Abstract. Shoulder replacements have evolved and current 4th generation implants allow intraoperative flexibility to perform anatomic, reverse, trauma, and revision shoulder arthroplasty. Despite high success rates with shoulder arthroplasty, complication rates high as 10–15% have been reported and progressive glenoid loosening remains a concern. Objectives. To report medium term outcomes following 4th generation VAIOS® shoulder replacement. Methods. We retrospectively analysed prospectively collected data following VAIOS® shoulder arthroplasty performed by the senior author between 2014–2020. This included anatomical (TSR), reverse(rTSR), revision and trauma shoulder replacements. The primary outcome was implant survival (Kaplan-Meier analysis). Secondary outcomes were Oxford Shoulder Scores (OSS), radiological outcomes and complications. Results. 172 patients met our inclusion criteria with 114 rTSR, 38 anatomical TSR, and 20 hemiarthroplasty. Reverse TSR- 55 primary, 31 revision, 28 for trauma. Primary rTSR- 0 revisions, average 3.35-year follow-up. Revision rTSR-1 revision (4.17%), average 3.52-year follow-up. Trauma rTSR- 1 revision (3.57%), average 4.56-year follow-up OSS: Average OSS improved from 15.39 to 33.8 (Primary rTSR) and from 15.11 to 29.1 (Revision rTSR). Trauma rTSR-Average post-operative OSS was 31.4 Anatomical TSR38 patients underwent primary anatomical TSR, 8 were revisions following hemiarthroplasty. In 16/38 patients, glenoid bone loss was addressed by bone grafting before implantation of the metal back glenoid component. Mean age at time of surgery was 68.3 years (53 – 81 years). Mean follow-up was 34 months (12 – 62 months). The average Oxford shoulder score improved from 14 (7–30) to 30 (9–48). There were 3 revisions (7.8%); two following subscapularis failure requiring revision conversion to reverse shoulder replacement and one for glenoid graft failure. Conclusions. The medium-term results of the VAIOS® system suggest much lower revision rates across multiple configurations of the system than previously reported, as well as a low incidence of scapular notching. This system allows conversion to rTSR during primary and revision surgery

Introduction and Objective. In recent years, along with the extending longevity of patients and the increase in their functional demands, the number of annually performed RSA and the incidence of complications are also increasing. When a complication occurs, the patient often needs multiple surgeries to restore the function of the upper limb. Revision implants are directly responsible for the critical reduction of the bone stock, especially in the shoulder. The purpose of this paper is to report the use of allograft bone to restore the bone stock of the glenoid in the treatment of an aseptic glenoid component loosening after a reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Materials and Methods. An 86-years-old man came to our attention for aseptic glenoid component loosening after RSA. Plain radiographs showed a complete dislocation of the glenoid component with 2 broken screws in the neck of glenoid. CT scans confirmed the severe reduction of the glenoid bone stock and critical bone resorption and were used for the preoperative planning. To our opinion, given the critical bone defect, the only viable option was revision surgery with restoration of bone stock. We planned to use a bone graft harvested from distal bone bank femur as component augmentation. During the revision procedure the baseplate with a long central peg was implanted “on table” on the allograft and an appropriate osteotomy was made to customize the allograft on the glenoid defect according to the CT-based preoperative planning. The Bio-component was implanted with stable screws fixation on residual scapula. We decided not to replace the humeral component since it was stable and showed no signs of mobilization. Results. The new bio-implant was stable, and the patient gained a complete functional recovery of the shoulder. The scheduled radiological assessments up to 12 months showed no signs of bone resorption or mobilization of the glenoid component. Conclusions. The use of bone allograft in revision surgery after a RSA is a versatile and effective technique to treat severe glenoid bone loss and to improve the global stability of the implant. Furthermore, it represents a viable alternative to autologous graft since it requires shorter operative times and reduces graft site complications. There are very few data available regarding the use of allografts and, although the first studies are encouraging, further investigation is needed to determine the biological capabilities of the transplant and its validity in complex revisions after RSA

Background. While total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is a generally successful procedure, glenoid loosening remains a common complication. Though the occurrence of loosening was related to patient-specific factors, biomechanical factors related to implant features may also affect the fixation of the glenoid component, in particular increased glenohumeral mismatch that could result in eccentric loads and translations. In this study, a novel test setup was used to quantify glenohumeral pressures for different motion patterns after TSA. Methods. Six cadaveric human shoulders were implanted with total shoulder replacements (Exactech, Inc., USA) and subjected to cyclic internal-external, flexion-extension and abduction-adduction rotations in a passive motion testing apparatus. The system was coupled to a pressure sensor system (Tekscan, Inc., USA) to acquire joint loads and to a Zebris system (Zebris Medical, GmbH, Germany) to measure joint kinematics. The specimens were subjected to a total of 2160 cycles and peak pressures were compared for each motion pattern. Results. It was shown that during abduction the contact area between the humeral head and the glenoid component shifts from a posterior to an anterior position, while also moving inferiorly. For internal-external rotation a mean peak pressure of 8.37 ± 0.22 MPa was registered, while for flexion-extension a pressure of 9.37 ± 0.38 MPa and for abduction-adduction a pressure of 9.88 ± 0.07 MPa were obtained. Conclusion. This study showed how glenohumeral pressures after TSA vary during simulated internal-external, flexion-extension and abduction-adduction rotations in a cyclic testing setup. It showed that peak loads are mainly obtained in abduction, and that these occurred mainly near the anterior part of the glenoid. Future steps involve implantation of other type of anatomical glenoid components to obtain different levels of glenohumeral mismatch and relating the 3D measurements of motion patterns to contact pressures

Introduction. Glenoid loosening, still a main complication for shoulder arthroplasty, was suggested to be related implant design, surgical aspects, and also bone quality. However, typical studies of fixation do not account for heterogeneity in bone morphology and density which were suggested to affect fixation failure. In this study, a combination of cyclic rocking horse tests on cadaver specimens and microCT-based finite element (microFE) analysis of specimens of a wide range of bone density were used to evaluate the effects of periprosthetic bone quality on the risks of loosening of anatomical keeled or pegged glenoid implants. Methods. Six pairs of cadaveric scapulae, scanned with a quantitative computer tomography (QCT) scanner to calculate bone mineral density (BMD), were implanted with either cemented anatomical pegged or keeled glenoid components and tested under constant glenohumeral load while a humeral head component was moved cyclically in the inferior and superior directions. Edge displacements were measured after 1000, 4000 and 23000 test cycles, and tested for statistical differences with regards to changes or implant design. Relationships were established between edge displacements and QCT-based BMD below the implant. Four other specimens were scanned with high-resolution peripheral QCT (82µm) and implanted with the same 2 implants to generate virtual models. These were loaded with constant glenohumeral force, varying glenohumeral conformity and superior or inferior load shifts while internal stresses at the cement-bone and implant-cement interfaces were calculated and related to apparent bone density in the periprosthetic zone. Results. Mean displacements at the inferior and superior edges showed no statistical difference between keeled and pegged designs (p>0.05). Compression and distraction were however statistically different from the initial reference measurement at even 1000 and 4000 cycles for both implant designs (p<0.05). For both implant designs, superior and inferior distractions were generally highest at each measurement time in specimens where BMD below the lifting edge was lower, showing a trend of increased distraction with decreased BMD. Moreover, the microFE models predicted higher bone and cement stresses for specimens of lower apparent bone density. Finally, highest peak stresses were located at the cement-bone interface, which seemed the weaker part of the fixation. Discussion. With this combined experimental and numerical study, it was shown that implant distraction and stresses in the cement layer are greater in glenoids of lower bone density for both implant designs. This indicates that fixation failure will most likely occur in bone of lower density, and that fixation design itself may play a secondary role. These results have important impact for understanding the mechanisms of glenoid component failure, a common complication of total shoulder arthroplasty

Total shoulder arthroplasty is a well-tested procedure that offers pain relief and restores the joint function. However, failure rate is still high, and glenoid loosening is pointed as the main reason in orthopedic registers. In order to understand the principles of failure, the principal strain distributions after implantation with Comprehensive® Total Shoulder System of Biomet® were experimental and numerically studied to predict bone behavior. Fourth generation composite left humerus and scapula from Sawbones® were used. These were implanted with Comprehensive® Total Shoulder System (Biomet®) with a modular Hybrid® glenoid base and Regenerex® glenoid and placed in situ by an experienced surgeon. The structures were placed in order to simulate 90º abduction, including principal muscular actions. Muscle forces used were as follows: Deltoideus 300N, Infraspinatus 120N, Supraspinatus 90N, Subscapularis 225N. All bone structures were modeled considering cortical and the trabecular bone of the scapula. The components of prosthesis were placed in the same positions than those in the in vitro models. Geometries were meshed with tetrahedral linear elements, with material properties as follows: Elastic modulus of cortical bone equal to 16 GPa, elastic modulus of trabecular bone equal to 0.155 GPa, polyethylene equal to 1GPa and titanium equal to 110 GPa. The assumed Poisson's ratio was 0.3 in all except for polyethylene where we assumed a value of 0.4. The prosthesis was considered as glued to the adjacent bone. The finite element model was composed of 336 024 elements. At the glenoid cavity, the major influence of the strain distributions was observed at the posterior-superior region, in both cortical and trabecular bone structures. The system presents critical region around holes of fixation in glenoid component. At the trabecular bone, the maximum principal strains at the posterior-superior region ranged from 2250 µε to 3000 µε. While at the cortical bone, the maximum principal strains were 300 µε to 400 µε. The results observed evidence some critical regions of concern and the effect of implant in the bone strains mainly at the posterior-superior region of the glenoid cavity is pronounced. This indicates that this region is more affected by the implant if bone remodeling is a concern and it is due to the strain-shielding effect, which has been connected with loosening of the glenoid component

Wear of polyethylene is associated with aseptic loosening of orthopaedic implants and has been observed in hip and knee prostheses and anatomical implants for the shoulder. The reversed shoulder prostheses have not been assessed as yet. We investigated the volumetric polyethylene wear of the reversed and anatomical Aequalis shoulder prostheses using a mathematical musculoskeletal model. Movement and joint stability were achieved by EMG-controlled activation of the muscles. A non-constant wear factor was considered. Simulated activities of daily living were estimated from in vivo recorded data.

After one year of use, the volumetric wear was 8.4 mm³ for the anatomical prosthesis, but 44.6 mm³ for the reversed version. For the anatomical prosthesis the predictions for contact pressure and wear were consistent with biomechanical and clinical data. The abrasive wear of the polyethylene in reversed prostheses should not be underestimated, and further analysis, both experimental and clinical, is required.