Lawrence V Gulotta1, K Lauchlan Chambers2, Russell F Warren3, David M Dines3, Edward V Craig3. 1. Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA. GulottaL@hss.edu. 2. Coastline Orthopaedics, Fountain Valley, CA, USA. 3. Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY, 10021, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Glenoid component loosening after total shoulder arthroplasty is one of the most common causes of failure. A hybrid glenoid that uses peripherally cemented pegs and a central press-fit post may improve implant longevity. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked, compared with polyethylene pegged glenoid implants, do hybrid glenoid implants with a titanium post provide (1) better ingrowth with fewer radiolucencies, (2) better outcome and pain scores, and (3) lower risk of complications and revisions? METHODS: Between 2009 and 2010, 126 patients underwent primary total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis. Patients were included in this retrospective study if they consented for inclusion in a shoulder arthroplasty registry, had complete baseline and 2-year data, and had complete radiographs. Eighty-three (67%) were available at an average followup of 3.2 years (range, 24-45 months). Forty received a conventional all-polyethylene pegged glenoid and 43 received a hybrid component. During the period in question, four of the participating surgeons used only one implant, and four used only the other; there was one high-volume surgeon in each of the study groups. Radiographs were taken at the 2-year followup and analyzed for radiolucent lines. CT scans were obtained randomly for 10 patients with hybrid glenoid implants to assess bone ongrowth. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, VAS score, complications and revisions were recorded. RESULTS: At final followup, radiolucent lines between the two study groups were not different (hybrid, 1.0 ± 0.4; pegged, 1.6 ± 0.3; mean difference, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.85-1.72; p = 0.323). Final VAS pain scores were not different (hybrid, 1.2 ± 0.2; pegged, 1.5 ± 0.3; p = 0.056). Change in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores were not different (hybrid, 33.7 ± 7.3; pegged, 35.5 ± 8.2; p = 0.283). There were no differences in complication risk (hybrid, one of 43 [2.3%]; pegged, three of 40 [7.5%]; relative risk, 2.3; 95% CI, 0.82-3.12; p = 0.061). CONCLUSIONS: With the numbers available and at early followup, there were no differences between the hybrid and pegged glenoids in terms of fixation, functional outcome, pain scores, and complications. CT scans confirmed bone ongrowth on the porous titanium post in a small subcohort of patients. Further studies are needed to determine how this new implant will perform with time. Until then, its use should be initiated with caution. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.
BACKGROUND: Glenoid component loosening after total shoulder arthroplasty is one of the most common causes of failure. A hybrid glenoid that uses peripherally cemented pegs and a central press-fit post may improve implant longevity. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We asked, compared with polyethylene pegged glenoid implants, do hybrid glenoid implants with a titanium post provide (1) better ingrowth with fewer radiolucencies, (2) better outcome and pain scores, and (3) lower risk of complications and revisions? METHODS: Between 2009 and 2010, 126 patients underwent primary total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis. Patients were included in this retrospective study if they consented for inclusion in a shoulder arthroplasty registry, had complete baseline and 2-year data, and had complete radiographs. Eighty-three (67%) were available at an average followup of 3.2 years (range, 24-45 months). Forty received a conventional all-polyethylene pegged glenoid and 43 received a hybrid component. During the period in question, four of the participating surgeons used only one implant, and four used only the other; there was one high-volume surgeon in each of the study groups. Radiographs were taken at the 2-year followup and analyzed for radiolucent lines. CT scans were obtained randomly for 10 patients with hybrid glenoid implants to assess bone ongrowth. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, VAS score, complications and revisions were recorded. RESULTS: At final followup, radiolucent lines between the two study groups were not different (hybrid, 1.0 ± 0.4; pegged, 1.6 ± 0.3; mean difference, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.85-1.72; p = 0.323). Final VAS pain scores were not different (hybrid, 1.2 ± 0.2; pegged, 1.5 ± 0.3; p = 0.056). Change in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores were not different (hybrid, 33.7 ± 7.3; pegged, 35.5 ± 8.2; p = 0.283). There were no differences in complication risk (hybrid, one of 43 [2.3%]; pegged, three of 40 [7.5%]; relative risk, 2.3; 95% CI, 0.82-3.12; p = 0.061). CONCLUSIONS: With the numbers available and at early followup, there were no differences between the hybrid and pegged glenoids in terms of fixation, functional outcome, pain scores, and complications. CT scans confirmed bone ongrowth on the porous titanium post in a small subcohort of patients. Further studies are needed to determine how this new implant will perform with time. Until then, its use should be initiated with caution. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, therapeutic study.
Authors: Steven Klepps; Alexis S Chiang; Suzanne Miller; Chun Yan Jiang; Yassamin Hazrati; Evan L Flatow Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Patrick Vavken; Patrick Sadoghi; Arvind von Keudell; Claudio Rosso; Victor Valderrabano; Andreas M Müller Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2013-02-06 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Soren Olson; Jeremiah M Clinton; Zachary Working; Joseph R Lynch; Winston J Warme; Wesley Womack; Frederick A Matsen Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2011-01-05 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Gary M Gartsman; Hussein A Elkousy; K Mathew Warnock; T Bradley Edwards; Daniel P O'Connor Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2005 May-Jun Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Michael A Wirth; Rebecca Loredo; Glen Garcia; Charles A Rockwood; Carleton Southworth; Joseph P Iannotti Journal: J Bone Joint Surg Am Date: 2012-02-01 Impact factor: 5.284
Authors: Amy K Franta; Tim R Lenters; Doug Mounce; Blazej Neradilek; Frederick A Matsen Journal: J Shoulder Elbow Surg Date: 2007-05-16 Impact factor: 3.019
Authors: Giovanni Merolla; Giovanni Ciaramella; Elisabetta Fabbri; Gilles Walch; Paolo Paladini; Giuseppe Porcellini Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2016-08-10 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Kyle N Kunze; Laura M Krivicich; Christopher Brusalis; Samuel A Taylor; Lawrence V Gulotta; Joshua S Dines; Michael C Fu Journal: Clin Shoulder Elb Date: 2022-07-05