2 years) who underwent preoperative non-arthrographic shoulder computed tomography (CT) scans and aTSA between 2002 and 2014. Preoperative glenoid BMD (CT numbers in Hounsfield unit) was measured in 3D using a reliable semi-automated quantitative method, in the following six contiguous volumes of interest (VOI): cortical, subchondral cortical plate (SC), subchondral trabecular, and three successive adjacent layers of trabecular bone. Univariate Cox regression was used to estimate the impact of preoperative glenoid BMD on aseptic glenoid implant loosening. We further compared 26 aseptic glenoid loosening patients with 56 matched control patients.ResultsGlenoid implant survival rates were 89% (95% confidence interval CI, 81–96%) and 57% (41–74%) at 5 and 10 years, respectively. Hazard ratios for the different glenoid VOIs ranged between 0.998 and 1.004 (95% CI [0.996, 1.007], p≥0.121). Only the SC VOI showed significantly lower CTn in the loosening group (622±104 HU) compared with the control group (658±88 HU) (p=0.048), though with a medium effect size (d=0.42). There were no significant differences in preoperative glenoid BMD in any other VOI between patients from the loosening and control groups.ConclusionsAlthough the preoperative glenoid BMD was statistically significantly lower in the SC region of patients with aseptic glenoid implant loosening compared with controls, this single-VOI difference was only moderate. We are thus unable to prove that lower preoperative glenoid BMD is clearly associated with aseptic glenoid implant loosening in aTSA. However, due to its proven biomechanical role in glenoid implant survival, we recommend extending this study to larger CT datasets to further assess and better understand the impact of preoperative glenoid BMD on glenoid implant loosening/survival and aTSA outcome.

Reliability and accuracy of 3D preoperative planning software for glenoid implants in total shoulder arthroplasty

BackgroundShoulder arthroplasty is technically demanding and can be associated with failures due to implant loosening, especially in the presence of posterior glenoid bone loss. Novel preoperative planning has been employed more frequently in an attempt to improve implant positioning, however, there is little data comparing the effectiveness of various systems for shoulder arthroplasty. Our goal was to assess the reliability and validity of preoperative planning software systems for measurements and implant selection. MethodsA retrospective analysis was done of 80 patients who underwent total shoulder arthroplasty. Preoperative computed tomography studies were used to create a preoperative plan using 3 software systems: independent preoperative plan software (IPPS) and 2 automated manufacturer preoperative simulation (AMPS I and II). We collected preoperative native and implant version and inclination and implant size from each software. Simulated plans of each patient were compared to one another. ResultsThe mean age of our population was 61 years old (±12), 51.3% females and 48.8% males. The mean native version measured by IPPS was −9.1° ± 11.3°, by AMPS I was −11.7° ± 8° and by AMPS II software was −11° ± 13.4° The mean native inclination for IPPS was 4.7° ± 6.8°, for AMPS I was 10.4° ± 5.9° and for AMPS II software was 7.76° ± 7.2° The mean implant version for IPPS was −4.8° ± 6.5°, for AMPS I was −6.73° ± 2.6° and for AMPS II software was −5.4° ± 5° The mean implant inclination suggested by IPPS was 2.04° ± 4.4°, by AMPS I was 3.5° ± 3.2° and by AMPS II software was 7.04° ± 7.2° Five of 14 comparisons resulted in statistically significant differences. Our results demonstrated strong positive correlations (r > 0.7) between AMPS I and AMPS II for Native Version and Implant Inclination. When implant diameter/size was compared between IPPS and AMPS II, AMPS I and AMPS II, we found a matching rate of 66.7% and 100%, respectively. ConclusionOur results support the use of either independent or commercially available preoperative simulation software to reliably measure pathology and accurately guide intraoperative implant selection. Notwithstanding, some manufacturer's software (AMPS II) provide more critical data, enhancing precision in implant placement and correction of pathologic bone loss. Level of evidenceLevel III.

Glenohumeral Resurfacing in Young, Active Patients With End-Stage Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder

Treatment of end-stage glenohumeral arthritis in young patients is a challenge; however, there is a lack of consensus on optimal treatment algorithms. A thorough history and physical examination are essential. Nonoperative treatments should first be attempted, whereas surgical options range from arthroscopic debridement to arthroplasty. One arthroplasty option is glenohumeral resurfacing with the objective of maintaining more native anatomy and bone stock. The described treatment includes a hemi-cap implant for the humerus and inlay polyethylene glenoid. While hemi-caps have been successfully used for decades, inlay glenoid implants are a more modern treatment, with the objective of less glenoid loosening, the typical complication and failure method in young patients. With the potential for greater longevity and preservation of anatomy, glenohumeral resurfacing for end-stage shoulder arthritis is an important treatment option to consider before total shoulder arthroplasty. This Technical Note describes resurfacing of the glenohumeral joint in a young, active patient presenting with extensive osteoarthritis on both the glenoid and humerus after a previous failed Trillat stabilization.

Distal clavicle autograft augmentation for glenoid bone loss in revision shoulder arthroplasty: results and technique

Structural bone graft for reconstruction of glenoid bone stock is often necessary in the setting of revision shoulder arthroplasty. This study introduces a new structural autograft technique using the distal clavicle for treatment of glenoid bone loss in the setting of revision shoulder arthroplasty. This is a retrospective, single-surgeonstudy of patients with significant glenoid bone loss requiring revision shoulder arthroplasty with autologous distal clavicle bone grafting to the glenoid. Twenty patients with failed shoulder arthroplasty who underwent revisions of their glenoid components between 2015 and 2019 were retrospectively identified. Sixteen patients were available with follow-up of greater than 1 year. Patient records and radiographs were reviewed for intraoperative and postoperative complications. Preoperative and postoperative function were evaluated by physical examination and patient-reported outcome surveys. There were no observed intraoperative complications relating to the distal clavicle autograft harvest or placement. There were no iatrogenic nerve injuriesor intraoperative instability. One of the 16 patients developed postoperative loosening and subsequent failure of the glenoid baseplate, requiring revision. One additional patient demonstrated increased elevation of the coracoclavicular interval postoperatively, likely related to the distal clavicle autograft harvest. At a mean follow-up of 25 months, 15 of 16 glenoid implants remained well fixed (93.4%), with no evidence of infection, or impingement demonstrated radiographically or clinically. Average patient age was 69 years at the time of surgery. Forward elevation improved from 76° to 123° at final follow-up (P = .0002). The American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form score improved from an average of 35.8 to 67.8 at mean follow-up (P = .001). The visual analog scale score improved from an average of 5.9 to 2 at mean follow-up, though not statistically significant (P = .068). There was no significant change in external rotation following surgery (P = .319). Osteolysis and bone loss of the glenoid poses a challenging problem in revision shoulder arthroplasty. Distal clavicle autograft augmentation is a viable and reproducible technique to manage structural glenoid defects.

The association between glenoid component design and revision risk in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is a proven treatment for glenohumeral joint osteoarthritis, with superior results compared with hemiarthroplasty. However, glenoid component loosening remains a problem and is one of the most common causes of failure in TSA. Multiple component designs have been developed in an attempt to reduce loosening rates. The purpose of this study was to evaluate risk of revision after anatomic TSA according to the glenoid component design. We conducted a cohort study including patients aged ≥18 years who underwent primary elective TSA for the diagnosis of osteoarthritis between 2010 and 2017. Patients with missing implant information, who received stemless humeral implants, or who received augmented glenoid implants, were excluded. Glenoid component designs used were categorized into 4 mutually exclusive treatment groups: polyethylene central-pegged ingrowth, polyethylene-metal hybrid, polyethylene all-cemented pegged, and polyethylene cemented keeled. Multivariable competing riskregression was used to evaluate the risk of glenoid loosening as a cause-specific revision by the glenoid component design. Of the 5566 TSA included in the final cohort, 39.2% of glenoid implants were polyethylene central-pegged ingrowth, 31.1% were polyethylene-metal hybrid, 26.0% were polyethylene all-cemented pegged, and 3.6% were polyethylene cemented keeled. At 6-yearfinal follow-up, 4.1% of TSA were revised for any cause, and 1.4% for glenoid loosening. Compared with the polyethylene central-pegged ingrowth design, no difference in glenoid loosening revision risk was observed for the polyethylene-metal hybrid design (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.42-3.20). However, both the polyethylene all-cemented pegged (HR = 2.48, 95% CI = 1.08-5.66) and polyethylene cemented keeled (HR = 3.84, 95% CI = 1.13-13.00) designs had higher risks for revision due to glenoid loosening. We observed glenoid component designs to be associated with differential risks in revision due to glenoid loosening with polyethylene all-cemented pegged glenoids and polyethylene cemented keeled glenoids having higher risks when compared with polyethylene central-pegged ingrowth glenoids. Surgeons may want to consider the glenoid component design when performing anatomic TSA.

Total shoulder arthroplasty outcomes after noncorrective, concentric reaming of B2 glenoids

BackgroundTotal shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is an effective procedure for the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) delivering reliable pain relief and improved shoulder function. Abnormal glenoid morphologies are common, and biconcave glenoids are enigmas that have been associated with poor clinical outcomes and implant survivorship.PurposeTo assess the clinical outcome scores of patients who underwent noncorrective, concentric reaming for TSA with biconcave glenoids (B2). We hypothesized that patients with B2 glenoids who underwent TSA with glenoid implantation using noncorrective, concentric reaming would have significant improvements in clinical outcome scores and high implant survivorship.MethodsAll patients who underwent anatomic TSA for GHOA with B2 glenoids, performed by a single surgeon, between July 2006 and December 2015 with minimum 2-year follow-up were reviewed. Walch classification was obtained from preoperative imaging (magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography). Clinical outcome scores were prospectively collected and included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score, Single Assessment Numerical Evaluation (SANE) score, Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (QuickDASH) score, 12-Item Short Form Health Survey physical component summary (PCS), and patient satisfaction. Clinical failures (revision TSA surgery or conversion to reverse TSA) and complications were reported. Paired t test and bivariate correlations level of significance was set at P = .05. Survivorship analysis with implant failure as an endpoint was done using Kaplan-Meier survival curves.Results51 TSA in 49 patients (9 females, 40 males) with primary GHOA with B2 glenoids were performed with a mean age of 64 (range 36-81 years) at the time of surgery. The mean retroversion was 19.1° (range 5.4°-38°), and posterior decentering was 42.0% (range 19.4%-78.5%). At final evaluation, 45/51 anatomic TSAs (88% follow-up) with a mean follow-up of 4.9 years (range 2.0-10.4 years) were assessed. All clinical outcome scores improved significantly pre- to postoperatively: ASES, 52.5 to 79.6 (P < .001); SANE, 52.4 to 74.7 (P < .001); QuickDASH, 39.2 to 19.1 (P = .001); and PCS, 40.9 to 48.9 (P = .001). Median postoperative satisfaction was 9 (range 1-10). There were 2 failures and 4 that required another surgery —subscapularis repair, lysis of adhesions, irrigation and débridement, and one to explore the status of the subscapularis for persistent pain. The implant survivorship rate was 95% at a mean follow-up of 4.9 years.ConclusionAnatomic total shoulder replacement with minimally noncorrective, concentric reaming in patients with B2 glenoids had significant improvement in clinical outcome scores, high patient satisfaction, and high survivorship in this cohort.

Reduction of scapulohumeral subluxation with posterior augmented glenoid implants in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: Short-term 3D comparison between pre- and post-operative CT

BackgroundFailure rates in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) are higher in case of asymmetric glenoid bone loss secondary to posterior wear, and in persistent static posterior subluxation of the humeral head (PSH). HypothesisThis study aimed to test the hypothesis that the combined use of posterior augmented glenoid (PAG) implants with three-dimensional (3D) surgical planning and patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) guides helps reduce short-term PSH after aTSA in patients with type B2-B3 glenoids. Patients and methodsWe included nine consecutive patients with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis and type B2 or B3 glenoids, who underwent aTSA with cemented keeled PAG implants (posterior augments of 15, 25, or 35 degrees). All patients underwent preoperative shoulder computed tomography (CT) scans, with 3D surgical planning coupled to PSI at the time of surgery. Postoperative shoulder CT scans were performed at an average of 14 weeks (range, 10-21 weeks). Scapulohumeral subluxation and glenoid version and inclination were measured in 3D, on both pre- and post-operative CT scans, using the same reliable quantitative method. ResultsThere was a significant decrease in scapulohumeral subluxation from 49±12% preoperatively to 22±17% postoperatively (p=0.0039), with a large effect size (Cohen's d=1.89). Preoperative glenoid version was corrected from −17.3±9.4 degrees to −5.2±7.5 degrees postoperatively. The absolute difference between the postoperative and surgically planned version and inclination was 5.4±3.6 degrees and 3.3±2.0 degrees, respectively. DiscussionThe combined use of PAG implants with 3D preoperative planning and PSI results in a significant decrease in short-term PSH and glenoid version in patients with asymmetric posterior glenoid wear. We suggest that such implants should not be limited to posterior augmentation, because glenoid deficiency can also be observed in other glenoid sectors. Level of evidenceIV, Basic science study.

Radiographic and clinical outcomes of second generation Trabecular Metal™ glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty.

Total shoulder arthroplasty with second generation porous tantalum glenoid implants (Trabecular Metal™) has shown good short-term outcomes, but mid-term outcomes are unknown. This study describes the clinical, radiographic, and patient-rated mid-term outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty utilizing cemented Trabecular Metal™ glenoid components. Patients who underwent anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with cemented Trabecular Metal™ glenoid components for primary osteoarthritis were identified for minimum five-year follow-up. The primary outcome measure was implant survival; secondary outcome measures included patient-rated outcome scores, shoulder range of motion findings, and radiographic analysis. Twenty-seven patients were enrolled in the study. Twenty-one patients had full radiographic follow-up. Mean follow-up was 6.6 years. There was 100% implant survival. Shoulder range of motion significantly improved and the mean American Shoulder and Elbow Society score was 89.8. There was presence of metal debris radiographically in 24% of patients. Twenty-nine percent of patients had evidence of radiolucency. Fourteen percent of patients had moderate superior subluxation. Total shoulder arthroplasty with second generation cemented Trabecular Metal™ glenoid components yielded good outcomes at mean 6.6-year follow-up. Metal debris incidence and clinical outcomes were similar to short-term findings. The presence of metal debris did not significantly affect clinical outcomes. Continued observation of these patients will elucidate longer-term implant survival.

Use of a 3D-Printed Custom Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty is an established treatment for rotator cuff tear arthropathy of the shoulder. In cases of deformity of the glenoid with limited bone stock, implantation of a noncustomized glenoid implant could be challenging. In this technique article, we report 2 cases with severe glenoid deformity. The first case is a 74-year-old woman presenting with rotator cuff tear arthropathy of the shoulder with a severly deformed glenoid. The second case is a 63-year-old woman with deformity of the glenoid after hemiarthroplasty of the shoulder. Both patients were succesfully treated with a 3D-printed customized glenoid implant, combined with a noncustom glenosphere and humeral stem.

Method of biometric measurement of glenoid cavities: Study scannographic 200 glenoid cavities

Introduction:Evaluating the size and morphology of the glenoid can help customize the prosthetic treatment. But there are few large workforces in studies examining CT scan measures the glenoid. We report an analysis of the dimensions of the glenoid.Materials and Methods: 100 consecutive chests CT performed 15 months including two non-pathological glenoid cavities were analyzed by three operators. There were 54 women and 46 men with a mean age of 64.8 years (20-92). Each glenoid was evaluated in 2D reconstruction, on several sections, on the CARESTREAM software. We made our measurements only on healthy or slightly worn glenoid. The largest vertical axis, the largest horizontal axis, the surface of the glenoid, and the circle tangent to the inferior pole of the glenoid were analyzed. The depth and the bone stock of the glenoid were measured in 9 points of the circle, divided into four quadrants, corresponding to the screw positions of a metaglenoid.Results:For each patient, both glenoid cavities were symmetrical compared to the measured criteria. Measurements on 200 glenoids found themselves: the largest vertical axis reached 38.5 mm (25-51), the largest horizontal axis: 27.9 mm (20-56) and the area circle tangential to the lower pole of the glenoid 624.5mm² diameter (324-983). The analytical study to classify the glenoid cavities by size in 3 families: small (area of the circle = 420mm²), medium (525mm²) and large (685mm²). The average size of the patients was de166.9 (147-192). The dimensions of the glenoid were correlated with the size of the patient for 3 families. The most representative measure of the size of the glenoid was the largest horizontal axis, also corresponding to the diameter of the circle inscribed in the glenoid. We measured the depth of the glenoid at the frequent passage of screws during the placement of glenoid implants. Above 10.7 mm, there is an increased risk of suprascapular nerve injury in the posterosuperior dial of the circle inscribed in the glenoid.We compared intra and inter individual measures between the 3 operators. The measurement method is reliable and reproducible with an average difference of 2.7 mm over all the measurements compared.Discussion:These results are similar to those already present in the literature. The large number of patients included in this cohort associated with the reliability and reproducibility of the measurements allow us to adapt this method to the preoperative planning of the placement of glenoid implants in prostheses. The main limitation remains the two-dimensional character of our study.

Long-term follow-up of total shoulder replacement surgery with inset glenoid implants for arthritis with deficient bone

Total shoulder replacement surgery has been a successful treatment for patients with shoulder arthritis. However, long-term results are limited by complications such as glenoid loosening, wear, and instability. Also, glenoid bone deficiency limits available treatment options and outcomes. Successful short-term outcomes have been reported previously using inset glenoid implants for deficient arthritic bone, but long-term outcomes have not been reported using this technique. A retrospective analysis was performed on 21 of 24 consecutive patients treated with inset glenoid implants for severe glenohumeral joint arthritis with bone deficiency with prospectively collected data. Inclusion criteria were patients with shoulder arthritis and severe glenoid bone deficiency, defined by perpendicular glenoid vault depth less than 15 mm. No bone grafts were used. All patients were evaluated preoperatively and after surgery with physical examination, radiographic studies, and outcome measures. There were 10 males and 11 females, 17 cases with osteoarthritis and 4 with inflammatory arthritis, and 5 patients with rotator cuff tears (3 full thickness and 2 partial tears). Mean age was 68 years. There were no surgical complications. At a mean follow-up of 8.7 years, there were statistically significant improvements (P < .001) in visual analog pain scores (7.7 to 0.1), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons outcome scores (23 to 95), and range of motion. There were no loose glenoids. No patients required any revision surgery. This study documents the long-term efficacy and safety of total shoulder replacement surgery with inset glenoid implants used to reconstruct deficient, arthritic glenoid bone.