P Randelli1,2, F Randelli3, P Arrigoni3, V Ragone3, R D'Ambrosi3, P Masuzzo3, P Cabitza4,3, G Banfi4,5. 1. Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. pietro.randelli@unimi.it. 2. IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy. pietro.randelli@unimi.it. 3. IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097, San Donato Milanese, Milan, Italy. 4. Dipartimento di Scienze Biomediche per la Salute, Università degli Studi di Milano, Milan, Italy. 5. IRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Milan, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that inferior inclination of the glenosphere is a protecting factor from joint dislocation in reverse total shoulder replacement. The hypothesis is that an average of 10° of inferior inclination of the glenoid component would determine a significant inferior rate of dislocation as compared to neutral inclination. METHODS: A retrospective case (dislocation)-control (stability of the implant) study was performed. Inclusion criteria were the homogeneity of the prosthetic model and availability of pre- and postoperative imaging of the shoulder, including antero-posterior and axillary X-ray views. Glenoid and glenosphere inclination were calculated according to standardized methods. Difference in between the angles determined the inferior tilt. RESULTS: Thirty-three cases fit the inclusion criteria. Glenoid and glenosphere inclination measured, respectively, 74.1° and 83.5°. The average tilt of the glenosphere measured 9.4°. The average tilt in stable patients was 10.2°. Tilt in patients with atraumatic dislocation measured, respectively, -6.9° (superior tilt) and 2.4°, while it was 8.3° for the patient with traumatic instability. The association between the tilt of glenosphere and atraumatic dislocation was significant. CONCLUSIONS: A 10° inferior tilt of the glenoid component in reverse shoulder arthroplasty is associated with a reduced risk of dislocation when compared to neutral tilt.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that inferior inclination of the glenosphere is a protecting factor from joint dislocation in reverse total shoulder replacement. The hypothesis is that an average of 10° of inferior inclination of the glenoid component would determine a significant inferior rate of dislocation as compared to neutral inclination. METHODS: A retrospective case (dislocation)-control (stability of the implant) study was performed. Inclusion criteria were the homogeneity of the prosthetic model and availability of pre- and postoperative imaging of the shoulder, including antero-posterior and axillary X-ray views. Glenoid and glenosphere inclination were calculated according to standardized methods. Difference in between the angles determined the inferior tilt. RESULTS: Thirty-three cases fit the inclusion criteria. Glenoid and glenosphere inclination measured, respectively, 74.1° and 83.5°. The average tilt of the glenosphere measured 9.4°. The average tilt in stable patients was 10.2°. Tilt in patients with atraumatic dislocation measured, respectively, -6.9° (superior tilt) and 2.4°, while it was 8.3° for the patient with traumatic instability. The association between the tilt of glenosphere and atraumatic dislocation was significant. CONCLUSIONS: A 10° inferior tilt of the glenoid component in reverse shoulder arthroplasty is associated with a reduced risk of dislocation when compared to neutral tilt.
Authors: Lawrence V Gulotta; Dan Choi; Patrick Marinello; Zakary Knutson; Joseph Lipman; Timothy Wright; Frank A Cordasco; Edward V Craig; Russell F Warren Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2011-10-29 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Jesse Affonso; Gregory P Nicholson; Mark A Frankle; Gilles Walch; Christian Gerber; Juan Garzon-Muvdi; Edward G McFarland Journal: Instr Course Lect Date: 2012
Authors: Sergio Gutiérrez; R Michael Greiwe; Mark A Frankle; Steven Siegal; William E Lee Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2006-09-20 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Allison L Clouthier; Markus A Hetzler; Graham Fedorak; J Tim Bryant; Kevin J Deluzio; Ryan T Bicknell Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2012-08-30 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Jason C Clark; Joseph Ritchie; Frederick S Song; Michael J Kissenberth; Stefan J Tolan; Nathan D Hart; Richard J Hawkins Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2011-07-31 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Daniel Molé; Frank Wein; Charles Dézaly; Philippe Valenti; François Sirveaux Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2011-09 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Pascal Boileau; Barbara Melis; David Duperron; Grégory Moineau; Adam P Rumian; Yung Han Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2013-05-22 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Robert Z Tashjian; Brook I Martin; Cassandra A Ricketts; Heath B Henninger; Erin K Granger; Peter N Chalmers Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Umile Giuseppe Longo; Lawrence V Gulotta; Sergio De Salvatore; Alessandra Berton; Ilaria Piergentili; Benedetta Bandini; Alberto Lalli; Vincenzo Denaro Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-06-23 Impact factor: 4.964