The liner design is a key determinant of the constraint of a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). The aim of this study was to compare the degree of constraint of rTSA liners between different implant systems. An implant company’s independent 3D shoulder arthroplasty planning software (mediCAD 3D shoulder v. 7.0, module v. 2.1.84.173.43) was used to determine the jump height of standard and constrained liners of different sizes (radius of curvature) of all available companies. The obtained parameters were used to calculate the stability ratio (degree of constraint) and angle of coverage (degree of glenosphere coverage by liner) of the different systems. Measurements were independently performed by two raters, and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to perform a reliability analysis. Additionally, measurements were compared with parameters provided by the companies themselves, when available, to ensure validity of the software-derived measurements.Aims
Methods
The current evidence comparing the two most common approaches for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), the deltopectoral and anterosuperior approach, is limited. This study aims to compare the rate of loosening, instability, and implant survival between the two approaches for rTSA using data from the Dutch National Arthroplasty Registry with a minimum follow-up of five years. All patients in the registry who underwent a primary rTSA between January 2014 and December 2016 using an anterosuperior or deltopectoral approach were included, with a minimum follow-up of five years. Cox and logistic regression models were used to assess the association between the approach and the implant survival, instability, and glenoid loosening, independent of confounders.Aims
Methods
Aims. To report early (two-year) postoperative findings from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating disease-specific quality of life (QOL), clinical, patient-reported, and radiological outcomes in patients undergoing a total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with a second-generation uncemented
Aims. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) using
Aims
Patients and Methods
Patients with a failed reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have limited salvage options. The aim of this study was to determine the outcome of revision RSA when used as a salvage procedure for a failed primary RSA. We reviewed all revision RSAs performed for a failed primary RSA between 2006 and 2012, excluding patients with a follow-up of less than two years. A total of 27 revision RSAs were included in the study. The mean age of the patients at the time of revision was 70 years (58 to 82). Of the 27 patients, 14 (52% were female). The mean follow-up was 4.4 years (2 to 10).Aims
Patients and Methods
Aim. We present the medium-term clinical results of a reverse total
shoulder arthroplasty with a
To date, there is insufficient evidence available to compare
the outcome of cemented and uncemented fixation of the humeral stem
in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). A systemic review comprising 41 clinical studies was performed
to compare the functional outcome and rate of complications of cemented
and uncemented stems in RSA. These included 1455 cemented and 329
uncemented shoulders. The clinical characteristics of the two groups
were similar. Variables were compared using pooled frequency-weighted means
and relative risk ratios (RR).Aims
Methods
We evaluated clinical and radiographic outcomes of total shoulder
arthroplasty (TSA) using the second-generation Trabecular Metal
(TM) Glenoid component. The first generation component was withdrawn
in 2005 after a series of failures were reported. Between 2009 and
2012, 40 consecutive patients with unilateral TSA using the second-generation
component were enrolled in this clinical study. The mean age of
the patients was 63.8 years (40 to 75) and the mean follow-up was
38 months (24 to 42). Patients were evaluated using the Constant score (CS), the American
Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score and routine radiographs.Aims
Methods
Some surgeons are reluctant to perform a reverse
total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) on both shoulders because of concerns
regarding difficulty with activities of daily living post-operatively
as a result of limited rotation of the shoulders. Nevertheless,
we hypothesised that outcomes and patient satisfaction following
bilateral RTSA would be comparable to those following unilateral
RTSA. A single-surgeon RTSA registry was reviewed for patients who underwent
bilateral staged RTSA with a minimum follow-up of two years. A unilateral
RTSA matched control was selected for each shoulder in those patients
undergoing bilateral procedures. The Constant–Murley score (CMS), American
Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, Subjective Shoulder Values
(SSV), visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, range of movement and
strength were measured pre- and post-operatively. The mean CMS,
ASES, SSV, VAS scores, strength and active forward elevation were
significantly improved
(all p <
0.01) following each operation in those undergoing bilateral
procedures. The mean active external rotation (p = 0.63 and p =
0.19) and internal rotation (p = 0.77 and p = 0.24) were not significantly
improved. The improvement in the mean ASES score after the first
RTSA was greater than the improvement in its control group (p =
0.0039). The improvement in the mean CMS, ASES scores and active
forward elevation was significantly less after the second RTSA than
in its control group (p = 0.0244, p = 0.0183, and p = 0.0280, respectively).
Pain relief and function significantly improved after each RTSA
in those undergoing a bilateral procedure. Bilateral RTSA is thus a reasonable form of treatment for patients
with severe bilateral rotator cuff deficiency, although inferior
results may be seen after the second procedure compared with the
first. Cite this article: