Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has an increasing effective use in the treatment of patients with a variety of diagnoses, including rotator cuff deficiency, inflammatory arthritis, or failed shoulder prostheses. Glenoid bone loss is not uncommonly encountered in these cases due to the significant wear. Severe bone loss can compromise glenoid baseplate positioning and fixation, consequently increasing the risk for early component loosening, instability, and scapular notching. To manage severe glenoid bone deficiencies, bone grafts are commonly used. Although, many studies report outcome of bone grafting in revision RSA, the literature on humeral head autograft for glenoid bone loss in primary RSA is less robust. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical and radiographic outcomes of primary RSA with humeral head autograft for glenoid bone loss at our institution. Institutional review board approval was obtained to retrospectively review the records of 22 consecutive primary RTSA surgeries in 21 patients with humeral head autograft for glenoid bone loss between January 2008 and December 2016. Five patients died during follow-up, three were unable to be contacted and one refused to participate, leaving a final study cohort of 12 patients with 13 shoulders that underwent RSA. All patients had a clinical evaluation including detailed ROM and clinical evaluation using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) Score, Constant Score, Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS), and Short Form-12 (SF-12) questionnaires. Preoperative and postoperative plain radiographs and CT scans were assessed for component position, loosening, scapular notching, as well as graft incorporation, resorption, or collapse. There were 6 males and 6 females, with an average age of 74 ± 6.8 years. The average BMI was 31.7 ± 5.3, and the median ASA score was 3. Average follow-up was 3.4 ± 1.1 years. The average postoperative range of motion measurements for the operative arm are: flexion = 120 ± 37, abduction = 106 ± 23, external rotation = 14 ± 12, internal rotation at 90 degrees of abduction = 49 ± 7, external rotation at 90 degrees of abduction = 50 ± 28. Average functional scores are: ASES: 76.9 ± 19.2, WOOS: 456 ± 347, SF12 physical: 34.2 ± 8.2, SF12 mental: 54.1 ± 10.2, Constant Score: 64.6 ± 14. No evidence of hardware loosening or evidence of bone graft resorption were encountered. On CT, the average of pre operative B-angle was 79.3 ± 9.3 while the pre operative reverse shoulder angle was 101.4 ± 28. Glenoid retroversion average on CT was 13.3 ± 16.6. Post operative baseplate inclination average was 82 ± 7.4 while the baseplate version 7.8 ±10. The operative technique was able to achieve up to 30 degrees of inclination correction and up to 50 degrees of version correction. In conclusion, primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty with humeral head autograft for glenoid bone loss provides excellent ROM and functional outcomes at mid-term follow-up. This technique has a high rate of bone incorporation and small risk of bone resorption at mid term follow up

Severe glenoid bone loss in patients with osteoarthritis with intact rotator cuff is associated with posterior glenoid bone loss and posterior humeral subluxation. Management of severe glenoid bone loss during shoulder arthroplasty is controversial and technically challenging and options range from humeral hemiarthroplasty, anatomic shoulder replacement with glenoid bone grafting or augmented glenoid component implantation, to reverse replacement with reaming to correct version or structural bone grafting or metallic augmentation of the bone deficiency. Shoulder replacement with severe glenoid bone loss is technically challenging and characterised by higher rates of complications and revisions. Hemiarthroplasty has limited benefit for pain relief and function especially if eccentric glenoid wear exists. Bone loss with >15 degrees of retroversion likely requires version correction include bone-grafting, augmented glenoid components, or reverse total shoulder replacement. Asymmetric reaming may improve version but is limited to 15 degrees of version correction in order to preserve subchondral bone and glenoid bone vault depth. Bone-grafting of glenoid wear and defects has had mixed results with graft-related complications, periprosthetic radiolucent lines, and glenoid component failure of fixation. Implantation of an augmented wedge or step polyethylene glenoid component improves joint version while preserving subchondral bone, but is technically demanding and with minimal short term clinical follow-up. A Mayo study demonstrated roughly 50% of patients with posteriorly augmented polyethylene had radiolucent lines and 1/3 had posterior subluxation. Another wedge polyethylene design had 66% with bone ingrowth around polyethylene fins at 3 years. Long term outcomes are unknown for these new wedge augmented glenoid components. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty avoids many risks of anatomic replacement glenoid component fixation and stability but is associated with a high complication rate (15%) including neurologic and baseplate loosening and often requires structural bone grafting behind the baseplate with suboptimal outcomes or metallic augmented baseplates with limited evidence and short term outcomes. Reverse replacement with baseplate bone grafting or metal augmentation is technically challenging due to limited native glenoid bone stock available for baseplate component ingrowth and long term fixation. Failure to correct glenoid superior inclination and restore neutral version within 10 degrees increases the risks of reverse baseplate failure of fixation, pull out, and failure of reverse replacement. Reverse baseplate failure rates in patients with severe glenoid bone loss and concomitant glenoid bone grafting range from 5–11%. The minimum native glenoid bony contact with the baseplate is unknown but likely is approximately 1cm of native bone contacting a central ingrowth post and a minority (∼15–25%) of native glenoid contacting the backside of the baseplate. Failure to correct posterior bone loss can lead to retroversion of the baseplate, reduced external rotation, posterior scapular notching, and posteromedial polyethylene wear. In summary, shoulder replacement with severe glenoid bone loss is technically challenging and characterised by higher rates of complication and revision

Background. A challenge to obtaining proper glenoid placement in total shoulder arthroplasty is eccentric posterior bone loss and associated glenoid retroversion. This bone loss can lead to poor stability and perforation of the glenoid during arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the three dimensional morphology of the glenoid with associated bone loss for a spectrum of osteoarthritis patients using 3-D computed tomography imaging and simulation software. Methods. This study included 29 patients with advanced glenohumeral osteoarthritis treated with shoulder arthroplasty. Three-dimensional (3D) reconstruction of preoperative CT images was performed using image analysis software. Glenoid bone loss was measured at ten, vertically equidistant axial planes along the glenoid surface at four distinct anterior-posterior points on each plane for a total of 40 measurements per glenoid. The glenoid images were also fitted with a modeled pegged glenoid implant to predict glenoid perforation. Results. The average bone loss was greatest posteriorly in the AP plane at the central axis of the glenoid in the SI plane. Walch A2 and B1 shoulders had bone loss more centrally located, while Walch B2 shoulders displayed more posterior and inferior bone loss. There was a significant difference in the overall average bone loss for patients with no predicted peg perforation compared to patients predicted to have peg perforation (p=0.37). Peg perforation was most common in Walch B2 shoulders, in the posterior direction, and involved the central and posterior-inferior peg. Discussion. These data demonstrate a clear, anatomical pattern of glenoid bone loss for different classes of glenohumeral arthritis. These findings can be used to develop various models of glenoid bone loss to guide surgeons, predict failures, and help develop better glenoid implant

Background: The results of arthroscopic anterior labral (Bankart) repair have been shown to have high failure rate in patients with significant glenoid bone loss. Several reconstruction procedures using bone graft have been described to overcome the bone loss, including autogenous coracoid transfer to the anterior glenoid (Latarjet procedure) as well as iliac crest autograft and tibial allografts. In recent years, trends toward minimally invasive shoulder surgery along with improvements in technology and technique have led surgeons to expand the application of arthroscopic treatment. Purpose: This study aims to perform a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data to evaluate the clinical and radiological follow up of patient who underwent anatomic glenoid reconstruction using distal tibia allograft for the treatment of shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss at 1-year post operation time point. Between December 2011 and January 2015, 55 patients underwent arthroscopic stabilisation of the shoulder by means of capsule-labral reattachment to glenoid ream and bony augmentation of glenoid bone loss with distal tibial allograft for recurrent instability of the shoulder. Preoperative and postoperative evaluation included general assessment by the western Ontario shoulder instability index (WOSI) questionnaire, preoperative and postoperative radiographs and CT scans. Fifty-five patients have been evaluated with mean age of 29.73 years at time of the index operation. There were 40 males (mean age of 29.66) and 15 female (mean age of 29.93). Minimum follow up time was 12 months. The following adverse effects were recorded: none suffered from recurrent dislocation, 2 patients suffered from bone resorption but without overt instability, 1 patient had malunion due to screw fracture, None of the patients had nonunion. The mean pre-operative WOSI score was 36.54 and the mean postoperative WOSI score was 61.0. Arthroscopic stabilisation of the shoulder with distal tibia allograft augmentation demonstrates promising result at 1year follow up

Glenoid bone loss is not an uncommon challenge in both primary shoulder arthroplasty surgery and revision surgery. Walch described the classification of glenoid morphology and this has led to an understanding of the expanded role for bone grafting, patient-specific implants and reverse prostheses. While bone grafting of the glenoid in conventional arthroplasty has been shown to be successful in some patients it is more routinely used in combination with reverse prostheses. More recently, augmented glenoid components have been developed for both conventional and reverse arthroplasty, though follow-up is insufficient to confirm their durability at this time

There is a large and growing population of patients with shoulder arthritis that are over 70 years old. Many of these patients live alone and sling immobilization after shoulder arthroplasty is problematic. Other than improved internal rotation, there are limited benefits of anatomic shoulder arthroplasty compared to reverse arthroplasty. Anatomic arthroplasty is associated with longer OR time, longer recovery with need for assistance to allow the subscapularis to heal, and more challenging glenoid exposure. The reverse arthroplasty is a faster operation without the need for subscapularis healing and the sphere provides a more forgiving implant position. Additional benefits of reverse arthroplasty include better ability to manage glenoid bone loss and joint subluxation. Data from the Australian Orthopaedic Association National Joint Replacement Registry shows that within the first year of surgery the rate of revision of anatomic shoulder arthroplasty is less than reverse arthroplasty. However, after one year, the overall revision rate of reverse arthroplasty is less than anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. Therefore, increased technical difficulty of anatomic shoulder arthroplasty together with concerns of subscapularis insufficiency, glenoid loosening, and lack of strong evidence of superiority do not warrant changing from reverse for patients over 70 years old

Superiorly eroded glenoids in cuff tear arthropathy represent a surgical challenge for reconstruction. The bone loss orientation and severity may influence glenoid component fixation. This computed-tomography study quantifies both the degree of erosion and orientation in superiorly eroded Favard E2 glenoids. We hypothesized that the erosion in E2 glenoids does not occur purely superiorly, rather, it is oriented in a predictable posterosuperior orientation with a largely semicircular line of erosion.

Three-dimensional reconstructions of 40 shoulders with E2 glenoids (28 female, 12 male patients) at a mean age of 74 years (range, 56–88 years) were created from computed-tomography images. Point coordinates were extracted from each construct to analyze the morphologic structure. The anatomical location of the supra- and infraglenoid tubercle guided the creation of a superoinferior axis, against which the orientation angle of the erosion was measured. The direction and, thus, orientation of erosion was calculated as a vector. By placing ten point coordinates along the line of erosion and creating a circle of best fit, the radius of the circle was placed orthogonally against a chord that resulted by connecting the two outermost points along the line of erosion. To quantify the extent of curvature of the line of erosion between the paleo- and neoglenoid, the length of the radius of the circle of best fit was calculated. Individual values were compared against the mean of circle radii. The area of bony erosion (neoglenoid), was calculated as a percentage of the total glenoid area (neoglenoid + paleoglenoid). The severity of the erosion was categorized as mild (0% to 33%), moderate (34% to 66%), and severe erosion (>66%).

The mean orientation angle between the vector of bony erosion and the superoinferior axis of the glenoid was 47° ± 17° (range, 14° – 74°) located in the posterosuperior quadrant of the glenoid, resulting in the average erosion being directed between the 10 and 11 o'clock position (right shoulder).

In 63% of E2 cases, the line of erosion separating the paleo- and neoglenoids was more curved than the average of all bony erosions in the cohort. The mean surface area of the neoglenoid was 636 ± 247 mm2(range, 233 – 1,333 mm2) and of the paleoglenoid 311 ± 165 mm2(range, 123 – 820 mm2), revealing that, on average, the neoglenoids consume 67% of the total glenoid surface. The extent of erosion of the total cohort was subdivided into one mild (2%), 14 moderate (35%) and 25 severe (62%) cases.

Using a clock-face for orientation, the average orientation of type E2 glenoid defects was directed between the 10 and 11 o'clock position in a right shoulder, corresponding to the posterosuperior glenoid quadrant. Surgeons managing patients with E2 type glenoids should be aware that a superiorly described glenoid erosion is oriented in the posterosuperior quadrant on the glenoid clock-face when viewed intra-operatively. Additionally, the line of erosion in 63% of E2 glenoids is substantially curved, having a significant effect on bone removal techniques when using commercially available augments for defect reconstruction.

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has a proven track record as an effective treatment for a variety of rotator cuff deficient conditions. However, glenoid erosion associated with the arthritic component of these conditions can present a challenge for the shoulder arthroplasty surgeon. Options for treatment of glenoid wear include partial reaming with incomplete baseplate seating, bony augmentation using structural or impaction grafting techniques, and augmented baseplates. Augmented components have the advantage of accommodating glenoid deformity with a durable material and also ream less subchondral bone; both of which may offer an advantage over traditional bone grafting.

Biomechanical and early clinical studies of augmented glenoid baseplates suggest they are a reasonable treatment option, though posteriorly augmented baseplates have shown better performance than superiorly augmented implants. However, there are no mid- or late-term studies comparing augmented baseplates to bone grafting or partial reaming.

We present a live surgical demonstration of RTSA for a patient with advanced glenoid erosion being treated with an augmented glenoid baseplate that can be dialed in the direction of any deformity (superior, posterior, etc.). This versatility allows the surgeon to place the augment in any direction and is not confined to the traditional concepts of glenoid wear in a single vector. Clearly, longer term follow up studies are needed to determine the ultimate effectiveness of these devices in treating glenoid deformity in RTSA.

Concepts in glenoid tracking and treatment strategies of glenoid bone loss are well established. Initial observations in our practice in Singapore showed few patients with major bone loss requiring glenoid reconstructions. This led us to investigate the incidence of and the extent of bone loss in our patients with shoulder instability. Our study revealed bony Bankart lesions were seen in 46% of our patients but glenoid bone loss measured only 6–10% of the glenoid surface. In the same study we found that arthroscopic labral repair with capsular plication and Mason-Ellen suturing (Hybrid technique) was sufficient to stabilise patients with bipolar bone defects and minor glenoid bone loss. This led us to develop the concept of minor bone loss and a new algorithm. Our algorithm and strategies to deal with major bone loss will also be discussed, and techniques & outcomes of Arthroscopic Bony Bankart repair, Arthroscopic Glenoid Reconstruction and Arthroscopic Remplissage procedures will be shown

Glenoid bone grafting in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has emerged as an effective method of restoring bone stock in the presence of complex glenoid bone loss, yet there is limited published evidence on efficacy. The aim of this study was to conduct an analysis of clinical and radiographic outcomes associated with glenoid bone grafting in primary RTSA. Patients who underwent a primary RTSA with glenoid bone grafting were retrospectively identified from the databases of two senior shoulder surgeons. Inclusion criteria included minimum of 12 months clinical and/or radiographical follow up. Patients underwent preoperative clinical and radiographic assessment. Graft characteristics (source, type, preparation), range of movement (ROM), patient-reported outcome measures (Oxford Shoulder Scores [OSS]), and complications were recorded. Radiographic imaging was used to analyse implant stability, graft incorporation, and notching by two independent reviewers. Between 2013 and 2021, a total of 53 primary RTSA procedures (48 patients) with glenoid bone grafting were identified. Humeral head autograft was used in 51 (96%) of cases. Femoral head allograft was utilised in two cases. Depending on the morphology of glenoid bone loss, a combination of structural (corticocancellous) and non-structural (cancellous) grafts were used to restore glenoid bone stock and the joint line. All grafts were incorporated at review. The mean post-operative OSS was significantly higher than the pre-operative OSS (40 vs. 22, p < 0.001). ROM was significantly improved post-operatively. One patient is being investigated for residual activity-related shoulder pain. This patient also experienced scapular notching resulting in the fracturing of the inferior screw. One patient experienced recurrent dislocations but was not revised. Overall, at short term follow up, glenoid bone grafting was effective in addressing glenoid bone loss with excellent functional and clinical outcomes when used for complex bone loss in primary RTSA. The graft incorporation rate was high, with an associated low complication rate

In patients with shoulder arthritis, the ability to accurately determine glenoid morphological alterations affects the outcomes of shoulder arthroplasty surgery significantly. This study was conducted to determine whether there is a correlation between scapular and glenoid morphometric components. Existence of such a correlation may help surgeons accurately estimate glenoid bone loss during pre-operative planning. The dimensions and geometric relationships of the scapula, scapula apophysis and glenoid were assessed using CT scan images of 37 South African and 40 Chinese cadavers. Various anatomical landmarks were marked on the 77 scapulae and a custom script was developed to perform the measurements. Intra-cohort correlation and inter-cohort differences were statistically analysed using IBM SPSS v28. The condition for statistical significance was p<0.05. The glenoid width and height were found to be significantly (p<0.05) correlated with superior glenoid to acromion tip distance, scapula height, acromion tip to acromion angle distance, acromion width, scapula width, and coracoid width, in both the cohorts. While anterior glenoid to coracoid tip distance was found to be significantly correlated to glenoid height and width in the South African cohort, it was only significantly correlated to glenoid height in the Chinese cohort. Significant (p<0.05) inter-cohort differences were observed for coracoid height, coracoid width, glenoid width, scapula width, superior glenoid to acromion tip distance, and anterior glenoid to coracoid tip distance. This study found correlations between the scapula apophyseal and glenoid measurements in the population groups studied. These morphometric correlations can be used to estimate the quantity of bone loss in shoulder arthroplasty patients

This paper presents an ongoing review of the use of a wedge-shaped porous metal augments in the shoulder to address glenoid retroversion as part of anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA). Seventy-five shoulders in 66 patients (23 women and 43 men, aged 42 to 85 years) with Walch grade B2 or C glenoids underwent porous metal glenoid augment (PMGA) insertion as part of aTSA. Patients received either a 15º or 30º PMGA wedge (secured by screws to the native glenoid) to correct excessive glenoid retroversion before a standard glenoid component was implanted using bone cement. Neither patient-specific guides nor navigation were used. Patients were prospectively assessed using shoulder functional assessments (Oxford Shoulder Score [OSS], American Shoulder and Elbow Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form [ASES], visual analogue scale [VAS] pain scores and forward elevation [FE]) preoperatively, at three, six, and 12 months, and yearly thereafter, with similar radiological surveillance. Forty-nine consecutive series shoulders had a follow-up of greater than 24 months, with a median follow-up of 48 months (range: 24–87 months). Median outcome scores improved for OSS (21 to 44), ASES (24 to 92), VAS (7 to 0), and FE (90º to 140º). Four patients died, but no others were lost to follow-up. Apart from one infection at 18 months postoperatively and one minor peg perforation, there were no complications, hardware failures, implant displacements, significant lucency or posterior re-subluxations. Radiographs showed good incorporation of the wedge augment with correction of glenoid retroversion from median 22º (13º to 46º) to 4º. All but four glenoids were corrected to within the target range (less than 10º retroversion). The porous metal wedge-shaped augments effectively addressed posterior glenoid deficiency as part of aTSA for rotator cuff intact osteoarthritis, producing satisfactory clinical outcomes with no signs of impending future failure

Previously, we conducted a multi-center, double-blinded randomized controlled trial comparing arthroscopic Bankart repair with and without remplissage. The end point for the randomized controlled trial was two years post-operative, providing support for the benefits of remplissage in the short term in reducing recurrent instability. The aim of this study was to compare the medium term (3 to 9 years) outcomes of patients previously randomized to have undergone isolated Bankart repair (NO REMP) or Bankart repair with remplissage (REMP) for the management of recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability. The rate of recurrent instability and instances of re-operation were examined. The original study was a double-blinded, randomized clinical trial with two 1:1 parallel groups with recruitment undertaken between 2011 and 2017. For this medium-term study, participants were reached for a telephone follow-up in 2020 and asked a series of standardized questions regarding ensuing instances of subluxation, dislocation or reoperation that had occurred on their shoulder for which they were randomized. Descriptive statistics were generated for all variables. “Failure” was defined as occurrence of a dislocation. “Recurrent instability” was defined as the participant reporting a dislocation or two or more occurences of subluxation greater than one year post-operative. All analyses were undertaken based on intention-to-treat whereby their data was analyzed based on the group to which they were originally allocated. One-hundred and eight participants were randomized of which 50 in the NO REMP group and 52 in the REMP group were included in the analyses in the original study. The mean number of months from surgery to final follow-up was 49.3 for the NO REMP group and 53.8 for the REMP group. The rates of re-dislocation or failure were 8% (4/52) in the REMP group at an average of 23.8 months post-operative versus 22% (11/50) in the NO REMP at an average of 16.5 months post-operative. The rates of recurrent instability were 10% (5/52) in the REMP group at an average of 24 months post-operative versus 30% (15/50) in the NO REMP group at an average of 19.5 months post-operative. Survival curves were significantly different favouring REMP in both scenarios. Arthroscopic Bankart repair combined with remplissage is an effective procedure in the treatment of patients with an engaging Hill-Sachs lesion and minimal glenoid bone loss (<15%). Patients can expect favourable rates of recurrent instability when compared with isolated Bankart repair at medium term follw-up

Background. Locked anterior shoulders (LAS) with static instability and anterior glenoid bone loss are challenging in the elderly population. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has been employed in treating these patients. No study has compared RSA for LAS to classically indicated RSA. Methods. A case-control study of patients treated with RSA for LAS with glenoid bone loss and static instability was performed using matched controls treated with primary RSA for classic indications. Twenty-four cases and 48 controls were evaluated. Average follow-up was 25.5 months and median age was 76. Motion, outcome assessments, and postoperative radiographs were compared. Results. Preoperatively, LAS had significantly less rotation and lower baseline outcome scores. Glenoid bone grafting was more common (p=0.05) in control group (26%) than LAS group (6.3%). Larger glenospheres were utilized more often (p=0.001) in LAS group (75%) than control group (29%). Both groups demonstrated significant improvements in pain, function, and outcome scores. Postoperatively, control group had significantly better elevation and functional outcome scores. With the exception of flexion and SST, effectiveness of treatment was similar between groups. Postoperative acromion stress fractures were seen in 21% of LAS and 9% of control (p=0.023) with a predominance of type 3 fractures in LAS. Two LAS patients remained dislocated. Conclusion. Treatment with RSA for LAS may anticipate improvements in pain and function using larger glenospheres often without the need for glenoid bone grafting. Worse postoperative motion, function, and a higher incidence of acromion stress fracture may be expected

The primary objective of this study was to establish a safety profile for an all-arthroscopic anatomic glenoid reconstruction via iliac crest autograft augmentation for the treatment of shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss. Short-term clinical and radiological outcomes were also evaluated. This study involved a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data for 14 patients (male 8, female 6) who were treated for shoulder instability with bone loss using autologous iliac crest bone graft between 2014 and 2018. Of 14 patients, 11 were available for follow-up. The safety profile was established by examining intra-operative and post-operative complications such as neurovascular injuries, infections, major bleeding, and subluxations. Assessment of pre-operative and post-operative Western Ontario Shoulder Instability (WOSI) index, radiographs, and CT scans comprised the evaluation of clinical and radiological outcomes. A good safety profile was observed. There was no occurrence of intraoperative complications, neurovascular injuries, adverse events, or major bleeding. One patient did develop an infection in the neurovascular injuries, adverse events, or major bleeding. One patient did develop an infection in the treated shoulder post-surgery. There were no subluxations or positive apprehension tests on clinical examination post-operatively. Short-term clinical outcomes were seen to be favorable WOSI scores at the most recent follow-up were significantly higher than pre-operative scores, with a mean increase of 39.6 ± 10.60 (p = 0.00055). The average follow-up for CT scan was 4.66 (SD± 2.33) months, where all patients showed bone graft union. Arthroscopic treatment of shoulder instability with bone loss via autologous iliac crest bone graft is shown to be a safe operative procedure that results in favorable short-term clinical and radiological outcomes. Further investigations must be done to evaluate the longevity of these positive health outcomes

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with glenoid bone grafting has become a common option for the management of significant glenoid bone loss and deformity associated with glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Despite the increasing utilization of this technique, our understanding of the rates of bone graft union, complications and outcomes are limited. The objectives of this systematic review are to determine 1) the overall rate of bone graft union, 2) the rate of union stratified by graft type and technique, 3) the reoperation and complication rates, and 4) functional outcomes, including range of motion (ROM) and functional outcome scores following RSA with glenoid bone grafting. A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL databases was completed for studies reporting outcomes following RSA with glenoid bone grafting. Inclusion criteria included clinical studies with greater than 10 patients, and minimum follow up of one year. Studies were screened independently by two reviewers and quality assessment was performed using the MINORs criteria. Pooled and frequency-weighted means and standard deviations were calculated where applicable. Overall, 15 studies were included, including nine retrospective case series (level IV), four retrospective cohort studies (level III), one prospective cohort study (level II) and one randomized control trial (level I). The entire cohort consisted of 555 patients with a mean age of 71.9±2.1 years and 70 percent female. The mean follow-up was 33.8±9.4 months. Across all procedures, 84.9% (N=471) were primary arthroplasties, and 15.1% (N=84) were revisions. The overall graft union rate was 89.2%, but was higher at 96.1% among studies that used autograft bone (9 studies, N=308). When stratified by technique, bone graft for the purposes of lateralization resulted in a 100% union rate (4 studies, N=139), while eccentric bone grafts used in asymmetric bone loss resulted in a lower union rate of 84.9% (10 studies, N=345). The overall revision rate was 6.5%, and was lowest following primary cases at 1.8% (11 studies, N=393). The pooled mean scapular notching rate was 20.1% (12 studies, N=497). Excluding notching, the pooled mean complication rate was 21.5% for all cases and 13% for primary cases (11 studies, N=393). When reported, there was significant improvement in post-operative ROM in all planes. There was also improvement in functional outcome scores, whereby the frequency-weighted mean Constant score increased from 25.9 to 67.2 (8 studies, N=319), ASES score increased from 34.7 to 75.2 (4 studies, N=142), and SST score increased from 2.1 to 7.6 (5 studies, N=196) at final follow up. This review demonstrates that glenoid bone grafting with RSA results in good mid-term clinical and radiographic outcomes. Union rate appears to depend highly on graft type and technique, whereby the highest union rates were seen following the use of autograft bone for the purposes of lateralization. Interestingly, the union rate of autograft bone for the purposes of augmentation in eccentric bone loss is considerably lower and its impact on the long-term survivorship of the implant remains unknown

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty is becoming a frequent treatment of choice for patients with shoulder disorders. Complication rates after reverse shoulder arthroplasty may be three-fold that of conventional total shoulder arthroplasty especially in high risk patient populations and diagnoses like revision arthroplasty, fracture sequelae, and severe glenoid bone loss. Complications include component malposition, stiffness, neurological injury, infection, dislocation or instability, acromial or scapular spine fractures, scapular notching, and loosening of implants. Recognition of preoperative risk factors and appropriate 3D planning are essential in optimizing patient outcome and intraoperative success. Failure of reverse shoulder arthroplasty is a significant challenge requiring appropriate diagnosis of the failure mode. The most common neurological injuries involve the brachial plexus and the axillary nerve due to traction, manipulation of the arm, aberrant retractor placement, or relative lengthening of the arm. Intraoperative fractures are relatively uncommon but include the greater tuberosity, acromion, and glenoid. Tuberosity fracture can be repaired intraoperatively with suture techniques, glenoid fractures may be insignificant rim fractures or jeopardise baseplate fixation and require abandoning RSA until glenoid fracture ORIF heals and then a second stage RSA. Periprosthetic infection after RSA ranges from 1 to 10% and may be higher in revision cases and frequently is Propionibacterium acnes and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Dislocation was one of the most common complications after RSA approximately 5% but with increased surgeon experience and prosthetic design, dislocation rates are approaching 1–2%. An anterosuperior deltoid splitting approach has been associated with increased stability as well as subscapularis repair after RSA. Scapular notching is the most common complication after RSA. Notching may be caused by direct mechanical impingement of the humerosocket polyethylene on the scapular neck and from osteolysis from polyethylene wear. Sirveaux classified scapular notching based on the defect size as it erodes behind the baseplate towards the central post. Acromial fractures are infrequent but more common is severely eroded acromions from CTA, with osteoporosis, with excessive lengthening, and with superior baseplate screws that penetrate the scapular spine and create a stress riser. Nonoperative care is the mainstay of acromial and scapular spine fractures. Recognizing preoperative risk factors and understanding component positioning and design is essential to maximizing successful outcomes

Introduction. The degree of glenoid bone loss associated with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis can influence the type of glenoid implant selected and its placement in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). The literature has demonstrated inaccurate glenoid component placement when using standard instruments and two-dimensional (2D) imaging without templating, particularly as the degree of glenoid deformity or bone loss worsens. Published results have demonstrated improved accuracy of implant placement when using three-dimensional (3D) computed tomography (CT) imaging with implant templating and patient specific instrumentation (PSI). Accurate placement of the glenoid component in TSA is expected to decrease component malposition and better correct pathologic deformity in order to decrease the risk of component loosening and failure over time. Different types of PSI have been described. Some PSI use 3D printed single use disposable instrumentation, while others use adjustable and reusable-patient specific instrumentation (R-PSI). However, no studies have directly compared the accuracy of different types of PSI in shoulder arthroplasty. We combined our clinical experience and compare the accuracy of glenoid implant placement with five different types of instrumentation when using 3D CT imaging, preoperative planning and implant templating in a series of 173 patients undergoing primary TSA. Our hypothesis was that all PSI technologies would demonstrate equivalent accuracy of implant placement and that PSI would show the most benefit with more severe glenoid deformity. Discussion and Conclusions. We demonstrated no consistent differences in accuracy of 3D CT preoperative planning and templating with any type of PSI used. In Groups 1 and 2, standard instrumentation was used in a patient specific manner defined by the software and in Groups 3, 4, and 5 a patient specific instrument was used. In all groups, the two surgeons were very experienced with use of the 3D CT preoperative planning and templating software and all of the instrumentation prior to starting this study, as well as very experienced with shoulder arthroplasty. This is a strength of the study when defining the efficacy of the technology, but limits the generalizability of the findings when considering the effectiveness of the technology with surgeons that may not have as much experience with shoulder arthroplasty and/or the PSI technology. Conversely, it could be postulated that greater improvements in accuracy may be seen with the studied PSI technology, when compared to no 3D planning or PSI, with less experienced surgeons. There could also be differences between the PSI technologies when used by less experienced surgeons, either across all cases or based upon the severity of pathology. When the surgeon is part of the method, the effectiveness of the technology is equally dependent upon the surgeon using the technology. A broader study using different surgeons is required to test the effectiveness of this technology. Comparing the results of this study with published results in the literature, 3D CT imaging and implant templating with use of PSI results in more accurate placement of the glenoid implant when compared to 2D CT imaging without templating and use of standard instrumentation. In previous studies, this was most evident in patients with more severe bone deformity. We believe that 3D CT planning and templating provides the most value in defining the glenoid pathology, as well as in the selection of the optimal implant and its placement. However, it should be the judgment of the surgeon, based upon their experience, to select the instrumentation to best achieve the desired result

Introduction. Varying degrees of posterior glenoid bone loss occurs in patients with end stage osteoarthritis and can result in increased glenoid retroversion. Ultimately, the goal is to correct retroversion to restore normal biomechanics of the glenohumeral joint. The goal of this study was to identify the optimal augmented glenoid design based on finite element model analysis which will provide key insights into implant loosening mechanisms and stability. Materials and Methods. Two different augmented glenoid designs, posterior wedge and posterior step- were created as a computer model by a computer aided design software (CAD). These implants were virtually implanted to correct 20° glenoid retroversion and the different mechanical parameters were calculated including: the glenohumeral contact pressure, the cement stress, the shear stress, and relative micromotions at the bone cement interface. Results. During abduction, high strain was concentrated around the peg and posterior glenoid bone. Strain was noticeably higher in stepped design (1–2%) than the wedged design (0.4–1.2%). Stepped glenoid models sustained 30% and 70% higher stresses than those experienced by the wedged glenoid implant models at two different corrections. Distractions predicted by the stepped designs were found to be at least twice as much as those by the wedged designs. Similarly, in compression values were 1.5–8 magnitudes higher in stepped designs than those of wedged designs. The wedged design, the amount of micromotion was not affected by the size of the augment (8° and 16°). Discussion. Our study showed that the wedged design experienced less stress compared to stepped design with abduction loading. Notably, the wedged design experienced less stress as the size of the wedge increased to correct a more retroverted arthritic glenoid. The step design also had the highest amount of micromotion which ultimately points to increased failures rate and decreased performace

Arthroplasty implant modularity enables the surgeon to adapt the joint replacement construct to the patient's requirements, and often facilitates revision procedures. Total shoulder arthroplasty humeral modularity exists for many implant systems. Glenoid modularity with convertibility between anatomic and reverse shoulder arthroplasty is a recent development. Glenoid modularity is very useful when reconstructing glenoid bone deficiencies, or in providing a method for reverse shoulder arthroplasty joint lateralization. The live surgery will demonstrate a bio-reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (bRTSA). The humeral component is a modular press fit stem that can accommodate either reverse or anatomic metaphyseal components. The metaphyseal components can be exchanged without removing the stem or changing the humeral height. The glenoid base has three components. The trabecular titanium peg is available in two diameters, and four lengths for each diameter. The peg is fixed to a metal base plate via Morse taper. In revision settings, these components can be easily dissociated in situ, and a coring drill inserted over a well-fixed peg allows removal with minimal bone loss. Either a polyethylene component, or glenosphere can be attached to the baseplate to complete the glenoid construct. An innovative set of instruments have been developed to reliably prepare the glenoid and humeral bone graft. While the live surgery will demonstrate the grafting technique in a bRTSA, it can also be used to reconstruct glenoid deficiencies (eg, Walch B2). Implants have been developed to solve these issues, but often do so at the expense of very limited glenoid bone stock. Bone grafting actually creates a net increase in glenoid bone stock that may improve implant durability, and decrease revision complexity. The technique is quite simple and adds approximately ten minutes to operative time. I have used this technique for 5 years with no cases of graft failure