Literature DB >> 15726076

Initial glenoid component fixation in "reverse" total shoulder arthroplasty: a biomechanical evaluation.

Melinda Harman1, Mark Frankle, Matt Vasey, Scott Banks.   

Abstract

In patients with rotator cuff arthropathy, a "reverse" shoulder prosthesis resists glenohumeral subluxation and offers the potential for improved function. However, premature mechanical failure due to loosening is a concern with these devices. This in vitro study evaluates initial glenoid component fixation of 2 uncemented "reverse" prostheses during physiologic loading and determines the relationship among lateral offset of the glenosphere, fixation method, and motion. To simulate an excellent glenoid bone stock, a polyurethane foam bone with similar material properties to that of the glenoid cancellous bone was used. Both lateral offset and peripheral screw type affected the magnitude of baseplate motion. Baseplate motion for Delta III components and Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis (RSP) components fixed with 5.0-mm captured screws were below the 150 mum of motion generally accepted as the threshold for bone ingrowth. Stable fixation was achieved for the RSP-neutral components despite a substantially (69%) greater moment at the baseplate-foam interface compared with the Delta III. Obtaining similar results in vivo is partially dependent on surgical placement of the peripheral screws and the patient's glenoid bone stock.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15726076     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2004.09.030

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg        ISSN: 1058-2746            Impact factor:   3.019


  47 in total

Review 1.  Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty-from the most to the least common complication.

Authors:  Mazda Farshad; Christian Gerber
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2010-09-25       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Bony increased-offset reversed shoulder arthroplasty: minimizing scapular impingement while maximizing glenoid fixation.

Authors:  Pascal Boileau; Grégory Moineau; Yannick Roussanne; Kieran O'Shea
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.176

3.  Does Humeral Component Lateralization in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Affect Rotator Cuff Torque? Evaluation in a Cadaver Model.

Authors:  Kevin Chan; G Daniel G Langohr; Matthew Mahaffy; James A Johnson; George S Athwal
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2017-06-14       Impact factor: 4.176

Review 4.  How reverse shoulder arthroplasty works.

Authors:  Matthew Walker; Jordan Brooks; Matthew Willis; Mark Frankle
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  Use of a custom alignment guide to improve glenoid component position in total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Eduardo M Suero; Musa Citak; Darrick Lo; Aaron J Krych; Edward V Craig; Andrew D Pearle
Journal:  Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 4.342

6.  Ranges of motion after reverse shoulder arthroplasty improve significantly the first year after surgery in patients with rheumatoid arthritis.

Authors:  Hannu Tiusanen; Pjotor Sarantsin; Miika Stenholm; Ryan Mattie; Mikhail Saltychev
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2016-05-19

Review 7.  Going forward with reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Keshav Singhal
Journal:  J Clin Orthop Trauma       Date:  2017-10-06

8.  Deltoid muscle activity in patients with reverse shoulder prosthesis at 2-year follow-up.

Authors:  F Pegreffi; A Pellegrini; P Paladini; G Merolla; G Belli; P U Velarde; G Porcellini
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2017-10-30

Review 9.  Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Implant Design Considerations.

Authors:  Ujash Sheth; Matthew Saltzman
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2019-12

10.  Glenoid bone loss in primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Amar Malhas; Abbas Rashid; Dave Copas; Steve Bale; Ian Trail
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2016-05-06
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.