Methods

This was retrospective analysis of 50 and 33 RSAs using a standard (33.8 mm, ST group) and a small (29.5 mm, SM group) baseplate of the Equinoxe reverse shoulder system, which were undertaken between January 2017 and March 2021. Radiological evaluations included the size of the glenoid, the β-angle, the inclination of the glenoid component, inferior overhang, scapular notching, the location of the central cage in the baseplate within the vault and the mismatch in size between the glenoid and baseplate. Clinical evaluations included the range of motion (ROM) and functional scores. In subgroup analysis, comparisons were performed between those in whom the vault of the glenoid was perforated (VP group) and those in whom it was not perforated (VNP group).

Methods

This retrospective study included 133 consecutive patients with a mean age of 30 years (14 to 69) who underwent ABR-HSR; 103 (77%) practiced sports before the instability of the shoulder. All had large/deep, engaging Hill-Sachs lesions (Calandra III). Patients were divided into two groups: A (n = 102) with minimal or no (< 10%) glenoid bone loss, and B (n = 31) with subcritical (10% to 20%) glenoid loss. A total of 19 patients (14%) had undergone a previous stabilization, which failed. The primary endpoint was recurrent instability, with a secondary outcome of the ability to return to sport.

Patients and Methods

A prospective cohort study of the first 45 shoulder arthroplasties using the SMR Axioma Trabecular Titanium (TT) metal-backed glenoid with autologous bone graft. Between May 2013 and December 2014, 45 shoulder arthroplasties were carried out in 44 patients with a mean age of 64 years (35 to 89). The indications were 23 complex primary arthroplasties, 12 to revise a hemiarthroplasty or resurfacing, five for aseptic loosening of the glenoid, and five for infection.

Patients and Methods

Between 2006 and 2010 we used the Latitude TEA for revision in 18 consecutive elbows (17 patients); mean age 53 years (28 to 80); 14 women. A Kudo TEA was revised in 15 elbows and a Souter-Strathclyde TEA in three.

Stability, range of movement (ROM), visual analogue score (VAS) for pain and functional scores, Elbow Functional Assessment Scale (EFAS), the Functional Rating Index of Broberg and Morrey (FRIBM) and the Modified Andrews’ Elbow Scoring System (MAESS) were assessed pre-operatively and at each post-operative follow-up visit (six, 12 months and biennially thereafter). Radiographs were analysed for loosening, fractures and dislocation. The mean follow-up was 59 months (26 to 89).

Patients and Methods

Implants retrieved from six patients in each group were pair-matched. Mean time to revision surgery of Copeland implants was 37 months (standard deviation (sd) 23; 14 to 72) and Epoca RH 38 months (sd 28; 12 to 84). The mean age of patients investigated was 66 years (sd 4; 59 to 71) and 58 years (sd 17; 31 to 73) in the Copeland and Epoca RH groups respectively. None of these implants were revised for loosening.