Joseph J King1, Lukas M Nystrom2, Nickolas B Reimer3, C Parker Gibbs1, Mark T Scarborough1, Thomas W Wright4. 1. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Loyola University Chicago, Maywood, IL, USA. 3. Emory Orthopaedics and Spine Center, Atlanta, GA, USA. 4. Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA. Electronic address: wrightw@ortho.ufl.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus reconstructions after resection of tumors are challenging. Early success of the reverse shoulder arthroplasty for reconstructions has recently been reported. The reverse allograft-prosthetic composite offers the advantage of improved glenohumeral stability compared with hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral reconstructions as it uses the deltoid for stability. METHODS: This article describes the technique for treating proximal humeral tumors, including preoperative planning, biopsy principles, resection pearls, soft tissue tensioning, and specifics about reconstruction using the reverse allograft-prosthetic composite. Two cases are presented along with the functional outcomes with use of this technique. Biomechanical considerations during reconstruction are reviewed, including techniques to improve the deltoid compression force. RESULTS: Reported instability rates are less with reverse shoulder arthroplasty reconstruction as opposed to hemiarthroplasty or total shoulder arthroplasty reconstructions of tumor resections. Reported functional outcomes are promising for the reverse allograft-prosthetic composite reconstructions, although complications are reported. CONCLUSION: Reverse allograft-prosthetic composites are a promising option for proximal humeral reconstructions, although nonunion of the allograft-host bone junction continues to be a challenge for this technique.
BACKGROUND: Proximal humerus reconstructions after resection of tumors are challenging. Early success of the reverse shoulder arthroplasty for reconstructions has recently been reported. The reverse allograft-prosthetic composite offers the advantage of improved glenohumeral stability compared with hemiarthroplasty for proximal humeral reconstructions as it uses the deltoid for stability. METHODS: This article describes the technique for treating proximal humeral tumors, including preoperative planning, biopsy principles, resection pearls, soft tissue tensioning, and specifics about reconstruction using the reverse allograft-prosthetic composite. Two cases are presented along with the functional outcomes with use of this technique. Biomechanical considerations during reconstruction are reviewed, including techniques to improve the deltoid compression force. RESULTS: Reported instability rates are less with reverse shoulder arthroplasty reconstruction as opposed to hemiarthroplasty or total shoulder arthroplasty reconstructions of tumor resections. Reported functional outcomes are promising for the reverse allograft-prosthetic composite reconstructions, although complications are reported. CONCLUSION: Reverse allograft-prosthetic composites are a promising option for proximal humeral reconstructions, although nonunion of the allograft-host bone junction continues to be a challenge for this technique.
Authors: Cyril Lazerges; Louis Dagneaux; Benjamin Degeorge; Nicolas Tardy; Bertrand Coulet; Michel Chammas Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2017-06-23 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Sebastien Zilber; Eleonora Camana; Peter Lapner; Emil Haritinian; Laurent Nove Josserand Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2018-03-26 Impact factor: 3.075