Literature DB >> 23850310

Evaluation of the role of glenosphere design and humeral component retroversion in avoiding scapular notching during reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Julien Berhouet1, Pascal Garaud2, Luc Favard2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Scapular notching is a common observation during radiological follow-up of reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of glenosphere design and humeral component retroversion on movement amplitude in the scapular plane and inferior scapular impingement.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Aequalis Reversed Shoulder Prosthesis (Tornier) was implanted into 40 cadaver shoulders. On the glenoid side, 8 different combinations were tested: 36-mm glenosphere: centered (standard), eccentric, with an inferior tilt, or with the center of rotation (COR) lateralized by 5 or 7 mm; and 42-mm centered glenosphere: used alone or with the COR lateralized by 7 or 10 mm. The humeral component was positioned in 0°, 10°, 20°, 30°, and 40° of retroversion. Maximum adduction and abduction were measured when inferior impingement and superior impingement, respectively, were detected.
RESULTS: The average increase in abduction amplitude was 10° and inferior impingement occurred 18° later with a 42-mm glenosphere, especially when it was lateralized by 10 mm, relative to a 36-mm centered glenosphere (P < .05). These 2 combinations provided a 28° increase in the movement amplitude in the scapular plane. Positioning of the humeral component in 10° or 20° of retroversion or in anatomical retroversion was most effective at avoiding inferior impingement but had less effect on abduction range of motion (except with the 42-mm glenosphere).
CONCLUSION: Our study confirmed published results with various glenosphere designs but was unique in describing the effect of humeral retroversion on scapular impingement. Inferior scapular notching can be most effectively prevented by using large-diameter glenospheres with lateralized COR and by making sure to replicate the patient's native humeral retroversion.
Copyright © 2014 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Basic Science Study; Biomechanics; Cadaver Model; Reverse shoulder arthroplasty; glenoid modularity; humeral version; scapular notching

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23850310     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2013.05.009

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


  26 in total

1.  Effect of humeral stem design on humeral position and range of motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Alexandre Lädermann; Patrick J Denard; Pascal Boileau; Alain Farron; Pierric Deransart; Alexandre Terrier; Julien Ston; Gilles Walch
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  Reverse polarity shoulder replacement: Current concepts and review of literature.

Authors:  Ling Hong Lee; Aravind Desai
Journal:  World J Orthop       Date:  2014-07-18

Review 3.  Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Biomechanics and Indications.

Authors:  Caitlin M Rugg; Monica J Coughlan; Drew A Lansdown
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2019-12

4.  What is the best glenoid configuration in onlay reverse shoulder arthroplasty?

Authors:  Alexandre Lädermann; Patrick J Denard; Pascal Boileau; Alain Farron; Pierric Deransart; Gilles Walch
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-02-28       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 5.  Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Implant Design Considerations.

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

6.  Pre-operative factors influence the recovery of range of motion following reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Philippe Collin; Tetsuya Matsukawa; Patrick J Denard; Solenn Gain; Alexandre Lädermann
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-08-08       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 7.  Lateralization in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a descriptive analysis of different implants in current practice.

Authors:  Jean-David Werthel; Gilles Walch; Emilie Vegehan; Pierric Deransart; Joaquin Sanchez-Sotelo; Philippe Valenti
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2019-06-28       Impact factor: 3.075

8.  Is there any influence of humeral component retroversion on range of motion and clinical outcome in reverse shoulder arthroplasty? A clinical study.

Authors:  F A de Boer; P M van Kampen; P E Huijsmans
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2016-12-03

9.  Clinical implications of scapular notching at 2 and 5-year follow-up after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Robert J Shelley; Mikalyn T DeFoor; Stephen A Parada; Lynn A Crosby
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2020-08-19

Review 10.  Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Technique, Decision-Making and Exposure Tips.

Authors:  Harshvardhan Chawla; Seth Gamradt
Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med       Date:  2020-04
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.