Literature DB >> 26652704

Functional and radiologic outcomes of uncemented reverse shoulder arthroplasty in proximal humeral fractures: cementing the humeral component is not necessary.

Seung-Min Youn1, Shaneel Deo2, Peter C Poon2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to determine the radiologic and functional outcomes of patients who underwent reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for proximal humeral fractures and to assess whether the uncemented humeral components put them at risk for early loosening and failure.
METHODS: Thirty-three patients were identified in our hospital database (January 2004-December 2012). Twenty patients were assessed using American Shoulder Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Constant Shoulder Score (CSS), and the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS). Up-to-date shoulder radiographs were evaluated for evidence of radiologic loosening.
RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 3.0 years (range, 2.5-7.8 years), and the mean age at the time of surgery was 76.5 years (range, 62-87 years). The mean ASES was 75.9 of 100 (range, 55-98.3), with a mean visual analog scale pain score of 2 of 10. The mean OSS was 42.5 of 48 (range, 35-48), and the mean CSS was 54.1 of 100 (range, 32-72). Upon radiographic assessment of the humeral component, 6 patients (30%) had 3 or more lucent zones, and 12 patients (60%) had a lucent zone measuring more than 2 mm in width; however, only 2 patients (10%) had 3 or more lucent zones measuring 2 mm or more in width and were identified as "at risk of loosening." No patients had tilt or subsidence of the humeral prosthesis.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrated satisfactory functional and radiologic outcomes of patients compared with other studies, suggesting that RSA is a good management option for elderly patients with these fractures. The uncemented nature of the humeral component did not result in early loosening or failure.
Copyright © 2016 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Proximal humeral fractures; humeral prosthesis; loosening; lucency; radiological outcome; reverse shoulder arthroplasty; shoulder function; uncemented

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26652704     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.09.007

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


  9 in total

1.  Value comparison of humeral component press-fit and cemented techniques in reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Derek D Berglund; Dragomir Mijic; Tsun Yee Law; Jennifer Kurowicki; Samuel Rosas; Jonathan C Levy
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2018-11-02       Impact factor: 3.019

2.  Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humeral fracture in the elderly. Cemented or uncemented stem?

Authors:  Yaiza Lopiz; Carlos García-Fernandez; María Vallejo-Carrasco; Daniel Garriguez-Pérez; Loreto Achaerandio; Carmen Tesoro-Gonzalo; Fernando Marco
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2022-01-16       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Clinical outcomes of cemented vs. uncemented reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for proximal humerus fractures: a systematic review.

Authors:  David S Kao; Omar A Protzuk; Robert S O'Connell
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2022-10-02

4.  Delta Xtend reverse shoulder arthroplasty - Results at a minimum of five years.

Authors:  Craig M Ball
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2019-03-06

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

Review 6.  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

Review 7.  The Evolution of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty and Its Current Use in the Treatment of Proximal Humerus Fractures in the Older Population.

Authors:  Gabriel Larose; Mandeep S Virk
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-09-30       Impact factor: 4.964

8.  Outcomes of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty for Proximal Humerus Fracture Using Uncemented Stems, a Single Center Study.

Authors:  Elias G Joseph; Aleksandr Krichmar; Mohammad Nadir Haider; Thomas R Duquin
Journal:  J Shoulder Elb Arthroplast       Date:  2022-09-21

Review 9.  Cementless reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in a patient affected by Osteogenesis Imperfecta: a case report and review of the literature.

Authors:  Francesco Mancuso; Paolo Di Benedetto; Andrea Marchetti; Dario Ghassempour; Alessandro Beltrame; Araldo Causero
Journal:  Acta Biomed       Date:  2021-07-26
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.