Literature DB >> 24986948

A reverse shoulder arthroplasty with increased offset for the treatment of cuff-deficient shoulders with glenohumeral arthritis.

C Middleton1, O Uri1, S Phillips1, K Barmpagiannis1, D Higgs1, M Falworth1, I Bayley1, S Lambert1.   

Abstract

Inherent disadvantages of reverse shoulder arthroplasty designs based on the Grammont concept have raised a renewed interest in less-medialised designs and techniques. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcome of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with the fully-constrained, less-medialised, Bayley-Walker prosthesis performed for the treatment of rotator-cuff-deficient shoulders with glenohumeral arthritis. A total of 97 arthroplasties in 92 patients (53 women and 44 men, mean age 67 years (standard deviation (sd) 10, (49 to 85)) were retrospectively reviewed at a mean follow-up of 50 months ((sd 25) (24 to 96)). The mean Oxford shoulder score and subjective shoulder value improved from 47 (sd 9) and 24 points (sd 18) respectively before surgery to 28 (sd 11) and 61 (sd 24) points after surgery (p < 0.001). The mean pain at rest decreased from 5.3 (sd 2.8) to 1.5 (sd 2.3) (p < 0.001). The mean active forward elevation and external rotation increased from 42(°)(sd 30) and 9(°) (sd 15) respectively pre-operatively to 78(°) (sd 39) and 24(°) (sd 17) post-operatively (p < 0.001). A total of 20 patients required further surgery for complications; 13 required revision of components. No patient developed scapular notching. The Bayley-Walker prosthesis provides reliable pain relief and reasonable functional improvement for patients with symptomatic cuff-deficient shoulders. Compared with other designs of RSA, it offers a modest improvement in forward elevation, but restores external rotation to some extent and prevents scapular notching. A longer follow-up is required to assess the survival of the prosthesis and the clinical performance over time. ©2014 The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayley-Walker; Increased offset; Reverse shoulder arthroplasty; Rotator cuff deficiency

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24986948     DOI: 10.1302/0301-620X.96B7.32946

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Bone Joint J        ISSN: 2049-4394            Impact factor:   5.082


  7 in total

1.  I.S.Mu.L.T - Rotator Cuff Tears Guidelines.

Authors:  Francesco Oliva; Eleonora Piccirilli; Michela Bossa; Alessio Giai Via; Alessandra Colombo; Claudio Chillemi; Giuseppe Gasparre; Leonardo Pellicciari; Edoardo Franceschetti; Clelia Rugiero; Alessandro Scialdoni; Filippo Vittadini; Paola Brancaccio; Domenico Creta; Angelo Del Buono; Raffaele Garofalo; Francesco Franceschi; Antonio Frizziero; Asmaa Mahmoud; Giovanni Merolla; Simone Nicoletti; Marco Spoliti; Leonardo Osti; Johnny Padulo; Nicola Portinaro; Gianfranco Tajana; Alex Castagna; Calogero Foti; Stefano Masiero; Giuseppe Porcellini; Umberto Tarantino; Nicola Maffulli
Journal:  Muscles Ligaments Tendons J       Date:  2016-02-13

2.  Preoperative external rotation deficit does not predict poor outcomes or lack of improvement after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Moby Parsons; Howard D Routman; Christopher P Roche; Richard J Friedman
Journal:  J Orthop       Date:  2020-08-22

Review 3.  Influence of Glenosphere Design on Outcomes and Complications of Reverse Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Cassandra Lawrence; Gerald R Williams; Surena Namdari
Journal:  Clin Orthop Surg       Date:  2016-08-10

4.  Is subscapularis repair associated with better outcome compared to non-repair in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty? A systematic review of comparative trials.

Authors:  Michael-Alexander Malahias; Dimitrios Gerogiannis; Efstathios Chronopoulos; Maria-Kyriaki Kaseta; Emmanouil Brilakis; Emmanouil Antonogiannakis
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2019-06-26

Review 5.  The modern reverse shoulder arthroplasty and an updated systematic review for each complication: part I.

Authors:  Sarav S Shah; Benjamin T Gaal; Alexander M Roche; Surena Namdari; Brian M Grawe; Macy Lawler; Stewart Dalton; Joseph J King; Joshua Helmkamp; Grant E Garrigues; Thomas W Wright; Bradley S Schoch; Kyle Flik; Randall J Otto; Richard Jones; Andrew Jawa; Peter McCann; Joseph Abboud; Gabe Horneff; Glen Ross; Richard Friedman; Eric T Ricchetti; Douglas Boardman; Robert Z Tashjian; Lawrence V Gulotta
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-09-07

6.  Radiologic Comparison of Humeral Position according to the Implant Designs Following Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: Analysis between Medial Glenoid/Medial Humerus, Lateral Glenoid/Medial Humerus, and Medial Glenoid/Lateral Humerus Designs.

Authors:  Nam Su Cho; Ju Hyun Nam; Se Jung Hong; Tae Wook Kim; Myeong Gu Lee; Jung Tae Ahn; Yong Girl Rhee
Journal:  Clin Shoulder Elb       Date:  2018-12-01

Review 7.  The modern reverse shoulder arthroplasty and an updated systematic review for each complication: part II.

Authors:  Sarav S Shah; Alexander M Roche; Spencer W Sullivan; Benjamin T Gaal; Stewart Dalton; Arjun Sharma; Joseph J King; Brian M Grawe; Surena Namdari; Macy Lawler; Joshua Helmkamp; Grant E Garrigues; Thomas W Wright; Bradley S Schoch; Kyle Flik; Randall J Otto; Richard Jones; Andrew Jawa; Peter McCann; Joseph Abboud; Gabe Horneff; Glen Ross; Richard Friedman; Eric T Ricchetti; Douglas Boardman; Robert Z Tashjian; Lawrence V Gulotta
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-09-10
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.