Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is increasingly used in the United States since approval by the FDA in 2003. RTSA relieves pain and restores mobility in arthritic rotator cuff deficient shoulders. Though many advantages of RTSA have been demonstrated, there still are a variety of complications (implant loosening, shoulder impingement, infection, frozen shoulder) making apparent much still is to be learned how RTSA modifies normal shoulder function. The goal of this study was to assess how RTSA affects deltoid muscle moment generating capacity post-surgery using a subject-specific computational model driven by in vivo kinematic data.

A subject-specific 12 degree-of-freedom (DOF) musculoskeletal model was used to analyze the shoulders of 27 subjects (14-RTSA, 12-Normal). The model was modified from the work of Holzbaur et al. to directly input 6 DOF humerus and scapula kinematics obtained using fluoroscopy. Model geometry was scaled according to each subject's skeletal dimensions. In vivo abduction kinematics for each subject were input to their subject-specific model and muscle moment arms for the anterior, lateral and posterior aspects of the deltoid were measured over the arc of motion.

Similar patterns of muscle moment arm changes were observed for normal and RTSA shoulders. The moment arm of the anterior deltoid was positive with the arm at the side and decreased monotonically, crossing zero (the point at which the muscle fibers pass across the joint center) between 50°–60° glenohumeral abduction (Figure 1a). The average moment arm of the lateral deltoid was constant and positive in normal shoulders, but showed a decreasing trend with abduction in RTSA shoulders (Figure 1b). The posterior deltoid moment arm was negative with the arm at the side, and increased monotonically to a positive value with increasing glenohumeral abduction (Figure 1c). Subject-specific moment arm values for RTSA shoulders were highly variable compared to normal shoulders. 2-way repeated measures ANOVA showed significant differences between RTSA and normal shoulders for all three aspects of the deltoid moment arm, where the moment arms in RTSA shoulders were smaller in magnitude.

Shoulder functional capacity is a product of the moment generating ability of the shoulder muscles which, in turn, are a function of the muscle moment arms and muscle forces. Placement of implant components during RTSA can directly affect the geometric relationship between the humerus and scapula and, therefore, the muscle moment arms in the RTSA shoulder. Our results show RTSA shoulders maintain the same muscle moment arm patterns as healthy shoulders, but they show much greater inter-subject variation and smaller moment arm magnitudes. These observations show directly how RTSA configuration and implant placement affect deltoid moment arms, and provide an objective basis for determining optimal implant configuration and surgical placement to maximize RTSA function in a patient-specific manner.

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is an increasingly common treatment for osteoarthritic shoulders with irreparable rotator cuff tears. Although very successful in alleviating pain and restoring some function there is little objective information relating geometric changes imposed by the reverse shoulder and the moment generating capacity of the shoulder muscles. Recent modeling studies of reverse shoulders have shown significant variation in deltoid muscle moment arms over varied joint centers for shoulders with RTSA. The goal of this study was to investigate the sensitivity of muscle moment arms as a function of varying the joint center in one representative RTSA subject. We hypothesized there may exist a more beneficial joint implant placement, measured by muscle moment arms, compared to the actual surgical implant placement.

A 12 degree of freedom, subject-specific model was used to represent the shoulder of a patient with RTSA for whom fluoroscopic measurements of scapular and humeral kinematics during abduction had been obtained. The computer model used these abduction kinematics and systematically varied joint center locations over 1521 different perturbations from the surgical placement to determine moment arms for the anterior, lateral and posterior aspects of the deltoid muscle. The joint center was varied from its surgical position ±4 mm in the anterior/posterior direction, 0–24 mm in the medial/lateral direction, and −10 mm to 14 mm in the superior/inferior direction.

The anterior deltoid moment arm varied up to 16mm with center of rotations variations, primarily in the medial/lateral and superior/inferior directions (Figure 2, Table 1(Figure 1)). Similarly, the lateral deltoid moment arm demonstrated variations up to 13 mm, primarily with joint center changes in the anterior/posterior and superior/inferior directions. The posterior deltoid moment arm varied up to 10mm, primarily in early abduction, and was most sensitive to changes of the joint center in demonstrated a sensitivity of 6 mm corresponding to variations in the superior/inferior directions (Figure 2).

The goal of this study was to assess the sensitivity of the deltoid muscle moment arms as a function of joint configuration for an existing RTSA subject. High variations were found for all three deltoid components. Variation over the entire abduction arc was greatest in the anterior and lateral deltoid, while the posterior deltoid moment arm was mostly sensitive to joint center changes early in the abduction arc. Moment arm changes of 10–16mm represent a significant amount of the total deltoid moment arm. This means there is an opportunity to dramatically change the deltoid moments arms through surgical placement of the joint center of rotation. Computational models of the shoulder may help surgeons optimize subject-specific placement of RTSA implants to provide the best possible muscle function, and assist implant designers to configure devices for the best overall performance.

Current modeling techniques have been used to model the Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty (RTSA) to account for the geometric changes implemented after RTSA. Though these models have provided insight into the effects of geometric changes from RTSA these is still a limitation of understanding muscle function after RTSA on a patient-specific basis. The goal of this study sought to overcome this limitation by developing an approach to calibrate patient-specific muscle strength for an RTSA subject.

The approach was performed for both isometric 0° abduction and dynamic abduction. A 12 degree of freedom (DOF) model developed in our previous work was used in conjunction with our clinical data to create a set of patient-specific data (3 dimensional kinematics, muscle activations, muscle moment arms, joint moments, muscle length, muscle velocity, tendon slack length, optimal fiber length, peak isometric force)) that was used in a novel optimization scheme to estimate muscle parameters that correspond to the patient's muscle strength[4]. The optimization varied to minimize the difference between measured(“in vivo”) and predicted joint moments and measured (“in vivo”) and predicted muscle activations. The predicted joint moments were constructed as a summation of muscle moments. The nested optimization was implemented within matlab (Mathworks). The optimization yields a set of muscle parameters that correspond to the subject's muscle strength. The abduction activity was optimized.

The maximum activation for the muscles within the model ranged between .03–2.4 (Figure 1). The maximum joint moment produced was 11 newton-meters. The joint moments were reproduced to an value of 1. Muscle parameters were calculated for both isometric and dynamic abduction (Figure 2). The muscle parameters produced provided a feasible solution to reproduce the joint moments seen “in vivo” (Figure 3).

Current modeling techniques of the upper extremity focus primarily on geometry. In efforts to create patient-specific models we have developed a framework to predict subject-specific strength characteristics. In order to fully understand muscle function we need muscle parameters that correspond to the subject's strength. This effort in conjunction with patient-specific models that incorporate the patient's joint configurations, kinematics and bone anatomy hopes to provide a framework to gain insight into muscle tensioning effects after RTSA. With this framework improvements can be made to the surgical implementation and design of RTSA to improve surgical outcomes.