Literature DB >> 15889022

Radiographic comparison of pegged and keeled glenoid components.

Gary M Gartsman1, Hussein A Elkousy, K Mathew Warnock, T Bradley Edwards, Daniel P O'Connor.   

Abstract

Glenoid loosening is one reason for failure of total shoulder arthroplasty. Several factors, including radiographic lucency, have been shown to be associated with glenoid loosening. The purpose of this study was to assess the correlation between glenoid design and immediate radiographic lucency in a prospective randomized clinical trial. Total shoulder arthroplasty was performed in 43 patients over a 2-year period. Twenty-three patients were randomized into the keel group and twenty patients into the pegged group. Postoperative radiographs obtained within 6 weeks of surgery were evaluated by 3 raters to determine glenoid lucency. On a scale from 0 (no lucency) to 5 (gross lucency and component loosening), the rate of lucency was 39% (9/23) in the keeled components, which was significantly higher than the rate of 5% (1/20) observed in the pegged components (P = .026). Patient age, gender, and glenoid size did not significantly affect glenoid component lucency (P > .05). The consistency reliability among raters (Cronbach alpha) was 0.87, and the intertester reliability was 0.87. Pegged glenoid components have less radiographic lucency when compared with keeled glenoid components in the immediate postoperative period.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 15889022     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2004.09.006

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


  19 in total

Review 1.  Is there sufficient evidence to support intervention to manage shoulder arthritis?

Authors:  Damian Bull; Andrew Tai Kie; Birgit Hanusch; Rohit Kulkarni; Jonathan Rees; Amar Rangan
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2016-01-08

2.  Multi-patient finite element simulation of keeled versus pegged glenoid implant designs in shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Werner Pomwenger; Karl Entacher; Herbert Resch; Peter Schuller-Götzburg
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2015-04-08       Impact factor: 2.602

Review 3.  [Anatomical total shoulder replacement in glenohumeral osteoarthritis : Indications, current implants, and clinical results].

Authors:  O Lorbach
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 1.087

Review 4.  Glenoid or not glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis.

Authors:  Kany Jean
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2012-11-30

5.  No differences in early results of a hybrid glenoid compared with a pegged implant.

Authors:  Lawrence V Gulotta; K Lauchlan Chambers; Russell F Warren; David M Dines; Edward V Craig
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2015-09-09       Impact factor: 4.176

6.  The glenoid in total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Mark Schrumpf; Travis Maak; Sommer Hammoud; Edward V Craig
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2011-12

7.  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

8.  Radiostereometric analysis of keeled versus pegged glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty: a randomized feasibility study.

Authors:  Trevor C Gascoyne; Sheila M B McRae; Sara L Parashin; Jeff R S Leiter; Martin J Petrak; Eric R Bohm; Peter B MacDonald
Journal:  Can J Surg       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 2.089

9.  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

10.  Number of pegs influence focal stress distributions and micromotion in glenoid implants: a finite element study.

Authors:  Abdul Hadi Abdul Wahab; Mohammed Rafiq Abdul Kadir; Muhammad Noor Harun; Tunku Kamarul; Ardiyansyah Syahrom
Journal:  Med Biol Eng Comput       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 2.602

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.