| Literature DB >> 30280137 |
Derek D Berglund1, Samuel Rosas1,2, Jacob J Triplet3, Jennifer Kurowicki1,4, Brandon Horn1,5, Jonathan C Levy1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Latissimus dorsi transfers have been considered necessary to restore active external rotation following reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The purpose of this study was to assess the effectiveness of an RSA system that lateralizes the center of rotation in restoring active external rotation without a latissimus dorsi transfer in patients with a preoperative external rotation deficit (external rotation of <0°).Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30280137 PMCID: PMC6145565 DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.17.00054
Source DB: PubMed Journal: JB JS Open Access ISSN: 2472-7245
Fig. 1Flow diagram showing the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the study population. ER = external rotation. *2 patients underwent revision RSA and latissimus dorsi transfer.
Fig. 2Graph showing the improvement in external rotation (ER) following RSA without a latissimus dorsi transfer. Mean preoperative and postoperative active external rotation with standard deviation is shown for overall, classic CLEER, and non-CLEER groups.
Patient Characteristics in the CLEER and Non-CLEER Groups*
| Preop. Goutallier Classification | Can You Place Your Hand Behind Your Head with the Elbow Straight Out to the Side? | Preop. Motion | Motion at the Time of Latest Follow-up | ||||||||||
| Case | Diagnosis | Infraspinatus | Teres Minor | External Rotation Lag | Preop. Answer | Answer at the Time of Final Follow-up | Active External Rotation | Passive External Rotation | Forward Elevation | Abduction | External Rotation | Forward Elevation | Abduction |
| CLEER group | |||||||||||||
| 1 | CTA | 4 | 4 | Unknown | No | Yes | −30 | Unknown | 60 | 70 | 0 | 150 | 90 |
| 2 | CTA with failed RCR | NA | NA | Yes | No | No | −20 | 40 | 40 | 30 | 30 | 65 | 40 |
| 3 | CTA | 3 | 2 | Yes | No | No | −20 | 0 | 90 | 80 | 55 | 115 | 110 |
| 4 | CTA | 4 | 2 | Yes | No | No | −20 | 0 | 100 | 85 | −15 | 145 | 125 |
| 5 | CTA | 3 | 3 | Yes | No | Yes | −20 | 60 | 55 | 45 | 40 | 130 | 85 |
| 6 | CTA | 4 | 4 | Yes | Unknown | Yes | −20 | 60 | 70 | 30 | 15 | 115 | 95 |
| 7 | CTA with locked anterior dislocation | NA | NA | Unknown | No | No | −30 | Unknown | 40 | 70 | 30 | 80 | 60 |
| 8 | CTA | 4 | 2 | Yes | Unknown | Yes | −10 | 60 | 90 | 70 | 30 | 135 | 100 |
| 9 | CTA | 4 | 1 | Yes | No | Yes | −25 | 15 | 60 | 40 | 20 | 130 | 120 |
| 10 | CTA | 4 | 4 | Yes | No | No | −30 | 45 | 65 | 60 | 20 | 55 | 35 |
| 11 | CTA | 2 | 2 | Yes | Unknown | No | −20 | 45 | 20 | 20 | 30 | 80 | 70 |
| 12 | CTA | 4 | 4 | Yes | No | Yes | −20 | 30 | 90 | 85 | 40 | 135 | 110 |
| 13 | CTA | 3 | 0 | Yes | No | Yes | −20 | 60 | 30 | 40 | 40 | 115 | 75 |
| 14 | CTA | 4 | 1 | Yes | No | Yes | −20 | 0 | 70 | 65 | 20 | 135 | 120 |
| 15 | CTA | NA | NA | Yes | No | Yes | −20 | 30 | 40 | 40 | 25 | 120 | 125 |
| 16 | CTA with failed RCR | 4 | 1 | Yes | Unknown | No | −20 | 60 | 40 | 30 | 45 | 50 | 30 |
| 17 | CTA | 3 | 0 | Yes | No | Yes | −10 | 0 | 100 | 60 | 35 | 140 | 150 |
| 18 | CTA | 4 | 2 | Yes | No | Yes | −30 | 30 | 140 | 70 | 20 | 90 | 70 |
| 19 | CTA | 4 | 3 | Yes | No | Yes | −30 | 30 | 110 | 80 | 30 | 140 | 80 |
| 20 | CTA | 4 | 3 | Yes | No | Yes | −20 | 30 | 30 | 35 | 45 | 150 | 120 |
| 21 | CTA | 4 | 4 | Yes | No | No | −20 | 30 | 30 | 30 | 10 | 90 | 90 |
| 22 | CTA | 4 | 2 | Yes | No | Yes | −25 | 20 | 75 | 50 | 30 | 125 | 100 |
| 23 | CTA | 2 | 0 | Yes | No | Yes | −5 | 20 | 80 | 65 | 40 | 130 | 90 |
| 24 | CTA | 4 | 3 | Yes | No | No | −20 | 50 | 65 | 80 | 30 | 50 | 50 |
| Non-CLEER group | |||||||||||||
| 25 | Acute fracture-dislocation of the glenoid | 2 | 1 | Yes | No | Yes | −30 | 0 | 30 | 30 | 60 | 140 | 95 |
| 26 | Posttraumatic osteonecrosis | 3 | 1 | Yes | No | Yes | −10 | 10 | 95 | 70 | 60 | 150 | 100 |
| 27 | Proximal humeral malunion with degenerative joint disease | 3 | 0 | No | No | Yes | −15 | −15 | 75 | 40 | 25 | 120 | 80 |
| 28 | Greater tuberosity nonunion | 4 | 0 | Yes | No | Yes | −20 | 25 | 30 | 30 | 20 | 130 | 90 |
| 29 | Proximal humeral nonunion | 0 | 0 | Yes | No | No | −10 | 0 | 60 | 60 | 20 | 90 | 60 |
| 30 | Posttraumatic osteonecrosis/malunion | 2 | 0 | Unknown | No | Yes | −20 | Unknown | 75 | 60 | −20 | 80 | 70 |
| 31 | Proximal humeral nonunion/malunion | 4 | 3 | Yes | No | No | −30 | 0 | 50 | 30 | 0 | 50 | 50 |
| 32 | Proximal humeral malunion | 3 | 0 | No | No | Yes | −10 | −10 | 30 | 30 | 25 | 60 | 60 |
| 33 | Osteonecrosis | 2 | 0 | Unknown | No | Yes | −30 | Unknown | 60 | 55 | 40 | 120 | 90 |
CTA = cuff tear arthropathy, RCR = rotator cuff repair, and NA = no CT available.
Goutallier Classification of Infraspinatus and Teres Minor in for CLEER and Non-CLEER Groups
| Goutallier Classification | ||||||
| Structure and Group | Grade 0 | Grade 1 | Grade 2 | Grade 3 | Grade 4 | Mean Grade (and Std. Dev.) |
| Infraspinatus | ||||||
| CLEER group | 0 | 0 | 2 | 4 | 15 | 3.6 ± 0.7 |
| Non-CLEER group | 1 | 0 | 3 | 3 | 2 | 2.6 ± 1.3 |
| Teres minor | ||||||
| CLEER group | 3 | 3 | 6 | 4 | 5 | 2.2 ± 1.4 |
| Non-CLEER group | 6 | 2 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.6 ± 1.0 |
Correlation of Goutallier Classification, Glenosphere Lateralization, and Total Prosthetic Lateralization with External Rotation Improvement in CLEER and Non-CLEER Groups
| Variable | R | P Value |
| Goutallier classification for infraspinatus | ||
| CLEER group | 0.018 | 0.938 |
| Non-CLEER group | −0.087 | 0.823 |
| Goutallier classification for teres minor | ||
| CLEER group | 0.032 | 0.891 |
| Non-CLEER group | −0.207 | 0.593 |
| Glenosphere lateralization | ||
| CLEER group | −0.055 | 0.800 |
| Non-CLEER group | 0.621 | 0.074 |
| Total prosthetic lateralization | ||
| CLEER group | −0.188 | 0.380 |
| Non-CLEER group | 0.480 | 0.191 |