Nathan D Orvets1, Aaron M Chamberlain1, Brendan M Patterson1, Peter N Chalmers2, Michelle Gosselin1, Dane Salazar3, Alexander W Aleem1, Jay D Keener4. 1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis Medical Center, St. Louis, MO, USA. 2. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA. 3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Loyola University, Chicago, IL, USA. 4. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Washington University in St. Louis Medical Center, St. Louis, MO, USA. Electronic address: keenerj@wudosis.wustl.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: This study describes the short-term functional and radiographic outcomes after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in shoulders with a B2 glenoid deformity addressed with corrective reaming. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective series of consecutive patients who underwent TSA with a Walch B2 glenoid quantified by computed tomography scan. All glenoid deformities were addressed using partially corrective glenoid reaming. Radiographic and functional outcome measures, including scores on the visual analog scale for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Standardized Shoulder Assessment, and Simple Shoulder Test were collected. RESULTS: Functional outcome scores were available for 59 of 92 eligible subjects (64%) at a mean of 50 months. The mean preoperative retroversion measured 18° (range, -1° to 36°), superior inclination was 8° (range, -11° to 27°), and posterior subluxation was 67% (range, 39%-91%). Mean visual analog scale improved from 7.4 to 1.4, the American Shoulder and Elbow Shoulder Standardized Assessment improved from 35.4 to 84.3, and the SST improved from 4.5 to 9.1. Radiographs were evaluated at a mean of 31 months: 38 had no glenoid radiolucent lines, 13 glenoids had grade 1, 2 had grade 2, and 5 had grade 3 lucencies. There was no difference in the rate of progression of glenoid radiolucencies between shoulders with a preoperative glenoid version of ≤20° (27.8%) compared with glenoids with >20° of retroversion (22.7%, P = .670). No shoulders were revised due to glenoid loosening or instability. CONCLUSION: TSA with partial corrective glenoid reaming in selected shoulders with a B2 glenoid deformity resulted in excellent functional and radiographic outcomes at short-term follow-up, with a low risk of revision surgery.
BACKGROUND: This study describes the short-term functional and radiographic outcomes after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) in shoulders with a B2 glenoid deformity addressed with corrective reaming. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective series of consecutive patients who underwent TSA with a Walch B2 glenoid quantified by computed tomography scan. All glenoid deformities were addressed using partially corrective glenoid reaming. Radiographic and functional outcome measures, including scores on the visual analog scale for pain, American Shoulder and Elbow Standardized Shoulder Assessment, and Simple Shoulder Test were collected. RESULTS: Functional outcome scores were available for 59 of 92 eligible subjects (64%) at a mean of 50 months. The mean preoperative retroversion measured 18° (range, -1° to 36°), superior inclination was 8° (range, -11° to 27°), and posterior subluxation was 67% (range, 39%-91%). Mean visual analog scale improved from 7.4 to 1.4, the American Shoulder and Elbow Shoulder Standardized Assessment improved from 35.4 to 84.3, and the SST improved from 4.5 to 9.1. Radiographs were evaluated at a mean of 31 months: 38 had no glenoid radiolucent lines, 13 glenoids had grade 1, 2 had grade 2, and 5 had grade 3 lucencies. There was no difference in the rate of progression of glenoid radiolucencies between shoulders with a preoperative glenoid version of ≤20° (27.8%) compared with glenoids with >20° of retroversion (22.7%, P = .670). No shoulders were revised due to glenoid loosening or instability. CONCLUSION: TSA with partial corrective glenoid reaming in selected shoulders with a B2 glenoid deformity resulted in excellent functional and radiographic outcomes at short-term follow-up, with a low risk of revision surgery.
Authors: Frederick A Matsen; Joseph P Iannotti; R Sean Churchill; Lieven De Wilde; T Bradley Edwards; Matthew C Evans; Edward V Fehringer; Gordon I Groh; James D Kelly; Christopher M Kilian; Giovanni Merolla; Tom R Norris; Giuseppe Porcellini; Edwin E Spencer; Anne Vidil; Michael A Wirth; Stacy M Russ; Moni Neradilek; Jeremy S Somerson Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2018-12-03 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Frederick A Matsen; Anastasia Whitson; Sarah E Jackins; Moni B Neradilek; Winston J Warme; Jason E Hsu Journal: Int Orthop Date: 2019-06-25 Impact factor: 3.075
Authors: Travis J Dekker; W Jeffrey Grantham; Lucca Lacheta; Brandon T Goldenberg; Rony-Orijit Dey Hazra; Dylan R Rakowski; Grant J Dornan; Marilee P Horan; Peter J Millett Journal: JSES Int Date: 2022-03-18
Authors: C Benjamin Ma; Weiyuan Xiao; Madeleine Salesky; Edward Cheung; Alan L Zhang; Brian T Feeley; Drew A Lansdown Journal: JSES Int Date: 2020-05-07
Authors: W Jeffrey Grantham; Travis J Dekker; Lucca Lacheta; Marilee P Horan; Brandon T Goldenberg; Bryant P Elrick; Peter J Millett Journal: JSES Int Date: 2020-05-06