Literature DB >> 22929583

Biologic resurfacing of the glenoid with meniscal allograft: long-term results with minimum 2-year follow-up.

Brian K Lee1, Suketu Vaishnav, George F Rick Hatch, John M Itamura.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of consensus in treating glenohumeral arthritis in younger patients. Hemiarthroplasty has historically been favored because of complications associated with total shoulder arthroplasty. Biologic resurfacing of the glenoid has been investigated as a potential treatment that would decrease glenoid erosion and pain, the major complications of hemiarthroplasty.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We report on 19 shoulders treated with meniscal allograft glenoid resurfacing and shoulder hemiarthroplasty. All patients were followed up for a minimum of 2 years postoperatively (mean, 4.25 years) with Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), and visual analog scale (VAS) scores. In addition, we compared the outcomes related to preoperative concentric versus eccentric glenoid wear.
RESULTS: At final follow-up, the mean score for the DASH questionnaire was 28; SST, 8; and VAS, 3.5. Whereas the eccentric wear group (DASH score, 19.4; SST score, 9.1; VAS score, 2.5) exhibited better shoulder function and pain scores compared with the concentric wear group (DASH score, 37.6; SST score, 8.4; VAS score, 4.1), the difference was not statistically significant (P = .098, P = .647, and P = .198, respectively). There were 6 complications (32%), all resulting in repeat surgery. Three patients underwent total shoulder arthroplasty and one shoulder had revision hemiarthroplasty, whereas synovectomy was performed in another shoulder. The sixth patient underwent lysis of adhesions and capsular release. DISCUSSION: With long-term follow-up, we have observed that biologic resurfacing of the glenoid with meniscal allograft exhibits inconsistent results and high complication rates. Strong consideration should be given to performing total shoulder arthroplasty in patients in whom all conservative treatment options have failed.
Copyright © 2013 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22929583     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.04.019

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


  6 in total

1.  Meniscal Allograft Interposition Combined with Proximal Row Carpectomy.

Authors:  Murphy M Steiner; Matthew R Willsey; Frederick W Werner; Brian J Harley; Shay Klein; Kevin J Setter
Journal:  J Wrist Surg       Date:  2016-08-05

Review 2.  Shoulder Arthroplasty Options for Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis in Young and Active Patients (<60 Years Old): A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Hélder Fonte; Tiago Amorim-Barbosa; Sara Diniz; Luís Barros; Joaquim Ramos; Rui Claro
Journal:  J Shoulder Elb Arthroplast       Date:  2022-03-23

Review 3.  Soft tissue resurfacing for glenohumeral arthritis: a systematic review.

Authors:  Joshua J Meaike; Diana C Patterson; Shawn G Anthony; Bradford O Parsons; Paul J Cagle
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2019-05-31

4.  Resurfacing hemiarthroplasty versus stemmed hemiarthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Baoliang Zhang; Guanghui Chen; Tianqi Fan; Zhongqiang Chen
Journal:  Arthroplasty       Date:  2020-09-01

5.  Humeral Head Morphology Influences Outcomes of Arthroscopic Interposition Glenoid Patch Allograft for Glenohumeral Arthritis.

Authors:  Brian M Cable; Ali S Farooqi; Steven Tsai; Ryan Plyler; Alex Lee; Robert L Parisien; John D Kelly
Journal:  Arthrosc Sports Med Rehabil       Date:  2021-08-14

6.  The Mature Athlete's Shoulder.

Authors:  John M Tokish
Journal:  Sports Health       Date:  2014-01       Impact factor: 3.843

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.