Quantifying bone loss and lateralization with standardized baseplate versus augmented baseplates.

Augmented baseplate Baseplate position Glenoid bone loss Glenoid inclination Reverse shoulder angle Reverse shoulder arthroplasty

Journal

JSES international
ISSN: 2666-6383
Titre abrégé: JSES Int
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101763461

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2024
Historique:
medline: 16 9 2024
pubmed: 16 9 2024
entrez: 16 9 2024
Statut: epublish

Résumé

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty continues to be utilized for the treatment of cuff tear arthropathy, glenohumeral degenerative joint disease, and irreparable rotator cuff tears. With advancement in component designs, glenoid retroversion and inclination are now correctable with augmented baseplates. However, quantifying bone loss and lateralization compared to standard baseplates has not been studied. The purpose of the current study is to determine the volume of bone reamed and net lateralization with a standardized baseplate vs. augmented baseplate when glenoid inclination was corrected to neutral. A series of 21 computed tomography scans of patients presenting for shoulder arthroplasty were chosen based on a range of increasing native positive inclination. Computed tomography scans were uploaded into segmentation software and processed. Four fellowship trained shoulder surgeons were then blinded from each other and virtually placed a neutral baseplate and an augmented baseplate for each specimen. Baseplate position was standardized. Additionally, baseplate backside seating of a minimum of 80% was also standardized and glenosphere (nonlateralized) size was selected to eliminate variation in baseplate contact and position. Glenoid inclination was corrected to a minimal of neutral in each specimen as well as glenoid retroversion corrected to <10 The mean glenoid retroversion was 8.1 The current study demonstrates approximately 50% less bone removal and 2.4 mm of true lateralization with a 10-degree augmented baseplate when compared to standard baseplates.

Sections du résumé

Background UNASSIGNED
Reverse shoulder arthroplasty continues to be utilized for the treatment of cuff tear arthropathy, glenohumeral degenerative joint disease, and irreparable rotator cuff tears. With advancement in component designs, glenoid retroversion and inclination are now correctable with augmented baseplates. However, quantifying bone loss and lateralization compared to standard baseplates has not been studied. The purpose of the current study is to determine the volume of bone reamed and net lateralization with a standardized baseplate vs. augmented baseplate when glenoid inclination was corrected to neutral.
Methods UNASSIGNED
A series of 21 computed tomography scans of patients presenting for shoulder arthroplasty were chosen based on a range of increasing native positive inclination. Computed tomography scans were uploaded into segmentation software and processed. Four fellowship trained shoulder surgeons were then blinded from each other and virtually placed a neutral baseplate and an augmented baseplate for each specimen. Baseplate position was standardized. Additionally, baseplate backside seating of a minimum of 80% was also standardized and glenosphere (nonlateralized) size was selected to eliminate variation in baseplate contact and position. Glenoid inclination was corrected to a minimal of neutral in each specimen as well as glenoid retroversion corrected to <10
Results UNASSIGNED
The mean glenoid retroversion was 8.1
Conclusion UNASSIGNED
The current study demonstrates approximately 50% less bone removal and 2.4 mm of true lateralization with a 10-degree augmented baseplate when compared to standard baseplates.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39280152
doi: 10.1016/j.jseint.2024.04.014
pii: S2666-6383(24)00119-1
pmc: PMC11401572
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Pagination

1055-1062

Informations de copyright

© 2024 The Authors.

Auteurs

Anup Shah (A)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Arizona, College of Medicine - Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Banner Sports Medicine, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

Brian Werner (B)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottsville, VA, USA.

Rueben Gobezie (R)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Cleveland Shoulder Institute, Cleveland, OH, USA.

Patrick Denard (P)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Oregon Shoulder Institute, Medford, OR, USA.

Samuel Harmsen (S)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Banner Health, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

Tyler Brolin (T)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Campbell Clinic, Memphis, TN, USA.

Michael Bercik (M)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Lancaster Orthopedic Group, Lancaster, PA, USA.

Siddhant Thankur (S)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Arthex, Inc, Naples, FL, USA.

Scott Doody (S)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Arthex, Inc, Naples, FL, USA.

David Knopf (D)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Arthex, Inc, Naples, FL, USA.

Nick Metcalfe (N)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Arthex, Inc, Naples, FL, USA.

Evan Lederman (E)

Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Arizona, College of Medicine - Phoenix, Phoenix, AZ, USA.
Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Banner Sports Medicine, Scottsdale, AZ, USA.

Classifications MeSH