Literature DB >> 11222891

Radiographic assessment of uncemented humeral components in total shoulder arthroplasty.

J Sanchez-Sotelo1, T W Wright, S W O'Driscoll, R H Cofield, C M Rowland.   

Abstract

Seventy-two total shoulder arthroplasties performed using Neer II press-fit humeral components and followed for an average of 4.1 years (range, 2-7.8 years) were analyzed radiographically. A humeral component was considered radiographically at risk for clinical loosening when a radiolucent line > or =2 mm in width was present in > or =3 zones or tilt or subsidence was identified on sequential radiographs by 2 of 3 or 3 of 3 independent observers. Forty components (55.6%) were judged to be at risk. There were no identifiable characteristics associated with the development of an at-risk humeral component except longer average follow-up of the at-risk group (4.7 years vs 3.3 years, P =.001). Humeral components at risk had a higher rate of endosteal erosion (P =.04) and greater number of zones with sclerosis. Radiographic changes around Neer II uncemented humeral components are common. Data from this study can be used as 1 benchmark to compare with alternate methods of humeral component fixation.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11222891     DOI: 10.1054/arth.2001.20905

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arthroplasty        ISSN: 0883-5403            Impact factor:   4.757


  14 in total

1.  Total shoulder arthroplasty: are the humeral components getting shorter?

Authors:  Luke Harmer; Thomas Throckmorton; John W Sperling
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-03

2.  [Survival rate and complications of stemmed shoulder prostheses in primary osteoarthritis].

Authors:  U Irlenbusch
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 1.087

3.  Is shoulder arthroplasty an option for charcot arthropathy?

Authors:  Bradley Schoch; Jean-David Werthel; John W Sperling; Robert H Cofield; Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2016-10-14       Impact factor: 3.075

4.  Radiographic stability of ingrowth humeral stems in total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Thomas W Throckmorton; Peter C Zarkadas; John W Sperling; Robert H Cofield
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2010-03-16       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Uncemented versus cemented humeral stem fixation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Joseph J King; Kevin W Farmer; Aimee M Struk; Thomas W Wright
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 3.075

6.  Anatomic versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a mid-term follow-up comparison.

Authors:  Bradley S Schoch; Joseph J King; Joseph Zuckerman; Thomas W Wright; Chris Roche; Pierre-Henri Flurin
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2020-05-16

7.  Porous metals and alternate bearing surfaces in shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Shannon R Carpenter; Ivan Urits; Anand M Murthi
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2016-03

8.  Biomechanical testing of rectangular humeral shaft prosthesis: higher torsional stability without increased fracture risk.

Authors:  Matthias P Flury; Werner Schmoelz; Ulrich Schreiber; Joerg Goldhahn
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2010-09-21       Impact factor: 3.067

9.  Total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2011-03-16

Review 10.  Short, Medium and Long Term Complications After Total Anatomical Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Authors:  T M Gregory; B Boukebous; J Gregory; J Pierrart; E Masemjean
Journal:  Open Orthop J       Date:  2017-09-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.