Literature DB >> 25808101

Resurfacing of the humeral head: An analysis of the bone stock and osseous integration under the implant.

Florian Schmidutz1,2, Christoph M Sprecher1, Stefan Milz1,3, Frank Gohlke4, Ralph Hertel5, Volker Braunstein1,6,7.   

Abstract

Cementless-surface-replacement-arthroplasty (CSRA) of the shoulder aims for functional joint restoration with minimal bone loss. Good clinical results have been reported, but due to the radiopaque metal shell no data is available on the structure, osseous integration, and bone stock under the implant. 14 hemi-CSRAs (4 manufacturers) with two geometries (crown [n = 7]/ stem [n = 7] fixation) were retrieved from patients undergoing revision due to glenoidal erosion. Histological sections cutting through the implant centre and bone were analysed. Quantitative histomorphometry evaluated the bone-implant-contact and compared the bone-area to native humeral retrievals (n = 7). The bone-implant-interface was further assessed by scanning-electron-microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive-x-ray (EDX). Qualitative histology revealed a reduced and inhomogeneous bone stock. Obvious signs of stress shielding were observed with bone predominantly visible at the stem and implant rim. Quantitative histomorphometry confirmed the significantly reduced bone-area (9.2 ± 3.9% [crown 9.9 ± 4.3%, stem 8.6 ± 3.6%]) compared to native humeri (21.2 ± 9.1%; p < 0.05). Bone-implant-contact was 20.5 ± 5.8% (crown 21.8 ± 6.2%, stem 19.2 ± 5.6%) which was confirmed by SEM and EDX. Altogether, CRSA shows satisfactory bone ingrowth at the interface suggesting sufficient primary stability to allow osseous integration. However, clear signs of stress shielding with an inhomogeneous and reduced bone stock were observed. The impact on the long-term-results is unclear requiring further investigation.
© 2015 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  bone contact; hemi arthroplasty; interface; osseous integration; resurfacing

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 25808101     DOI: 10.1002/jor.22902

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Orthop Res        ISSN: 0736-0266            Impact factor:   3.494


  4 in total

1.  Clinical and radiological results 7 years after Copeland shoulder resurfacing arthroplasty in patients with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: an independent multicentre retrospective study.

Authors:  F U Verstraelen; L A Horta; M G M Schotanus; N P Kort; S K Samijo; E J P Jansen
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2017-08-03

2.  Preoperative Comorbidities and Postoperative Complications Do Not Influence Patient-Reported Satisfaction Following Humeral Head Resurfacing: Mid- to Long-term Follow-up of 106 Patients.

Authors:  Andrea Beck; Hannah Lee; Mitchell Fourman; Juan Giugale; Jason Zlotnicki; Mark Rodosky; Albert Lin
Journal:  J Shoulder Elb Arthroplast       Date:  2019-02-13

3.  Revision shoulder arthroplasty for failed humeral head resurfacing hemiarthroplasty.

Authors:  Tanujan Thangarajah; Sara Ajami; Melanie Coathup; Gordon W Blunn; Deborah Higgs; Mark Falworth; Simon Lambert
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2017-06-13

Review 4.  Stemless Total Shoulder: A Review of Biomechanical Fixation and Recent Results.

Authors:  Jeremy Wodarek; Edward Shields
Journal:  J Shoulder Elb Arthroplast       Date:  2021-04-26
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.