Advertisement for orthosearch.org.uk
Results 1 - 2 of 2
Results per page:
The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 90-B, Issue 6 | Pages 751 - 756
1 Jun 2008
Terrier A Reist A Merlini F Farron A

Reversed shoulder prostheses are increasingly being used for the treatment of glenohumeral arthropathy associated with a deficient rotator cuff. These non-anatomical implants attempt to balance the joint forces by means of a semi-constrained articular surface and a medialised centre of rotation. A finite element model was used to compare a reversed prosthesis with an anatomical implant. Active abduction was simulated from 0° to 150° of elevation. With the anatomical prosthesis, the joint force almost reached the equivalence of body weight. The joint force was half this for the reversed prosthesis. The direction of force was much more vertically aligned for the reverse prosthesis, in the first 90° of abduction. With the reversed prosthesis, abduction was possible without rotator cuff muscles and required 20% less deltoid force to achieve it. This force analysis confirms the potential mechanical advantage of reversed prostheses when rotator cuff muscles are deficient


The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery British Volume
Vol. 94-B, Issue 5 | Pages 671 - 677
1 May 2012
Raiss P Sowa B Bruckner T Eck S Woerz S Rohr K Rickert M Kasten P

The aim of this study was to compare a third-generation cementing procedure for glenoid components with a new technique for cement pressurisation. In 20 pairs of scapulae, 20 keeled and 20 pegged glenoid components were implanted using either a third-generation cementing technique (group 1) or a new pressuriser (group 2). Cement penetration was measured by three-dimensional (3D) analysis of micro-CT scans. The mean 3D depth of penetration of the cement was significantly greater in group 2 (p < 0.001). The mean thickness of the cement mantle for keeled glenoids was 2.50 mm (2.0 to 3.3) in group 1 and 5.18 mm (4.4 to 6.1) in group 2, and for pegged glenoids it was 1.72 mm (0.9 to 2.3) in group 1 and 5.63 mm (3.6 to 6.4) in group 2. A cement mantle < 2 mm was detected less frequently in group 2 (p < 0.001). Using the cement pressuriser the proportion of cement mantles < 2 mm was significantly reduced compared with the third-generation cementing technique.