Aims. Optimal glenoid positioning in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is crucial to provide impingement-free range of motion (ROM). Lateralization and inclination correction are not yet systematically used. Using planning software, we simulated the most used glenoid implant positions. The primary goal was to determine the configuration that delivers the best theoretical impingement-free ROM. Methods. With the use of a 3D planning software (Blueprint) for RSA, 41 shoulders in 41 consecutive patients (17 males and 24 females; means age 73 years (SD 7)) undergoing RSA were planned. For the same anteroposterior positioning and retroversion of the glenoid implant, four different glenoid baseplate configurations were used on each shoulder to compare ROM: 1) no correction of the RSA angle and no lateralization (C-L-); 2) correction of the RSA angle with medialization by inferior reaming (C+M+); 3) correction of the RSA angle without lateralization by superior compensation (C+L-); and 4) correction of the RSA angle and additional lateralization (C+L+). The same humeral inlay implant and positioning were used on the humeral side for the four different glenoid configurations with a 3 mm symmetric 135° inclined polyethylene liner. Results. The configuration with lateralization and correction of the RSA angle (C+L+) led to better ROM in flexion, extension, adduction, and external rotation (p ≤ 0.001). Only internal rotation was not significantly different between groups (p = 0.388). The configuration where correction of the inclination was done by medialization (C+M+) led to the worst ROM in adduction, extension, abduction, flexion, and external rotation of the shoulder. Conclusion. Our software study shows that, when using a 135° inlay reversed humeral implant, correcting glenoid inclination (RSA angle 0°) and lateralizing the glenoid component by using an angled bony or metallic augment of 8 to 10 mm provides optimal impingement-free ROM. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(10):851–857

Aims

Proximal humeral fractures are the third most common fracture among the elderly. Complications associated with fixation include screw perforation, varus collapse, and avascular necrosis of the humeral head. To address these challenges, various augmentation techniques to increase medial column support have been developed. There are currently no recent studies that definitively establish the superiority of augmented fixation over non-augmented implants in the surgical treatment of proximal humeral fractures. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the outcomes of patients who underwent locking-plate fixation with cement augmentation or bone-graft augmentation versus those who underwent locking-plate fixation without augmentation for proximal humeral fractures.

Aims

The aims of this study were to identify and evaluate the current literature examining the prognostic factors which are associated with failure of total elbow arthroplasty (TEA).

Aims

Both anatomical and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA and rTSA) provide functional improvements. A reported benefit of aTSA is better range of motion (ROM). However, it is not clear which procedure provides better outcomes in patients with limited foward elevation (FE). The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of aTSA and rTSA in patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA), an intact rotator cuff, and limited FE.

The purpose of this study is to report the clinical and radiological outcomes of patients undergoing primary or revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using custom 3D printed components to manage severe glenoid bone loss with a minimum of 2-year follow-up. After ethical approval (reference: 17/YH/0318), patients were identified and invited to participate in this observational study. Inclusion criteria included: 1) severe glenoid bone loss necessitating the need for custom implants; 2) patients with definitive glenoid and humeral components implanted more than 2 years prior; 3) ability to comply with patient reported outcome questionnaires. After seeking consent, included patients underwent clinical assessment utilising the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), Constant-Murley score, American Shoulder and Elbow Society Score (ASES), and quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Score (quickDASH). Radiographic assessment included AP and axial projections. Patients were invited to attend a CT scan to confirm osseointegration. Statistical analysis utilised included descriptive statistics (mean and standard deviation) and paired t test for parametric data. 3 patients had revision surgery prior to the 2-year follow-up. Of these, 2/3 retained their custom glenoid components. 4 patients declined to participate. 5 patients were deceased at the time of commencement of the study. 21 patients were included in this analysis. The mean follow-up was 36.1 months from surgery (range 22–60.2 months). OSS improved from a mean 16 (SD 9.1) to 36 (SD 11.5) (p < 0.001). Constant-Murley score improved from mean 9 (SD 9.2) to 50 (SD 16.4) (p < 0.001). QuickDASH improved from mean 67 (SD 24) to 26 (SD 27.2) (p = 0.004). ASES improved from mean 28 (SD 24.8) to 70 (SD 23.9) (p = 0.007). Radiographic evaluation demonstrated good osseointegration in all 21 included patients. The utility of custom 3D-printed components for managing severe glenoid bone loss in primary and revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty yields significant clinical improvements in this complex patient cohort

The reverse total shoulder replacement (rTSR) has excellent clinical outcomes and prosthesis longevity, and thus, the indications have expanded to a younger age group. The use of a stemless humeral implant has been established in the anatomic TSR; and it is postulated to be safe to use in rTSR, whilst saving humeral bone stock for younger patients. The Lima stemless rTSR is a relatively new implant, with only one paper published on its outcomes. This is a single-surgeon retrospective matched case control study to assess short term outcomes of primary stemless Lima SMR rTSR with 3D planning and Image Derived Instrumentation (IDI), in comparison to a matched case group with a primary stemmed Lima SMR rTSR with 3D planning and IDI. Outcomes assessed: ROM, satisfaction score, PROMs, pain scores; and plain radiographs for loosening, loss of position, notching. Complications will be collated. Patients with at least 1 year of follow-up will be assessed. With comparing the early radiographic and clinical outcomes of the stemless rTSR to a similar patient the standard rTSR, we can assess emerging trends or complications of this new device. 41 pairs of stemless and standard rTSRs have been matched, with 1- and 2-year follow up data. Data is currently being collated. Our hypothesis is that there is no clinical or radiographical difference between the Lima stemless rTSR and the traditional Lima stemmed rTSR

Shoulder arthroplasty humeral stem design has evolved to accommodate patient anatomy characteristics. As a result, stems are available in numerous shapes, coatings, lengths, sizes, and vary by fixation method. This abundance of stem options creates a surgical paradox of choice. Metrics describing stem stability, including a stem's resistance to subsidence and micromotion, are important factors that should influence stem selection, but have yet to be assessed in response to the diametral (i.e., thickness) sizing of short stem humeral implants. Eight paired cadaveric humeri (age = 75±15 years) were reconstructed with surgeon selected ‘standard’ sized short-stemmed humeral implants, as well as 2mm ‘oversized’ implants. Stem sizing conditions were randomized to left and right humeral pairs. Following implantation, an anteroposterior radiograph was taken of each stem and the metaphyseal and diaphyseal fill ratios were quantified. Each humerus was then potted in polymethyl methacrylate bone cement and subjected to 2000 cycles of 90º forward flexion loading. At regular intervals during loading, stem subsidence and micromotion were assessed using a validated system of two optical markers attached to the stem and humeral pot (accuracy of <15µm). The metaphyseal fill ratio did not differ significantly between the oversized and standard stems (0.50±0.06 vs 0.50±0.10; P = 0.997, Power = 0.05); however, the diaphyseal fill ratio did (0.52±0.06 vs 0.45±0.07; P < 0.001, Power = 1.0). Neither fill ratio correlated significantly with stem subsidence or micromotion. Stem subsidence and micromotion were found to plateau following 400 cycles of loading. Oversizing stem thickness prevented implant head-back contact in all but one specimen with the least dense metaphyseal bone, while standard sizing only yielded incomplete head-back contact in the two subjects with the densest bone. Oversized stems subsided significantly less than their standard counterparts (standard: 1.4±0.6mm, oversized: 0.5±0.5mm; P = 0.018, Power = 0.748;), and resulted in slightly more micromotion (standard: 169±59µm, oversized: 187±52µm, P = 0.506, Power = 0.094,). Short stem diametral sizing (i.e., thickness) has an impact on stem subsidence and micromotion following humeral arthroplasty. In both cases, the resulting three-dimensional stem micromotion exceeded, the 150µm limit suggested for bone ingrowth, although that limit was derived from a uniaxial assessment. Though not statistically significant, the increased stem micromotion associated with stem oversizing may in-part be attributed to over-compacting the cancellous bed during broaching, which creates a denser, potentially smoother, interface, though this influence requires further assessment. The findings of the present investigation highlight the importance of proper short stem diametral sizing, as even a relatively small, 2mm, increase can negatively impact the subsidence and micromotion of the stem-bone construct. Future work should focus on developing tools and methods to support surgeons in what is currently a subjective process of stem selection

Total shoulder arthroplasty implants have evolved to include more anatomically shaped components that replicate the native state. The geometry of the humeral head is non-spherical, with the sagittal diameter of the base of the head being up to 6% (or 2.1-3.9 mm) larger than the frontal diameter. Despite this, many TSA humeral head implants are spherical, meaning that the diameter must be oversized to achieve complete coverage, resulting in articular overhang, or portions of the resection plane will remain uncovered. It is suspected that implant-bone load transfer between the backside of the humeral head and the cortex on the resection plane may yield better load-transfer characteristics if resection coverage was properly matched without overhang, thereby mitigating proximal stress shielding. Eight paired cadaveric humeri were prepared for reconstruction with a short stem total shoulder arthroplasty by an orthopaedic surgeon who selected and prepared the anatomic humeral resection plane using a cutting guide and a reciprocating sagittal saw. The humeral head was resected, and the resulting cortical boundary of the resection plane was digitized using a stylus and an optical tracking system with a submillimeter accuracy (Optotrak,NDI,Waterloo,ON). A plane was fit to the trace and the viewpoint was transformed to be perpendicular to the plane. To simulate optimal sizing of both circular and elliptical humeral heads, both circles and ellipses were fit to the filtered traces using the sum of least squares error method. Two extreme scenarios were also investigated: upsizing until 100% total coverage and downsizing until 0% overhang. Total resection plane coverage for the fitted ellipses was found to be 98.2±0.6% and fitted circles was 95.9±0.9%Cortical coverage was found to be 79.8 ±8.2% and 60.4±6.9% for ellipses and circles respectively. By switching to an ellipsoid humeral head, a small 2.3±0.3% (P < 0.001) increase in total coverage led to a 19.5±1.3%(P < 0.001) increase in cortical coverage. The overhang for fitted ellipses and circles was 1.7 ±0.7% and 3.8 ±0.8% respectively, defined as a percentage of the total enclosed area that exceeded the bounds of the humerus resections. Using circular heads results in 2.0 ±0.1% (P < 0.001) greater overhang. Upsizing until 100% resection coverage, the ellipse produced 5.4 ±3.5% (P < 0.001) less overhang than the circle. When upsizing the overhang increases less rapidly for the ellipsoid humeral head that the circular one (Figure 1). Full coverage for the head is achieved more rapidly when up-sizing with an ellipsoid head as well. Downsizing until 0% overhang, total coverage and cortical coverage were 7.5 ±2.8% (P < 0.001) and 7.9 ±8.2% (P = 0.01) greater for the ellipse, respectively. Cortical coverage exhibits a crossover point at −2.25% downsizing, where further downsizing led to the circular head providing more cortical coverage. Reconstruction with ellipsoids can provide greater total resection and cortical coverage than circular humeral heads while avoiding excessive overhang. Elliptical head cortical coverage can be inferior when undersized. These initial findings suggest resection-matched humeral heads may yield benefits worth pursuing in the next generation of TSA implant design. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Aims

The use and variety of stemless humeral components in anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) have proliferated since their advent in 2004. Early outcomes are reassuring but independent mid-term results are scarce. This independent study reports a consecutive series of 143 Eclipse stemless shoulder prostheses with a minimum five-year (5 to 10) follow-up.

Aims. Stemless humeral implants have been developed to overcome stem-related complications in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). However, stemless implant designs may hypothetically result in less stable initial fixation, potentially affecting long-term survival. The aim of this study is to investigate early fixation and migration patterns of the stemless humeral component of the Simpliciti Shoulder System and to evaluate clinical outcomes. Methods. In this prospective cohort study, radiostereometric analysis (RSA) radiographs were obtained in 24 patients at one day, six weeks, six months, one year, and two years postoperatively. Migration was calculated using model-based RSA. Clinical outcomes were evaluated using the visual analogue scale (VAS), the Oxford Shoulder Score (OSS), the Constant-Murley Score (CMS), and the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score. Results. At two years, median translation along the x-, y-, and z-axis was -0.12 mm (interquartile range (IQR) -0.18 to 0.02), -0.17 mm (IQR -0.27 to -0.09), and 0.09 mm (IQR 0.02 to 0.31). Median rotation around the x-, y-, and z-axis was 0.12° (IQR -0.50 to 0.57), -0.98° (IQR -1.83 to 1.23), and 0.09° (IQR -0.76 to 0.30). Overall, 20 prostheses stabilized within 12 months postoperatively. Four prostheses showed continuous migration between 12 and 24 months. At two-year follow-up, with the exception of one revised prosthesis, all clinical scores improved significantly (median VAS difference at rest: -3.0 (IQR -1.5 to -6.0); OSS 22.0 (IQR 15.0 to 25.0); CMS 29.5 (IQR 15.0 to 35.75); and DASH -30.0 (IQR -20.6 to -41.67) (all p < 0.001)) with the exception of one revised prosthesis. Conclusion. In conclusion, we found that 20 out of 24 implants stabilized within 12 months postoperatively. The significance of continuous migration in four implants is unclear and future research on the predictive value of early migration for future loosening in TSA is required. Clinical results revealed a clinically relevant improvement. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(1):76–82

Aims

To report early (two-year) postoperative findings from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating disease-specific quality of life (QOL), clinical, patient-reported, and radiological outcomes in patients undergoing a total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with a second-generation uncemented trabecular metal (TM) glenoid versus a cemented polyethylene glenoid (POLY) component.

Aims

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) using trabecular metal (TM)-backed glenoid implants has been introduced with the aim to increase implant survival. Only short-term reports on the outcomes of TM-RTSA have been published to date. We aim to present the seven-year survival of TM-backed glenoid implants along with minimum five-year clinical and radiological outcomes.

Aims. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical results, long-term survival, and complication rates of stemless shoulder prosthesis with stemmed anatomical shoulder prostheses for treatment of osteoarthritis and to analyze radiological bone changes around the implants during follow-up. Methods. A total of 161 patients treated with either a stemmed or a stemless shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder were evaluated with a mean follow-up of 118 months (102 to 158). The Constant score (CS), the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, and active range of motion (ROM) were recorded. Radiological analysis for bone adaptations was performed by plain radiographs. A Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was calculated and complications were noted. Results. The ROM (p < 0.001), CS (p < 0.001), and DASH score (p < 0.001) showed significant improvements after shoulder arthroplasty for both implants. There were no differences between the groups treated with stemmed or stemless shoulder prosthesis with respect to the mean CS (79.2 (35 to 118) vs 74.4 (31 to 99); p = 0.519) and DASH scores (11.4 (8 to 29) vs 13.2 (7 to 23); p = 0.210). The ten-year unadjusted cumulative survival rate was 95.3% for the stemmed anatomical shoulder prosthesis and 91.5% for the stemless shoulder prosthesis and did not differ between the treatment groups (p = 0.251). The radiological evaluation of the humeral components in both groups did not show loosening of the humeral implant. The main reason for revision for each type of arthroplasties were complications related to the glenoid. Conclusion. The use of anatomical stemless shoulder prosthesis yielded good and reliable results and did not differ from anatomical stemmed shoulder prosthesis over a mean period of ten years. The differences in periprosthetic humeral bone adaptations between both implants have no clinical impact during the follow-up. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(7):1292–1300

Aims

The purpose of this study was to report bone adaptive changes after anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) using a standard-length hydroxyapatite (HA)-coated humeral component, and to report on a computer-based analysis of radiographs to determine changes in peri-implant bone density objectively.

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is an effective treatment for end-stage glenohumeral arthritis. The use of high modulus uncemented stems causes stress shielding and induces bone resorption of up to 63% of patients following TSA. Shorter length stems with smaller overall dimensions have been studied to reduce stress shielding, however the effect of humeral short stem varus-valgus positioning on bone stress is not known. The purpose of this study was to quantify the effect of humeral short stem varus-valgus angulation on bone stresses after TSA. Three dimensional models of eight male cadaveric humeri (mean±SD age:68±6 years) were created from computed tomography data using MIMICS (Materialise, Belgium). Separate cortical and trabecular bone sections were created, and the resulting bone models were virtually reconstructed three times by an orthopaedic surgeon using an optimally sized short stem humeral implant (Exactech Preserve) that was placed directly in the center of the humeral canal (STD), as well as rotated varus (VAR) or valgus (VAL) until it was contacting the cortex. Bone was meshed using a custom technique which produced identical bone meshes permitting the direct element-to-element comparison of bone stress. Cortical bone was assigned an elastic modulus of 20 GPa and a Poisson's ratio of 0.3. Trabecular bone was assigned varying stiffness based on CT attenuation. A joint reaction force was then applied to the intact and reconstructed humeri representing 45˚ and 75˚ of abduction. Changes in bone stress, as well as the expected bone response based on change in strain energy density was then compared between the intact and reconstructed states for all implant positions. Both varus and valgus positioning of the humeral stem altered both the cortical and trabecular bone stresses from the intact states. Valgus positioning had the greatest negative effect in the lateral quadrant for both cortical and trabecular bone, producing greater stress shielding than both the standard and varus positioned implant. Overall, the varus and standard positions produced values that most closely mimicked the intact state. Surprisingly, valgus positioning produced large amounts of stress shielding in the lateral cortex at both 45˚ and 75˚ of abduction but resulted in a slight decrease in stress shielding in the medial quadrant directly beneath the humeral resection plane. This might have been a result of direct contact between the distal end of the implant and the medial cortex under loading which permitted load transfer, and therefore load-reduction of the lateral cortex during abduction. Conversely, when the implant was placed in the varus angulation, noticeable departures in stress shielding and changes in bones stress were not observed when compared to the optimal STD position. Interestingly, for the varus positioned implant, the deflection of the humerus under load eliminated the distal stem-cortex contact, hence preventing distal load transfer thus precluding the transfer of load

Introduction. Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is an effective treatment to restore shoulder function and alleviate pain in the case of glenohumeral arthritis [1]. Stress shielding, which occurs when bone stress is reduced due to the replacement of bone with a stiffer metallic implant, causes bone resorption of up to 9% of the humeral cortical thickness following TSA [2]. Shorter length stems and smaller overall geometries may reduce stress shielding [3], however the effect of humeral head backside contact with the resection plane has not yet been fully investigated on bone stress. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to quantify the effect of humeral head contact conditions on bone stresses following TSA. Methods. 3D models of eight male left cadaveric humeri (68±6 years) were generated from CT data using MIMICS. These were then virtually prepared for reconstruction by an orthopaedic surgeon to accept a short-stem humeral implant (Exactech Equinoxe® Preserve) that was optimally sized and placed centrally in the humeral canal. The humeral head was positioned in the inferior-medial position such that contact was achieved on the medial cortex, and no contact existed on the lateral cortex. Three different humeral head backside contact conditions were investigated (Figure 1); full backside contact (FULL), contact with only the inferior-medial half of the resection (INF), and contact with only the superior-lateral half of the resection (SUP). Cortical bone was assigned an elastic modulus of 20 GPa and a Poisson's ratio of 0.3. Trabecular bone was assigned varying stiffness based on CT attenuation [4]. A joint reaction force was then applied representing 45˚ and 75˚ of abduction [5]. Changes in bone stress, as well as the expected bone response based on change in strain energy density [6] was then compared between the intact and reconstructed states. Results. For cortical bone, the full backside contact altered bone stress by 28.9±5.5% compared to intact, which was significantly less than the superior (37.0±3.9%, P=0.022) and inferior (53.4±3.9%, P<0.001) backside contact conditions. Similar trends were observed for changes in trabecular bone stress relative to the intact state, where the full backside contact altered bone stress by 86.3±27.9% compared to intact, compared to the superior and inferior contact conditions, which altered bone stress by 115.2±45.0% (P=0.309) and 197.4±80.2% (P=0.024), respectively. In terms of expected bone response, both the superior and inferior contact resulted in an increase in bone volume with resorbing potential compared to the full contact (Figure 2). Discussion and Conclusions. The results of this study show that full humeral head backside contact with the humeral resection plane is preferable for short stem humeral TSA implants with the head in the inferior-medial position. As expected, the superior contact typically increased resorption potential in the medial quadrant due to the lack of load transfer, however interestingly the inferior contact increased resorption potential in both the lateral and medial quadrants. Analysis of implant micromotion showed that medial liftoff of the implant occurred, which resulted in a lack of load transfer in the most medial aspect of the resection plane. For any figures or tables, please contact the authors directly

Aims

The Mathys Affinis Short is the most frequently used stemless total shoulder prosthesis in the UK. The purpose of this prospective cohort study is to report the survivorship, clinical, and radiological outcomes of the first independent series of the Affinis Short prosthesis.

Total elbow arthroplasty (TEA) usage is increasing owing to expanded surgical indications, better implant designs, and improved long-term survival. Correct humeral implant positioning has been shown to diminish stem loading in vitro, and radiographic loosening in in the long-term. Replication of the native elbow centre of rotation is thought to restore normal muscle moment arms and has been suggested to improve elbow strength and function. While much of the focus has been on humeral component positioning, little is known about the effect of positioning of the ulnar stem on post-operative range of motion and clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study is to determine the effect of the sagittal alignment and positioning of the humeral and ulnar components on the functional outcomes after TEA. Between 2003 and 2016, 173 semi-constrained TEAs (Wright-Tornier Latitude/Latitude EV, Memphis, TN, USA) were performed at our institution, and our preliminary analysis includes 46 elbows in 41 patients (39 female, 7 male). Patients were excluded if they had severe elbow deformity precluding reliable measurement, experienced a major complication related to an ipsilateral upper limb procedure, or underwent revision TEA. For each elbow, saggital alignment was compared pre- and post-operatively. A best fit circle of the trochlea and capitellum was drawn, with its centre representing the rotation axis. Ninety degree tangent lines from the intramedullary axes of the ulna and humerus, and from the olecranon tip to the centre of rotation were drawn and measured relative to the rotation axis, representing the ulna posterior offset, humerus offset, and ulna proximal offset, respectively. In addition, we measured the ulna stem angle (angle subtended by the implant and the intramedullary axis of the ulna), as well as radial neck offset (the length of a 90o tangent line from the intramedullary axis of the radial neck and the centre of rotation) in patients with retained or replaced radial heads. Our primary outcome measure was the quickDASH score recorded at the latest follow-up for each patient. Our secondary outcome measures were postoperative flexion, extension, pronation and supination measured at the same timepoints. Each variable was tested for linear correlation with the primary and secondary outcome measures using the Pearson two-tailed test. At an average follow-up of 6.8 years (range 2–14 years), there was a strong positive correlation between anterior radial neck offset and the quickDASH (r=0.60, p=0.001). There was also a weak negative correlation between the posterior offset of the ulnar component and the qDASH (r=0.39, p=0.031), and a moderate positive correlation between the change in humeral offset and elbow supination (r=0.41, p=0.044). The ulna proximal offset and ulna stem angle were not correlated with either the primary, or secondary outcome measures. When performing primary TEA with radial head retention, or replacement, care should be taken to ensure that the ulnar component is correctly positioned such that intramedullary axis of the radial neck lines up with the centre of elbow rotation, as this strongly correlates with better function and less pain after surgery