Aims. Existing literature indicates that inferiorly inclined glenoid baseplates following reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) produce better outcomes compared to superiorly inclined baseplates. We aim to compare clinical outcomes for RSAs with superiorly and neutrally/inferiorly inclined lateralized glenospheres. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed 154 consecutive patients undergoing RSA between July 2015 and July 2017 by one single-fellowship trained surgeon (AJ). Two raters (KAM and MVS) independently measured glenoid inclination in preoperative and minimum two year follow-up radiographs (anteroposterior/Grashey) using the RSA angle. Inclination was then compared to patient-reported outcomes, range of motion (ROM), and independently assessed degree of scapular notching and staging of heterotopic ossification at two year follow-up. Results. Median postoperative inclination for each group was found to be -3.6° (interquartile range (IQR) -2.1 to -6.9) and 6.0° (3.2° to 10.1°) for the neutrally/inferiorly and superiorly inclined cohorts, respectively. Preoperative inclination was highly associated with postoperative inclination (p = 0.004). When comparing superiorly and neutrally/inferiorly inclined glenospheres, there were no differences in heterotopic ossification (p = 0.606), scapular notching (p = 0.367), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (p = 0.419), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (p = 0.417), Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) pain score (p = 0.290), forward elevation (p = 0.161), external rotation (p = 0.537), or internal rotation (p = 0.656). Conclusion. Compared to neutral and inferior inclination, up to 6° ± 3° of superior glenoid baseplate inclination on a lateralized RSA design produces no differences in postoperative ROM or patient-reported outcomes, and produces similar levels of scapular notching and heterotopic ossification. Additionally, the degree of preoperative inclination represents an important factor in surgical decision-making as it is strongly associated with postoperative inclination. It is important to note that the findings of this study are only reflective of lateralized RSA prostheses. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(2):360–365

Aims. Optimal glenoid positioning in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is crucial to provide impingement-free range of motion (ROM). Lateralization and inclination correction are not yet systematically used. Using planning software, we simulated the most used glenoid implant positions. The primary goal was to determine the configuration that delivers the best theoretical impingement-free ROM. Methods. With the use of a 3D planning software (Blueprint) for RSA, 41 shoulders in 41 consecutive patients (17 males and 24 females; means age 73 years (SD 7)) undergoing RSA were planned. For the same anteroposterior positioning and retroversion of the glenoid implant, four different glenoid baseplate configurations were used on each shoulder to compare ROM: 1) no correction of the RSA angle and no lateralization (C-L-); 2) correction of the RSA angle with medialization by inferior reaming (C+M+); 3) correction of the RSA angle without lateralization by superior compensation (C+L-); and 4) correction of the RSA angle and additional lateralization (C+L+). The same humeral inlay implant and positioning were used on the humeral side for the four different glenoid configurations with a 3 mm symmetric 135° inclined polyethylene liner. Results. The configuration with lateralization and correction of the RSA angle (C+L+) led to better ROM in flexion, extension, adduction, and external rotation (p ≤ 0.001). Only internal rotation was not significantly different between groups (p = 0.388). The configuration where correction of the inclination was done by medialization (C+M+) led to the worst ROM in adduction, extension, abduction, flexion, and external rotation of the shoulder. Conclusion. Our software study shows that, when using a 135° inlay reversed humeral implant, correcting glenoid inclination (RSA angle 0°) and lateralizing the glenoid component by using an angled bony or metallic augment of 8 to 10 mm provides optimal impingement-free ROM. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2024;5(10):851–857

Aims

This study aimed to assess the impact of using the metal-augmented glenoid baseplate (AGB) on improving clinical and radiological outcomes, as well as reducing complications, in patients with superior glenoid wear undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA).

Aims

In patients with a rotator cuff tear, tear pattern and tendon involvement are known risk factors for the development of pseudoparalysis of the shoulder. It remains unclear, however, why similar tears often have very different functional consequences. The present study hypothesizes that individual shoulder anatomy, specifically the moment arms (MAs) of the rotator cuff (RC) and the deltoid muscle, as well as their relative recruitment during shoulder abduction, plays a central role in pseudoparalysis.

Aims

The Walch Type C dysplastic glenoid is characterized by excessive retroversion. This anatomical study describes its morphology.

The three-dimensional (3D) correction of glenoid erosion is critical to the long-term success of total shoulder replacement (TSR). In order to characterise the 3D morphology of eroded glenoid surfaces, we looked for a set of morphological parameters useful for TSR planning. We defined a scapular coordinates system based on non-eroded bony landmarks. The maximum glenoid version was measured and specified in 3D by its orientation angle. Medialisation was considered relative to the spino-glenoid notch. We analysed regular CT scans of 19 normal (N) and 86 osteoarthritic (OA) scapulae. When the maximum version of OA shoulders was higher than 10°, the orientation was not only posterior, but extended in postero-superior (35%), postero-inferior (6%) and anterior sectors (4%). The medialisation of the glenoid was higher in OA than normal shoulders. The orientation angle of maximum version appeared as a critical parameter to specify the glenoid shape in 3D. It will be very useful in planning the best position for the glenoid in TSR.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2014;96-B:513–18.