header advert
Orthopaedic Proceedings Logo

Receive monthly Table of Contents alerts from Orthopaedic Proceedings

Comprehensive article alerts can be set up and managed through your account settings

View my account settings

Visit Orthopaedic Proceedings at:

Loading...

Loading...

Full Access

General Orthopaedics

CLINICAL OUTCOME COMPARISON OF AUGMENTED GLENOID COMPONENTS VS GLENOID BONE GRAFTING WITH REVERSE TOTAL SHOULDER ARTHROPLASTY

The International Society for Technology in Arthroplasty (ISTA), 28th Annual Congress, 2015. PART 4.



Abstract

Introduction

Due to the predictability of outcomes achieved with reverse shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA), rTSA is increasingly being used in patients where glenoid fixation is compromised due to presence of glenoid wear. There are various methods to achieve glenoid fixation in patients with glenoid wear, including the use of bone grafting behind the glenoid baseplate or the use of augmented glenoid baseplates. This clinical study quantifies clinical outcomes achieved using both techniques in patients with severe glenoid wear at 2 years minimum follow-up.

Methods

80 patients (mean age: 71.6yrs) with 2 years minimum follow-up were treated by 7 fellowship trained orthopaedic surgeons using rTSA with bone graft behind the baseplate or rTSA with an augmented glenoid baseplate in patients with severe posterior glenoid wear. 39 rTSA patients (14 female, avg: 73.1 yrs; 25 male, avg: 71.5 yrs) received an augmented glenoid (cohort composed of 24 patients with an 8° posterior augment baseplate and 15 patients with a 10° superior augment baseplate) for treatment of CTA, RCT, and OA with a medially eroded scapula. 41 rTSA patients (27 female, avg: 73.0 yrs; 14 male, avg: 66.9 yrs) received glenoid bone graft (cohort composed of 5 patients with allograft and 36 patients with autograft) for treatment of CTA, RCT, and OA with a medially eroded scapula. Outcomes were scored using SST, UCLA, ASES, Constant, and SPADI metrics; active abduction, forward flexion, and internal/external rotation were also measured to quantify function. Average follow-up was 31.2 months (augment 28.3; graft 34.1). A two-tailed, unpaired t-test identified differences (p<0.05) in pre-operative, post-operative, and pre-to-post improvements.

Results

A comparison of pre-operative, post-operative, and pre-to-post improvement in outcomes are presented in Tables 1–3, respectively. No difference was noted in pre-operative, post-operative, and pre-to-post improvement in outcomes between cohorts. The augmented glenoid baseplate rTSA cohort had 0 complications for a complication rate of 0%; whereas, the rTSA glenoid bone graft cohort had 6 complications (including 2 glenoid loosenings/graft failures) for a complication rate of 14.6%. Additionally, radiographic follow-up information was available for 30 of 39 augmented baseplate patients (76.9%) and 27 of 41 bone graft patients (65.9%); where the augmented baseplate rTSA cohort had a scapular notching rate of 10.0% with an average scapular notching grade of 0.1; whereas, the rTSA glenoid bone graft cohort had a scapular notching rate of 18.5% with an average scapular notching grade of 0.19.

Conclusions

These results demonstrate positive outcomes can be achieved at 2 years minimum follow-up in patients with severe glenoid wear using either augmented glenoid baseplates or bone graft behind the glenoid baseplate with rTSA. While no statistical difference was noted between pre-operative, post-operative, and pre-to-post improvement in outcomes between rTSA cohorts, a substantial difference in the complication rate was noted between cohorts which may factor into the surgeon's decision of the choice of treatment technique for these patients. Additional and longer-term follow-up is needed to confirm these outcomes and trends.


*Email: