Abstract
Introduction
Initial fixation of noncemented implants is critical to achieve a stable bone/implant interface during the first few months after surgery to potentiate bone in-growth and avoid aseptic loosening. Numerous reverse shoulder glenoid implant designs have been conceived in an attempt to improve implant performance and decrease the rate of aseptic glenoid loosening, commonly reported to be 5%. Design variations include: baseplate profile, baseplate size, backside geometry, center of rotation, surface finish and coatings, fixation screw diameters, number of fixation screw options, and type of screw fixation. However, little comparative biomechanical data exist to substantiate one design consideration over another. To that end, this study quantified glenoid fixation before and after cyclic loading of simulated abduction of 6 different reverse shoulder glenoid designs when secured to a low density polyurethane bone substitute block.
Methods
A displacement test quantified fixation of 6 different reverse shoulder designs: 38 mm Equinoxe standard offset (EQ), 38 mm Equinoxe lateral offset (EQL), 36 mm Depuy Delta III (DRS), 36 mm Zimmer, (ZRS), 32 mm neutral DJO RSP (DJO), and a 36 mm Tornier BIO-RSA (BIO), secured to a 0.24 g/cm3 polyurethane block as a shear (357 N) and compressive (50 N) load was applied before and after cyclic loading. (Figure 1) Glenoid displacement was measured relative to the block using dial indicators in the directions of the applied loads along the superior/inferior axis. A cyclic test rotated each glenosphere (n = 7 for each design) about a 55° arc of abduction at 0.5 Hz for 10k cycles as 750N was constantly applied. (Figure 2) Each implant was cycled using a 145° humeral liner of the appropriate diameter to ensure each device is subjected to the same shear load. A two-tailed unpaired student's t-test was used to compare pre- and post-cyclic mean displacements between designs; p < 0.05 denotes significance.
Results
The average pre-cyclic displacement of the EQ, EQL, DRS, ZRS, DJO, and BIO devices was 181, 137, 186, 381, 238, 232 microns, respectively. The average post-cyclic displacement of the EQ, EQL, DRS, DJO, and BIO devices was 186, 129, 189, 368, 249 microns, respectively. During the cyclic test, 6 of 7 ZRS devices failed at an average of 2603 cycles, 1 of 7 DJO failed at 7342 cycles, and 4 of 7 BIO devices failed at an average of 2926 cycles. All 7 of the EQ, EQL, and DRS devices remained well fixed throughout cyclic loading.
Discussion and Conclusions
The results of this study demonstrate significant difference in fixation associated 6 different reverse shoulder designs. Despite many similarities in geometry between these designs, significant differences in fixation were observed between nearly every implant design tested. This suggests that subtle changes in glenoid baseplate design can dramatically impact fixation, particularly in low density bone substitutes which are intended to simulate the bone quality of the recipient population for reverse shoulders. Future work should attempt to isolate which design parameters are the most critical contributors for initial fixation and ultimately, long-term stability.
