Literature DB >> 25725965

The influence of humeral head inclination in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Brandon J Erickson1, Rachel M Frank2, Joshua D Harris3, Nathan Mall4, Anthony A Romeo2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Humeral component inclination may play an important role in implant stability and the incidence of scapular notching in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). This study was conducted to determine if a difference exists between RTSA prostheses with a 135° vs 155° humeral component inclination angle with respect to dislocation rates and scapular notching rates. We hypothesized that the rate of dislocation would be significantly higher with the 135° inclination design and that the rate of scapular notching would be significantly higher with the 155° inclination design.
METHODS: A systematic review was registered with PROSPERO and performed with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines using 3 publicly available free databases. Therapeutic clinical outcome investigations reporting the number of dislocations, number of patients with scapular notching, and postoperative range of motion after RTSA with levels of evidence I to IV were eligible for inclusion. All study and subject demographics were analyzed. Statistics were calculated using 2-proportion z tests.
RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies including 2222 shoulders (average age, 70.3 ± 3.91 years; 67% female) undergoing RTSA were included. Of these, 1762 (79.3%) used the 155° inclination prosthesis and 460 (20.7%) used the 135° inclination prosthesis with a lateralized glenosphere. The rate of scapular notching was 2.83% in the 135° group and 16.80% in the 155° group (P < .0001, z = -7.7107). The rate of dislocation was 1.74% in the 135° group and 2.33% in the 155° group (P = .4432, z = -0.7669).
CONCLUSIONS: Our systematic review of 38 studies and 2222 shoulders found that the rate of scapular nothing was significantly higher with the 155° prosthesis than with the 135° prosthesis with a lateralized glenosphere, with no difference in dislocation rates between prostheses.
Copyright © 2015 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty; dislocation; head neck angle; rotator cuff arthropathy; scapular notch

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25725965     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.01.001

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


  21 in total

Review 1.  Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Implant Design Considerations.

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

Review 2.  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

Review 3.  Lateralized versus nonlateralized reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Yehia H Bedeir; Brian M Grawe; Magdy M Eldakhakhny; Ahmed H Waly
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2020-07-09

4.  Treating cuff tear arthropathy by reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: do the inclination of the humeral component and the lateral offset of the glenosphere influence the clinical and the radiological outcome?

Authors:  Malte Holschen; Alexandros Kiriazis; Benjamin Bockmann; Tobias L Schulte; Kai-Axel Witt; Jörn Steinbeck
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-04-20

5.  Shoulder replacement surgery for osteoarthritis and rotator cuff tear arthropathy.

Authors:  Richard S Craig; Henry Goodier; Jasvinder A Singh; Sally Hopewell; Jonathan L Rees
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-04-21

6.  Determination of humeral inclination in stemless shoulder arthroplasty using plain radiographs.

Authors:  Sascha Beck; Robert J Martin; Theodor Patsalis; Manuel Burggraf; André Busch; Stefan Landgraeber; Wegner Alexander
Journal:  Orthop Rev (Pavia)       Date:  2019-12-02

7.  Midterm clinical outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty in Japanese patients with rheumatoid arthritis using patient-reported outcome measures (Shoulder36).

Authors:  Yuichi Nagase; Masashi Naito; Gen Momoyama; Yoshio Uchida; Takuji Nishikawa; Kenta Makabe; Sakae Tanaka; Kazuya Tamai
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-12-01

8.  Adjusting Implant Size and Position Can Improve Internal Rotation After Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in a Three-dimensional Computational Model.

Authors:  Eric G Huish; George S Athwal; Lionel Neyton; Gilles Walch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 4.755

9.  Subscapularis Repair During Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Using a Stem-Based Double-Row Repair: Sonographic and Clinical Outcomes.

Authors:  Brandon J Erickson; Yousef Shishani; Meghan E Bishop; Midhat Patel; Stacy Jones; Anthony A Romeo; Evan S Lederman; Reuben Gobezie
Journal:  Orthop J Sports Med       Date:  2020-03-09

10.  Current state of short-stem implants in total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review of the literature.

Authors:  Brandon J Erickson; Peter N Chalmers; Patrick J Denard; Reuben Gobezie; Anthony A Romeo; Evan S Lederman
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2020-01-28
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.