Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
You currently have no access to view or download this content. Please log in with your institutional or personal account if you should have access to through either of these
The Bone & Joint Journal Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from The Bone & Joint Journal

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Upper Limb

An evaluation of the radiological changes around the Grammont reverse geometry shoulder arthroplasty after eight to 12 years



Download PDF

Abstract

Radiological changes and differences between cemented and uncemented components of Grammont reverse shoulder arthroplasties (DePuy) were analysed at a mean follow-up of 9.6 years (8 to 12). Of 122 reverse shoulder arthroplasties implanted in five shoulder centres between 1993 and 2000, a total of 68 (65 patients) were available for study. The indications for reversed shoulder arthroplasty were cuff tear arthropathy in 48 shoulders, revision of shoulder prostheses of various types in 11 and massive cuff tear in nine. The development of scapular notching, bony scapular spur formation, heterotopic ossification, glenoid and humeral radiolucencies, stem subsidence, radiological signs of stress shielding and resorption of the tuberosities were assessed on standardised true anteroposterior and axillary radiographs.

A scapular notch was observed in 60 shoulders (88%) and was associated with the superolateral approach (p = 0.009). Glenoid radiolucency was present in 11 (16%), bony scapular spur and/or ossifications in 51 (75%), and subsidence of the stem and humeral radiolucency in more than three zones were present in three (8.8%) and in four (11.8%) of 34 cemented components, respectively, and in one (2.9%) and two (5.9%) of 34 uncemented components, respectively. Radiological signs of stress shielding were significantly more frequent with uncemented components (p < 0.001), as was resorption of the greater (p < 0.001) and lesser tuberosities (p = 0.009).


Correspondence should be sent to Dr G. Walch; e-mail: walch.gilles@wanadoo.fr

For access options please click here