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. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether CT-based pre-operative planning, integrated with intra-operative navigation could improve glenoid baseplate fixation and positioning by increasing screw length, reducing number of screws required to obtain fixation and increasing the use of augmented baseplate to gain the desired positioning. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) successfully restores shoulder function in different conditions. Glenoid baseplate fixation and positioning seem to be the most important factors influencing RSA survival. When scapular anatomy is distorted (primitive or secondary), optimal baseplate positioning and secure screw purchase can be challenging. Materials and Methods. Twenty patients who underwent navigated RSA (oct 2018 and feb 2019) were compared retrospectively with twenty patients operated on with a conventional technique. All the procedures were performed by the same surgeon, using the same implant in cases of eccentric osteoarthritis or complete cuff tear. Exclusion criteria were: other diagnosis as proximal humeral fractures, post-traumatic OA previously treated operatively with hardware retention, revision shoulder arthroplasty. Results. The NAV procedure required mean 11 (range 7–16) minutes more to performed than the conventional procedure. Mean screw length was significantly longer in the navigation group (35.5+4.4 mm vs 29.9+3.6 mm; p . .001). Significant higher rate of optimal fixation using 2 screws only (17 vs 3 cases, p . .019) and higher rate of augmented baseplate usage (13 vs 4 cases, p . .009) was also present in the navigation group. Signficant difference there is all in function outcomes, DASH score is 15.7 vs 29.4 and constant scale 78.1 vs 69.8. Conclusions. The glenoid component positioning in RSA is crucial to prevent failure, loosening and biomechanical mismatch, coverage by the baseplate of the glenoid surface, version, inclination and offset are all essential for implant survival. This study showed how useful 3D CT-based planning helps in identifying the best position of the metaglena and the usefulness of receiving directly in the operation theater real-time feedback on the change in position. This study shows promising results, suggesting that improved baseplate and screw positioning and fixation is possible when computer-assisted implantation is used in RSA comparing to a conventional procedure