Literature DB >> 28161240

Survival of the pegged glenoid component in shoulder arthroplasty: part II.

Paul B McLendon1, Bradley S Schoch1, John W Sperling2, Joaquín Sánchez-Sotelo1, Cathy D Schleck1, Robert H Cofield1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Loosening of the glenoid component is a primary reason for failure of an anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. Pegged glenoids were designed in an effort to outperform keeled components. This study evaluated the midterm clinical and radiographic survival of a single implant design with implantation of an in-line pegged glenoid component and identified risk factors for radiographic loosening and clinical failure.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: There were 330 total shoulder arthroplasties that had been implanted with a cemented, all-polyethylene, in-line pegged glenoid component evaluated with an average clinical follow-up of 7.2 years. Of these shoulders, 287 had presurgical, initial postsurgical, and late postsurgical radiographs (mean radiographic follow-up, 7.0 years).
RESULTS: At most recent follow-up, 30 glenoid components had been revised for aseptic loosening. This translated to a rate of glenoid component survival free from revision for all 330 shoulders of 99% at 5 years and 83% at 10 years. Of 287 glenoid components, 120 were considered loose on the basis of radiographic evaluation. Four humeral components were considered loose. Component survival (Kaplan-Meier) free from radiographic failure at 5 and 10 years was 92% and 43%. Severe presurgical glenoid erosion (Walch A2, B2, C) and patient age <65 years were risk factors for radiographic failure. Late humeral head subluxation was associated with radiographic failure.
CONCLUSION: Despite the predominant thinking that pegged glenoid components may be superior to keeled designs, midterm radiographic and clinical failure rates were high with this pegged component design, particularly after 5 years. Advanced presurgical glenoid erosion and younger patient age are risk factors for radiographic loosening. Revision rates underestimate radiographic glenoid loosening.
Copyright © 2017 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Shoulder arthroplasty; arthroplasty; glenoids; pegged glenoids; radiographic survival; revision surgery; shoulder; survival

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28161240     DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.12.068

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


  17 in total

Review 1.  Journey of the glenoid in anatomic total shoulder replacement.

Authors:  Alessandro Castagna; Raffaele Garofalo
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2018-08-01

2.  Evaluation of thirty eight cemented pegged glenoid components with variable backside curvature: two-year minimum follow-up.

Authors:  Florence Dauzère; Marine Arboucalot; Julie Lebon; Fanny Elia; Nicolas Bonnevialle; Pierre Mansat
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2017-09-15       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  Glenoid Radiolucent Lines in Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty are Unaffected by Thrombin Glenoid Preparation.

Authors:  Jason C Ho; Liam T Kane; Bernardo Nunes; Gerald R Williams; Joseph A Abboud; Surena Namdari
Journal:  Arch Bone Jt Surg       Date:  2021-09

4.  Anatomic versus reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a mid-term follow-up comparison.

Authors:  Bradley S Schoch; Joseph J King; Joseph Zuckerman; Thomas W Wright; Chris Roche; Pierre-Henri Flurin
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2020-05-16

5.  Clinical and radiographic outcomes of total shoulder arthroplasty with a partially cemented all-polyethylene pegged bone-ingrowth glenoid component: a systematic review.

Authors:  Michael-Alexander Malahias; Lazaros Kostretzis; Ioannis Gkiatas; Efstathios Chronopoulos; Emmanouil Brilakis; Emmanouil Antonogiannakis
Journal:  Shoulder Elbow       Date:  2020-07-27

6.  Radiologic midterm results of cemented and uncemented glenoid components in primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder: a matched pair analysis.

Authors:  Petra Magosch; Peter Habermeyer; Philipp Vetter
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  2021-07-06       Impact factor: 3.067

7.  Articular surface failure in hybrid anatomic glenoid components: a unique failure mechanism.

Authors:  Joseph G Monir; William K Powers; Joseph J King; Thomas W Wright; Bradley S Schoch
Journal:  Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol       Date:  2021-06-15

8.  Cadaveric study validating in vitro monitoring techniques to measure the failure mechanism of glenoid implants against clinical CT.

Authors:  Sarah Junaid; Thomas Gregory; Shirley Fetherston; Roger Emery; Andrew A Amis; Ulrich Hansen
Journal:  J Orthop Res       Date:  2018-04-25       Impact factor: 3.494

9.  Primary Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty: What Can Be Learned From 359 Cases That Were Surgically Revised?

Authors:  Daniel J Hackett; Jason E Hsu; Frederick A Matsen
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2018-05       Impact factor: 4.176

10.  Loosening and revision rates after total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review of cemented all-polyethylene glenoid and three modern designs of metal-backed glenoid.

Authors:  Dong Min Kim; Mohammed Aldeghaither; Fahad Alabdullatif; Myung Jin Shin; Erica Kholinne; Hyojune Kim; In-Ho Jeon; Kyoung-Hwan Koh
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2020-02-21       Impact factor: 2.362

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.