Literature DB >> 34271281

Maximizing range of motion of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using design optimization techniques.

Josie Elwell1, George Athwal2, Ryan Willing3.   

Abstract

Range of motion (ROM) obtained after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is an important factor in patient satisfaction and success of the procedure. The optimum RSA design that maximizes ROM is currently unknown. Furthermore, it is unknown if the envelope of motion the RSA is optimized for (overall versus forward elevation planes only) will determine its design. We hypothesized that these were potentially competing objectives (maximizing ROM in frontal elevation planes would require sacrifice in posterior elevation planes), and as a result the optimized designs would differ. The objective of this study was to use computer models and design optimization techniques to determine RSA configurations optimized for either case and compare them in terms of design and performance. Design parameters included glenoid lateralization, humeral lateralization, neck-shaft angle, and inferior offset of the center of rotation (COR) and two different cup depths. All optimized designs maximized glenoid lateralization and inferior offset of the COR. Designs optimized specifically for greater forward elevation plane ROM, however, had slightly higher neck-shaft angles and greater humeral lateralization. In terms of performance, the optimized designs provided 31% to 39% increases in ROM in comparison to that of a representative commercially-available Grammot-style prosthesis. It was concluded that RSA designs optimized for overall versus forward elevation plane ROMs will differ, but both offer improvement over a representative commercially available design, regardless of which ROM region is considered.
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Biomechanics; GC-ROM; Impingement; OpenSim; Parametric modelling; RSA

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34271281      PMCID: PMC8355217          DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2021.110602

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Biomech        ISSN: 0021-9290            Impact factor:   2.789


  27 in total

1.  Effect of humeral component version on impingement in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Daniel R Stephenson; Joo Han Oh; Michelle H McGarry; George F Rick Hatch; Thay Q Lee
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2010-12-08       Impact factor: 3.019

2.  Mechanical tradeoffs associated with glenosphere lateralization in reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Carolyn M Hettrich; Vijay N Permeswaran; Jessica E Goetz; Donald D Anderson
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2015-07-31       Impact factor: 3.019

3.  Glenoid loosening in total shoulder arthroplasty. Association with rotator cuff deficiency.

Authors:  J L Franklin; W P Barrett; S E Jackins; F A Matsen
Journal:  J Arthroplasty       Date:  1988       Impact factor: 4.757

4.  Hierarchy of stability factors in reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Authors:  Sergio Gutiérrez; Tony S Keller; Jonathan C Levy; William E Lee; Zong-Ping Luo
Journal:  Clin Orthop Relat Res       Date:  2008-02-10       Impact factor: 4.176

5.  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

6.  OpenSim: open-source software to create and analyze dynamic simulations of movement.

Authors:  Scott L Delp; Frank C Anderson; Allison S Arnold; Peter Loan; Ayman Habib; Chand T John; Eran Guendelman; Darryl G Thelen
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  2007-11       Impact factor: 4.538

7.  The effects of progressive lateralization of the joint center of rotation of reverse total shoulder implants.

Authors:  Oren Costantini; Daniel S Choi; Andreas Kontaxis; Lawrence V Gulotta
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2015-01-16       Impact factor: 3.019

8.  Effect of implant geometry on range of motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty assessed using glenohumeral separation distance.

Authors:  Lydia R North; Markus A Hetzler; Michael Pickell; J Tim Bryant; Kevin J Deluzio; Ryan T Bicknell
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2015-02-25       Impact factor: 3.019

9.  Initial glenoid component fixation in "reverse" total shoulder arthroplasty: a biomechanical evaluation.

Authors:  Melinda Harman; Mark Frankle; Matt Vasey; Scott Banks
Journal:  J Shoulder Elbow Surg       Date:  2005 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 3.019

10.  [Range of motion of shoulder and elbow in activities of daily life in 3D motion analysis].

Authors:  P Raiss; O Rettig; S Wolf; M Loew; P Kasten
Journal:  Z Orthop Unfall       Date:  2007 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 0.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.