Literature DB >> 31721016

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Implant Design Considerations.

Ujash Sheth1, Matthew Saltzman2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Our understanding of the reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has grown exponentially since Grammont first introduced his design in 1985. There are a multitude of implant-related variables to consider when performing RTSA. The purpose of this article is to provide a review of these design considerations. RECENT
FINDINGS: Current literature demonstrates that the traditional Grammont prosthesis has over 90% survivorship at 10 years. Despite these promising results, there have been concerns raised over the significant rate of scapular notching observed. As a result, the traditional RTSA design has been modified to minimize this complication and maximize impingement-free motion. Modern RTSA designs with a cementless, curved, short-stemmed eccentric onlay humeral component combined with a large, lateralized glenosphere placed in 10° of inferior tilt with > 3.5 mm of inferior overhang have been found to provide excellent results. However, all implant design features must be considered on a case-by-case basis to optimize outcome for each patient. Humeral and glenoid implant design variables have evolved as the biomechanics of RTSA have been further elucidated. Consideration of these variables allows the surgeon to maximize joint efficiency, improve impingement-free range of motion, decrease the risk of scapular notching, preserve bone stock, and minimize the risk of instability.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Glenosphere; Humeral tray; Lateralization; Neck-shaft angle

Year:  2019        PMID: 31721016      PMCID: PMC6942091          DOI: 10.1007/s12178-019-09585-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med        ISSN: 1935-9748


  79 in total

1.  Effect of humeral stem design on humeral position and range of motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Alexandre Lädermann; Patrick J Denard; Pascal Boileau; Alain Farron; Pierric Deransart; Alexandre Terrier; Julien Ston; Gilles Walch
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-09-18       Impact factor: 3.075

2.  Range of impingement-free abduction and adduction deficit after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Hierarchy of surgical and implant-design-related factors.

Authors:  Sergio Gutiérrez; Charles A Comiskey; Zong-Ping Luo; Derek R Pupello; Mark A Frankle
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 5.284

3.  Biomechanical evaluation of different designs of glenospheres in the SMR reverse total shoulder prosthesis: range of motion and risk of scapular notching.

Authors:  Justin Chou; Sharif F Malak; Iain A Anderson; Tim Astley; Peter C Poon
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2009 May-Jun       Impact factor: 3.019

4.  Arc of motion and socket depth in reverse shoulder implants.

Authors:  Sergio Gutiérrez; Zong-Ping Luo; Jonathan Levy; Mark A Frankle
Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)       Date:  2009-04-05       Impact factor: 2.063

5.  Reverse shoulder arthroplasty with a cementless short metaphyseal humeral implant without a stem: clinical and radiologic outcomes in prospective 2- to 7-year follow-up study.

Authors:  Ofer Levy; Ali Narvani; Nir Hous; Ruben Abraham; Jai Relwani; Riten Pradhan; Juan Bruguera; Giuseppe Sforza; Ehud Atoun
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2016-02-26       Impact factor: 3.019

6.  Scapular notching in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: is it important to avoid it and how?

Authors:  Christophe Lévigne; Jérome Garret; Pascal Boileau; Ghassan Alami; Luc Favard; Gilles Walch
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 4.176

7.  Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: radiological and clinical result using an eccentric glenosphere.

Authors:  Carlo Felice De Biase; Marco Delcogliano; Mario Borroni; A Castagna
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2012-04-20

8.  Is there any influence of humeral component retroversion on range of motion and clinical outcome in reverse shoulder arthroplasty? A clinical study.

Authors:  F A de Boer; P M van Kampen; P E Huijsmans
Journal:  Musculoskelet Surg       Date:  2016-12-03

9.  Biomechanical comparison of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty systems in soft tissue-constrained shoulders.

Authors:  Heath B Henninger; Frank K King; Robert Z Tashjian; Robert T Burks
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2013-11-23       Impact factor: 3.019

10.  Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a review of results according to etiology.

Authors:  Bryan Wall; Laurent Nové-Josserand; Daniel P O'Connor; T Bradley Edwards; Gilles Walch
Journal:  J Bone Joint Surg Am       Date:  2007-07       Impact factor: 5.284

View more
  5 in total

1.  Patient Posture Affects Simulated ROM in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Modeling Study Using Preoperative Planning Software.

Authors:  Philipp Moroder; Manuel Urvoy; Patric Raiss; Jean-David Werthel; Doruk Akgün; Jean Chaoui; Paul Siegert
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2022-03-01       Impact factor: 4.755

2.  Implant characteristics affect in vivo shoulder kinematics during multiplanar functional motions after reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Christopher Como; Clarissa LeVasseur; Gillian Kane; Ajinkya Rai; Maria Munsch; Alexandra Gabrielli; Jonathan Hughes; William Anderst; Albert Lin
Journal:  J Biomech       Date:  2022-03-12       Impact factor: 2.789

3.  Screw-Tip Augmented Locked Plating Versus Primary Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in Displaced Proximal Humeral Fractures: A Retrospective Comparative Cohort Study With a Mean Follow-Up of 39 Months.

Authors:  Georg Siebenbürger; Evi Fleischhacker; Ulla Stumpf; Tobias Helfen; Wolfgang Böcker; Ben Ockert
Journal:  Geriatr Orthop Surg Rehabil       Date:  2021-10-24

Review 4.  Does Humeral Component Version Affect Range of Motion and Clinical Outcomes in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty? A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Shivan S Jassim; Lukas Ernstbrunner; Eugene T Ek
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2021-12-08       Impact factor: 4.241

Review 5.  The Evolution of Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty-From the First Steps to Novel Implant Designs and Surgical Techniques.

Authors:  Julia K Frank; Paul Siegert; Fabian Plachel; Philipp R Heuberer; Stephanie Huber; Jakob E Schanda
Journal:  J Clin Med       Date:  2022-03-10       Impact factor: 4.241

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.