Early clinical and radiographic outcomes of an augmented baseplate in reverse shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral arthritis with glenoid deformity

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Using Lateralized Glenoid Baseplates Has Superior Patient-determined Outcome Scores at Short-term Follow-up

INTRODUCTION

There are a variety of baseplate options when performing reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Currently, there is no consensus on the optimal glenoid baseplate. The hypothesis of this study was that the use of lateralized baseplates would improve patient-determined outcomes and postoperative range of motion after RTSA compared with standard baseplates without increasing the risk of complications.

METHODS

Patients undergoing RTSA were stratified into a standard baseplate group (SBG) and a lateralized baseplate group (LBG). The LBG included 3 mm lateralization, 6 mm lateralization, and full-wedge augmentation (8 mm lateralization). The Western Ontario Osteoarthritis Score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) were recorded at baseline, 1 year, and 2 years. Range of motion was recorded at baseline and 1 year. Differences in complications between groups were recorded.

RESULTS

The LBG included 187 patients, and the SBG included 51 patients. No difference was observed in any patient-determined outcome score at 1-year follow-up. At 2 years, there were greater Western Ontario Osteoarthritis Score (84 ± 16 versus 74 ± 19; P = 0.01), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (81 ± 15 versus 70 ± 20; P = 0.001), SST (8.0 ± 2.4 versus 6.6 ± 2.6; P = 0.007), and SANE (82 ± 17 versus 68 ± 25; P = 0.0005). The improvement in SST (5.0 ± 2.7 versus 3.3 ± 3.6; P = 0.02) and SANE (54 ± 26 versus 37 ± 30; P = 0.004) at 2 years compared with baseline was greater in the LBG compared with the SBG. No difference was observed in any range-of-motion metric between groups. Total complications were similar between groups (P = 0.91). Scapular notching was more prevalent in the SBG (7.8% versus 1.6%; P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The LBG had better patient-determined outcome scores compared with the SBG at 2-year follow-up with a similar rate of overall complications but a lower rate of scapular notching. Range of motion was not improved by the use of a lateralized baseplate compared with a standard baseplate.

Metallic Lateralized-Offset Glenoid Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

Background

Metallic lateralized-offset glenoid reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for cuff tear arthropathy combines the use of a metallic augmented baseplate with a metaphyseally oriented short stem design that can be applied at a 135° or 145° neck-shaft angle, leading to additional lateralization on the humeral side. Lateralization of the center of rotation decreases the risk of inferior scapular notching and improves external rotation, deltoid wrapping, residual rotator cuff tensioning, and prosthetic stability1-4. Metallic increased-offset RSA (MIO-RSA) achieves lateralization and corrects inclination and retroversion while avoiding graft resorption and other complications of bony increased-offset RSA (BIO-RSA)5-8. Reducing the neck-shaft angle from the classical Grammont design, in combination with glenoid lateralization, improves range of motion9,10 by reducing inferior impingement during adduction at the expense of earlier superior impingement during abduction2,11. Lädermann et al.12 investigated how different combinations of humeral stem and glenosphere designs influence range of motion and muscle elongation. They assessed 30 combinations of humeral components, as compared with the native shoulder, and found that the combination that allows for restoration of >50% of the native range of motion in all directions was a 145° onlay stem with a concentric or lateralized tray in conjunction with a lateralized or inferior eccentric glenosphere. In addition, the use of a flush-lay or a slight-onlay stem design (like the one utilized in the presently described technique) may decrease the risk of secondary scapular spine fracture13,14. The goal of this prosthetic design is to achieve an excellent combination of motion and stability while reducing complications.

Description

This procedure is performed via a deltopectoral approach with the patient in the beach-chair position under general anesthesia combined with a regional interscalene nerve block. Subscapularis tenotomy and capsular release are performed, the humeral head is dislocated, and any osteophytes are removed. An intramedullary cutting guide is placed for correct humeral resection. The osteotomy of the humeral head is performed in the anatomical neck with an inclination of 135° and a retroversion of 20° to 40°, depending on the anatomical retroversion. The glenoid is prepared as usual. The lateralized, augmented baseplate is assembled with the central screw and the baseplate-wedge-screw complex is placed by inserting the screw into the central screw hole. Four peripheral screws are utilized for definitive fixation. An eccentric glenosphere with inferior overhang is implanted. The humerus is dislocated, and the metaphysis is prepared. Long compactors are utilized for proper stem alignment, and an asymmetric trial insert is positioned before the humerus is reduced. Stability and range of motion are assessed. The definitive short stem is inserted and the asymmetric polyethylene is impacted, resulting in a neck-shaft angle of 145°. Following reduction, subscapularis repair and wound closure are performed.

Alternatives

BIO-RSA is the main alternative to MIO-RSA. Boileau et al.15 demonstrated satisfactory early and long-term outcomes of BIO-RSA for shoulder osteoarthritis. A larger lateral offset may also be achieved with a thicker glenosphere2,16. Mark A. Frankle developed an implant that addressed the drawbacks of the Grammont design: a lateralized glenosphere combined with a 135° humeral neck-shaft angle. The 135° neck-shaft angle provides lateral humeral offset, preserving the normal length-tension relationship of the residual rotator cuff musculature, which optimizes its strength and function. The lateralized glenosphere displaces the humeral shaft laterally, minimizing the potential for impingement during adduction2,9,17,18. The advantage of BIO-RSA and MIO-RSA over lateralized glenospheres is that the former options provide correction of angular deformities without excessive reaming, which can lead to impingement19.

Rationale

BIO-RSA has been proven to achieve excellent functional outcomes15,20,21; however, the bone graft can undergo resorption, which may result in early baseplate loosening. Bipolar metallic lateralized RSA is an effective strategy for achieving lateralization and correction of multiplanar defects while avoiding the potential complications of BIO-RSA6,7,22-24. MIO-RSA also overcomes another limitation of BIO-RSA, namely that BIO-RSA is not applicable when the humeral head is not available for use (e.g., humeral head osteonecrosis, revision surgery, fracture sequelae).

Expected Outcomes

A recent study evaluated the clinical and radiographic outcomes of metallic humeral and glenoid lateralized implants. A total of 42 patients underwent primary RSA. Patients were documented prospectively and underwent follow-up visits at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. That study demonstrated that bipolar metallic lateralized RSA achieves excellent clinical results in terms of shoulder function, pain relief, muscle strength, and patient-reported subjective assessment, without instability or radiographic signs of scapular notching23. Kirsch et al.25 reported the results of primary RSA with an augmented baseplate in 44 patients with a minimum of 1 year of clinical and radiographic follow-up. The use of an augmented baseplate resulted in excellent short-term clinical outcomes and substantial deformity correction in patients with advanced glenoid deformity. No short-term complications and no failure or loosening of the augmented baseplate were observed. Merolla et al.7 compared the results of 44 patients who underwent BIO-RSA and 39 patients who underwent MIO-RSA, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Both techniques provided good clinical outcomes; however, BIO-RSA yielded union between the cancellous bone graft and the surface of the native glenoid in <70% of patients. On the other hand, complete baseplate seating was observed in 90% of MIO-RSA patients.

Important Tips

When performing subscapularis tenotomy, leave an adequate stump to allow end-to-end repair.Tenotomize the superior part of the subscapularis tendon in an L-shape, sparing the portion below the circumflex vessels.As glenoid exposure is critical, perform a 270° capsulotomy.Continuously check the orientation of the baseplate relative to the prepared hole and reamed surface to ensure accurate implantation of the full wedge baseplate to achieve a proper fit.Aim for 70% to 80% seating of the baseplate onto the prepared glenoid surface. Avoid overtightening or excessive advancement of the baseplate into the subchondral bone. Gaps between the baseplate and glenoid surface should also be avoided.In order to avoid varus or valgus malpositioning of the final implant, obtain proper diaphyseal alignment by following "the three big Ls": large, lateral, and long. Use a large metaphyseal component to fill the metaphysis. Place the guide pin for the reaming of the metaphysis slightly laterally into the resected surface of the humerus. Use long compactors for diaphyseal alignment to avoid varus or valgus malpositioning of the final implant.Use an intramedullary cutting guide for correct humeral resection.Utilize the correct liner in order to obtain proper tensioning and avoid instability.

Acronyms and Abbreviations

K wire = Kirschner wireROM = range of motion.

Clinical and radiographic outcomes of shoulder hemiarthroplasty for patients with glenoid medialization

BACKGROUND

Glenoid bone loss in shoulder arthroplasty is a difficult problem that is prone to complications because of challenges with achieving glenoid component fixation and stability. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of primary shoulder hemiarthroplasty for patients with severe glenoid medialization precluding placement of a glenoid component.

METHODS

This was a retrospective case series evaluating patients who underwent shoulder hemiarthroplasty for severe glenoid erosion and medialization between 2010 and 2020. Patients were evaluated via chart review and phone survey to determine if there were any reoperations at final follow-up and to obtain Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were evaluated and compared to determine glenoid morphology, version, medialization, acromiohumeral distance, and humeral offset. Final postoperative films were also evaluated for anterosuperior migration and signs of mechanical failure, including loosening or periprosthetic fracture.

RESULTS

Overall, there were 28 patients during this period who underwent shoulder hemiarthroplasty for severe glenoid medialization. Eight patients were deceased at the time of the study, 2 were unable to complete surveys because of dementia, and 7 were lost to follow-up. The final cohort included 11 shoulders and 11 patients with a mean age of 71 ± 7.1 years and mean follow-up of 6.7 years (range 1.6-13.0 years). Mean postoperative SANE, ASES, and SST scores were 80.6 ± 17.6, 71.5 ± 29.3, and 7.6 ± 2.0, respectively. There were no reoperations or revision surgeries at final follow-up. Radiographic evaluation demonstrated severe glenoid medialization and decreased lateral humeral offset, which was unchanged postoperatively. There were 2 patients with signs of anterosuperior migration at final radiographic follow-up but no signs of implant failure.

CONCLUSION

Shoulder hemiarthroplasty for severe medial glenoid bone loss provides modest clinical outcomes and low rates of reoperation at mid- to long-term follow-up and is an option worth considering in cases where placement of a glenoid component is challenging because of deficient bone stock and high risk for complications.

Factors affecting stress shielding and osteolysis after reverse shoulder arthroplasty: A multicenter study in a Japanese population

BACKGROUND

Stress shielding and osteolysis around the humeral stem after reverse shoulder arthroplasty causes loosening and periprosthetic fractures and reduces bone stock during revision surgery. In Japanese patients, who have relatively small bodies, different characteristics may exist regarding the occurrence of these changes compared with the characteristics of Westerners, who have relatively larger frames. The purpose of this multicenter study was to investigate the incidence and clarify the predictors of stress shielding and osteolysis in Japanese individuals who underwent reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

The occurrence of stress shielding and osteolysis was investigated in 135 shoulders that had undergone reverse shoulder arthroplasty at least 2 years prior in five Japanese hospitals. During post-surgical follow-up, which was conducted every 3 months, the locations of the stress shielding occurrences, such as cortical thinning and osteopenia (which primarily occurred in zones 1, 2, and 7, where 1 is the greater tuberosity and 7 is the calcar part), spot weld, and condensation lines, were recorded. Cases without any abnormal findings on radiographs obtained up to ≥2 years after surgery were regarded as having no abnormalities. Finally, the predictors of cortical thinning and proximal humeral osteolysis were assessed using univariate and multivariate regression analyses.

RESULTS

Cortical thinning and osteopenia occurred in 68 shoulders, a condensation line occurred in 37 shoulders, and spot weld occurred in 23 shoulders. In particular, greater tuberosity and calcar osteolysis occurred in 40 and 47 shoulders, respectively. Long stem, cementless stem, and a larger proximal filling ratio were independent predictors of cortical thinning and osteopenia, whereas a cementless stem, larger metaphysis diameter, and a larger proximal filling ratio were associated with proximal humeral osteolysis.

CONCLUSIONS

The predictors of stress shielding and osteolysis included the use of long stems, cementless stems, larger proximal filling ratios, and larger metaphysis diameters.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

retrospective comparative study (Level III).

BIO-RSA vs. metal-augmented baseplate in shoulder osteoarthritis with multiplanar glenoid deformity: a comparative study of radiographic findings and patient outcomes

BACKGROUND

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) requiring extensive reaming to address severe glenoid bone loss increases the risk of glenoid medialization and baseplate failure. We hypothesized that (1) metal-augmented baseplate prevents the medialization of the joint line and preserves glenoid bone stock similarly to bony increased-offset (BIO)-RSA and (2) bone graft viability and healing in BIO-RSA patients become compromised over time.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-one patients (83 shoulders) underwent glenoid lateralization with bone (BIO-RSA group, 44) or metal-augmented baseplate (metallic increased-offset [MIO]-RSA group, 39) and a minimum follow-up of 24 months were included. The orientation and direction of glenoid erosion was identified and recorded using computerized 3D planning. Active range of motion, and the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS) index were assessed before arthroplasty and at the last follow-up visits. Radiographic changes around the glenoid and humeral components were assessed. Healing and thickness of bone graft were evaluated by predefined criteria. Postoperative global glenoid inclination (β angle) and retroversion were also measured.

RESULTS

Delta scores of active anterior elevation were higher in the MIO-RSA group (P = .027). The differences in the other planes of shoulder motion and in WOOS index scores between the groups were not significant. Preoperative glenoid retroversion was higher in BIO-RSA patients, and glenoid inclination was similar in both groups. Type B2 and B3 glenoids had a posterior-central (91%) and posterior-superior (90%) erosion with a mean posterior humeral head subluxation of 76% and 78%, respectively. The direction of erosion in type E2 and E3 glenoids was posterior-superior, with a mean posterior humeral head subluxation of 74%. The rate of high position of the glenosphere was higher in the BIO-RSA group (P = .022), whereas the values of β angle and postoperative retroversion were similar in the 2 groups. BIO-RSA group showed radiolucent lines <2 mm around the bone graft in 16 patients (36.4%) and decreased thickness in 15 (34.1%). Incomplete baseplate seating was found in 4 MIO-RSA patients (10%). We found higher rates of humerus condensation lines in MIO-RSA patients (P = .01) and higher rates of cortical thinning and tuberosity resorption in the BIO-RSA group (P = .027 and P = .004, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Metal-augmented glenoid is a suitable alternative to BIO-RSA to preserve bone and prevent the medialization of the joint line in arthritic glenoid with multiplanar glenoid deformity. Bone and metal augmentation provided satisfactory clinical outcomes. Bone graft resorption in BIO-RSA patients raise concern about the risk of baseplate loosening and requires further long-term studies.

Effect of using a small baseplate on the radiological and clinical outcomes of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in Asian patients

Aims

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical and radiological outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) using small and standard baseplates in Asian patients, and to investigate the impact of a mismatch in the sizes of the glenoid and the baseplate on the outcomes.

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).

Results

Perforation of the vault of the glenoid (p = 0.018) and size mismatch in height (p < 0.001) and width (p = 0.013) were significantly more frequent in the ST group than in the SM group. There was no significant difference in the clinical scores and ROM in the two groups, two years postoperatively (all p > 0.05). In subgroup analysis, the VP group had significantly less inferior overhang (p = 0.009), more scapular notching (p = 0.018), and more size mismatch in height (p < 0.001) and width (p = 0.025) than the VNP group.

Conclusion

In Asian patients with a small glenoid, using a 29.5 mm small baseplate at the time of RSA was more effective in reducing size mismatch between the glenoid and the baseplate, decreasing the incidence of perforation of the glenoid vault, and achieving optimal positioning of the baseplate compared with the use of a 33.8 mm standard baseplate. However, longer follow-up is required to assess the impact of these findings on the clinical outcomes.

The base plate orientation angle: a plain radiographic technique for designing the base plate's inclination in reverse shoulder arthroplasty

Background

Superior inclination of the base plate in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is underestimated and may lead to major setbacks in terms of functional outcomes due to the altered biomechanics. Joint instability, scapular notching, and loosening of the glenoid component are considered the most serious sequelae. Therefore, a thorough preoperative radiological assessment of the affected shoulder joint and customized design of the prosthesis according to the glenoid morphology are decisive and directly correlated to the outcome. In this article, we propose a simple radiographic technique to assess the inclination of the glenoid preoperatively, which identifies the need for intraoperative correction.

Materials and Methods

One hundred inconspicuous shoulder radiographs were included in the control group (CG) to define the normal ranges of the base plate orientation angle (BOA) and the base plate correction angle (BCA). Further, both angles were measured on 2-dimensional (2D) computed tomography scans of patients with proximal humerus fractures as well as radiographs, 2D and 3-dimensional (3D) computed tomography scans of patients with cuff tear arthropathy who underwent RSA between 2018 and 2021. The interobserver reliability among three independent testers was evaluated by calculating the intraclass correlation coefficient. In cuff tear arthropathy cases, the BOA and BCA measurements on different imaging modalities were compared using the Wilcoxon test. Possible variations of both angles' values based on glenoid erosion types, according to the Favard classification, were also investigated.

Results

Regardless of the imaging modality used, the interobserver reliability was excellent among three independent observers. In the CG, the mean BOA and BCA values were 118° ± 6° and 17° ± 5°, respectively. The mean corrected BOA values of the CG and fracture group were 136° ± 5° and 140° ± 5°, respectively. In contrast to the BCA values, the BOA measurements on radiographs showed a statistically significant difference compared to those obtained on 2D- and 3D scans in the cuff arthropathy group. Further, both angles' values varied according to the extent and location of the glenoid erosion. The lowest mean BOA and highest mean BCA values were observed in cases with Favard glenoid type E3.

Conclusions

The BOA and the BCA are reliable tools proposed to aid in precisely positioning the glenoid component in RSA in the preoperative setting. Whereas, the BOA determines the inclination of the inferior glenoid segment, the BCA represents the extent of correction required to obtain a neutral inclination of the base plate. Glenoid type E3 of the Favard classification with superior wear is particularly susceptible to base plate superior tilt.

Treatment of Glenoid Wear with the Use of Augmented Glenoid Components in Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Scoping Review

» Treatment of glenoid bone loss continues to be a challenge in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Although correcting glenoid wear to patient's native anatomy is desirable in TSA, there is lack of consensus regarding how much glenoid wear correction is acceptable and necessary in both anatomic and reverse TSA.» Use of augmented glenoid components is a relatively new treatment strategy for addressing moderate-to-severe glenoid wear in TSA. Augmented glenoid components allow for predictable and easy correction of glenoid wear in the coronal and/or axial planes while at the same time maximizing implant seating, improving rotator cuff biomechanics, and preserving glenoid bone stock because of off-axis glenoid reaming.» Augmented glenoid components have distinct advantages over glenoid bone grafting. Glenoid bone grafting is technically demanding, adds to the surgical time, and carries a risk of nonunion and graft resorption with subsequent failure of the glenoid component.» The use of augmented glenoid components in TSA is steadily increasing with easy availability of computed tomography-based preoperative planning software and guidance technology (patient-specific instrumentation and computer navigation).» Although different augment designs (full wedge, half wedge, and step cut) are available and a particular design may provide advantages in specific glenoid wear patterns to minimize bone removal (i.e. a half wedge in B2 glenoids), there is no evidence to demonstrate the superiority of 1 design over others.

Comparison of glenoid bone grafting vs. augmented glenoid baseplates in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Management of bone loss and glenoid deformity can present a significant challenge to surgeons. The purpose of this review was to compare outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) using either bone graft or augmented baseplates for the management of glenoid bone loss and deformity.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane indices was performed for studies reporting clinical outcomes following primary RSA with bone grafting or use of augmented baseplates. Pooled and frequency-weighted means, standard deviations, and ranges were calculated and reported for comparison.

RESULTS

Overall, 19 studies and 652 patients with bone grafting (n = 401) and augmented baseplates (n = 251) were included in the study. Mean patient age and gender were 70.3 ± 3.1 years and 47% female in the bone grafting group and 72.9 ± 3.7 years and 59.0% female in the augmented baseplate group. Mean follow-up for the augmented baseplate group was 23.1 ± 8.2 months and 29.5 ± 10.1 months for the bone grafting group. Overall complication and revision rates were 11.7% and 4.5% for the bone grafting group and 11.8% and 3.7% for the augmented baseplate group. Range of motion as well as patient-reported and functional outcome scores were similar between both techniques. Infections, component loosening, and notching were 1.9%, 3.6%, and 24.6% in the bone grafting group and 0.7%, 1.6%, and 4.7% in the augmented baseplate group.

CONCLUSIONS

Glenoid bone grafting and augmented baseplates are effective treatment options for the management of bone loss and glenoid deformity. Both treatments improve overall clinical outcomes with relatively low complication rates and revision rates.

How common is nerve injury after reverse shoulder arthroplasty? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Nerve injury following reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is a known risk factor with wide ranging incidences reported. This systematic review evaluates the overall incidence of nerve injury following primary and revision RSA and summarizes the characteristics of the nerve injuries reported in the current literature.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed using separate database searches (Pubmed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane) following the PRISMA guidelines. Search criteria included the title terms "reverse shoulder," "reverse total shoulder," "inverted shoulder," and "inverted total shoulder" with publication dates ranging from 01/01/2010 to 01/01/2022. Studies that reported neurological injuries and complications were included and evaluated for primary RSA, revision RSA, number of nerve injuries, and which nerves were affected.

RESULTS

After exclusion, our systematic review consisted of 188 articles. A total of 40,146 patients were included, with 65% female. The weighted mean age was 70.3 years. The weighted mean follow-up was 35.4 months. The rate of nerve injury after RSA was 1.3% (510 of 40,146 RSAs). The rate of injury was greater in revision RSA compared to primary RSA (2.4% vs. 1.3%). Nerve injury was most common in RSAs done for a primary diagnosis of acute proximal humerus fracture (4.0%), followed by cuff tear arthropathy (3.0%), DJD (2.6%), and inflammatory arthritis (1.7%). Massive rotator cuff tears and post-traumatic arthritis cases had the lowest nerve injury rates (1.0% and 1.4%, respectively). The axillary nerve was the most commonly reported nerve that was injured in both primary and revision RSA (0.6%), followed by the ulnar nerve (0.26%) and median nerve (0.23%). Brachial plexus injury was reported in 0.19% of overall RSA cases.

CONCLUSION

Based on current English literature, nerve injuries occur at a rate of 1.3% after primary RSA compared with 2.4% after revision RSA. The most common nerve injury was to the axillary nerve (0.64%), with the most common operative diagnosis associated with nerve injury after RSA being acute proximal humerus fracture (4.0%). Surgeons should carefully counsel patients prior to surgery regarding the risk of nerve injury.

Augmented baseplates in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review of outcomes and complications

Background

Glenoid wear secondary to primary osteoarthritis or rotator cuff arthropathy is an obstacle commonly encountered by surgeons performing reverse shoulder arthroplasty, with numerous techniques devised to address this finding. The most recent of such techniques is the introduction of augmented glenoid baseplates to fill these glenoid defects. The objectives of this systematic review are to analyze clinical outcomes of augmented baseplates in patients with glenoid wear, including pain, range of motion, patient-reported functional scores, radiographic outcome measures, complication rates, and revision rates.

Methods

Three online databases (Ovid Medline, EMBASE, Pubmed) were searched for studies publishing clinical and functional outcomes of augmented baseplates in primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Findings were aggregated and frequency-weighted means of these variables were calculated when applicable.

Results

Seven studies comprising 810 patients were included in this review. The mean patient age was 72.1 ± 8.1 years with an average follow-up time of 41.4 months. Frequency-weighted means of improvement in forward elevation, abduction, and active external rotation were 53°, 47°, and 19°, respectively. Patients experienced American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Simple Shoulder Test, and Constant score improvements of 45.9, 5.9, and 33.7, respectively. Pooled complicated rate was 6.4%, with 10 cases of baseplate loosening and 3 cases of instability. Five (0.6%) patients required reoperation. Subdividing among augment type (posterior, superior, posterosuperior), there were no apparent differences in outcomes or complication rates between directional augments.

Conclusion

This systematic review demonstrates that augmented baseplates for reverse shoulder arthroplasty provide positive outcomes both clinically and functionally at early follow-up. Complications are within an acceptable range for primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty, with a low rate of revision. Augmented baseplates should serve as a viable option for surgeons seeking to address glenoid wear during reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Analysis and 3D correction of glenoid dysplasia with metal hemi-wedge base plate augment: short-term radiographic outcomes

BACKGROUND

Glenoid defects can be addressed traditionally by asymmetric reaming or by bone-preserving correction to a more lateral joint line by bone or metal augmented baseplates in reverse shoulder arthroplasties. While there is more evidence in literature regarding the outcome and complications of Bony Increased Offset Reversed Shoulder Arthroplasty (BIO-RSA), there is minimal reported experience with the outcome after metal glenoid augments. The aim of this study was to determine whether a metal augment can correct the glenoid deformity in an anatomic manner.

METHODS

Glenoid morphology and deformity were determined in 50 patients with Walch type B1, B2, D and Favard type E0-E3 glenoid defects using preoperative radiographic and computed tomography (CT) analysis. All patients received a preoperative planning CT with 3D planning, and measurements of glenoid inclination (in 3 planes proximal, middle, distal), reversed shoulder arthroplasty angle (RSA) and glenoid version were obtained. All patients had a pathologic inclination in the coronal or frontal planes of > 10°. Above the threshold of 10° pathological glenoid version or inclination metal hemi-augments of 10°, 20°, or 30° were used which allow an individual 360° augment positioning according to the patient glenoid deformity.

RESULTS

The mean preoperative numbers of the glenoid version demonstrate that most glenoids were in retroversion and superior inclination. In total 2410° wedges, 1820° wedges and 8 30° wedges were used. In the majority of cases, the wedge was positioned posteriorly and/or cranially between 10:00 and 12:00 o'clock, which allows a correction in a 3D manner of the glenoid inclination and version. The mean RSA angle could be corrected from 22.76 ± 6.06 to 0.19° ± 2.7 (p < 0.0001). The highest retroversion of the glenoid is evidenced in the proximal section and it could be corrected from - 23.32° ± 4.56 to - 6.74° ± 7.75 (p < 0.0001) and in the middle section from - 18.93° ± 3.35 to - 7.66° ± 5.28 (p < 0.0001). A mean sphere bone overhang distance (SBOD) of 5.70 ± 2.04 mm was found in order to avoid or minimize relevant scapular notching.

CONCLUSION

By using a new 360° metal-augmented baseplate, the preoperative pathological inclination and retroversion can be corrected without medialization of the joint line. Future clinical results will show whether this bone-preserving procedure improves also the clinical outcomes as compared to asymmetric medialized reaming or wedged BIO-RSA.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, Case series.

Management of glenoid bone loss in primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty

Aims

Rates of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) continue to grow. Glenoid bone loss and deformity remains a technical challenge to the surgeon and may reduce improvements in patients’ outcomes. However, there is no consensus as to the optimal surgical technique to best reconstruct these patients’ anatomy. This review aims to compare the outcomes of glenoid bone grafting versus augmented glenoid prostheses in the management of glenoid bone loss in primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Methods

This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated study-level data in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We performed searches of Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and PubMed from their dates of inception to January 2022. From included studies, we analyzed data for preoperative and postoperative range of motion (ROM), patient-reported functional outcomes, and complication rates.

Results

A total of 13 studies (919 shoulders) were included in the analysis. The mean age of patients at initial evaluation was 72.2 years (42 to 87), with a mean follow-up time of 40.7 months (24 to 120). Nine studies with 292 rTSAs evaluated the use of bone graft and five studies with 627 rTSAs evaluated the use of augmented glenoid baseplates. One study was analyzed in both groups. Both techniques demonstrated improvement in patient-reported outcome measures and ROM assessment, with augmented prostheses outperforming bone grafting on improvements in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score. There was a higher complication rate (8.9% vs 3.5%; p < 0.001) and revision rate among the bone grafting group compared with the patients who were treated with augmented prostheses (2.4% vs 0.6%; p = 0.022).

Conclusion

This review provides strong evidence that both bone graft and augmented glenoid baseplate techniques to address glenoid bone loss give excellent ROM and functional outcomes in primary rTSA. The use of augmented base plates may confer fewer complications and revisions. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2022;104-B(12):1334–1342.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty with and without baseplate wedge augmentation in the setting of glenoid deformity and rotator cuff deficiency-a multicenter investigation

INTRODUCTION

Glenoid baseplate augments have recently been introduced as a way of managing glenoid monoplanar or biplanar abnormalities in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the difference in clinical outcomes, complications, and revision rates between augmented and standard baseplates in RSA for rotator cuff arthropathy patients with glenoid deformity.

METHODS

A multicenter retrospective analysis of 171 patients with glenoid bone loss who underwent RSA with and without augmented baseplates was performed. Preoperative inclusion criteria included minimum follow-up of 2 years and preoperative retroversion of 15°-30° and/or a beta angle 70°-80°. Version and beta angle were measured on computed tomographic scans, when available, and plain radiographs. Shoulder range of motion (ROM) and patient-reported outcomes were obtained from preoperative and multiple postoperative time points.

RESULTS

The study consisted of 84 standard baseplate patients and 87 augmented baseplate patients. The augment cohort had greater mean preoperative glenoid retroversion (17° vs. 9°, P < .001). At >5-year follow-up, the increase in postoperative active abduction (52° vs. 31°, P = .023), forward flexion (58° vs. 35°, P = .020), and internal rotation score (2.8° vs. 1.1°, P = .001) was significantly greater in the augment cohort. Additionally, >5-year follow-up American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form score (87.0 ± 16.6 vs. 75.9 ± 22.4, P = .022), Constant score (78.0 ± 9.7 vs. 64.6 ± 15.1, P < .001), and Shoulder Arthroplasty Smart score (81.2 ± 6.5 vs. 71.2 ± 13.6, P = .003) were significantly higher in the augment cohort. Revision rate was low overall, with no difference between the augment and no augment groups (0.7% vs. 3.0%, P = .151).

CONCLUSION

In comparing augments to standard nonaugment baseplates in the setting of RSA with glenoid deformity, our results demonstrate greater postoperative improvements in multiple planes of active ROM in the augment cohort. Additionally, the augment cohort demonstrated greater postoperative level and improvement in scores for multiple clinical outcome metrics up to >5 years of follow-up with no difference in complication or revision rates, supporting the use of augmented glenoid baseplates in RSA with glenoid deformity.

Augmented baseplates yield optimum outcomes when compared with bone graft augmentation for managing glenoid deformity during reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a retrospective comparative study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) using glenoid bone grafting (BG rTSA) with primary rTSA using augmented glenoid baseplates (Aug rTSA) with a minimum 2-year follow-up.

METHODS

A total of 520 primary rTSA patients treated with 8° posterior glenoid augments (n = 246), 10° superior glenoid augments (n = 97), or combined 10° superior/8° posterior glenoid augments (n = 177) were compared with 47 patients undergoing glenoid bone grafting for glenoid bone insufficiency. The mean follow-up was 37.0(±16) and 53.0(±27) months, respectively. Outcomes were analyzed preoperatively and at the latest follow-up using conventional statistics and stratification by minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) thresholds where applicable. Radiographs were analyzed for baseplate failure, and the incidences of postoperative complications and revisions were recorded.

RESULTS

The glenoid Aug rTSA cohort had greater improvements in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and range of motion when compared with the BG rTSA group at a minimum of 2-year follow-up, including Simple Shoulder Test, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, University of California Los Angeles score, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index score, shoulder function, Shoulder Arthroplasty Smart score, abduction, and external rotation (P < .05). Patient satisfaction was higher in the Aug rTSA group compared with the BG rTSA group (P = .006). The utilization of an augmented glenoid component instead of glenoid bone grafting resulted in approximately 50% less total intraoperative time (P < .001), nearly 33% less intraoperative blood loss volume (P < .001), approximately 3-fold less scapular notching (P < .01), and approximately 15-fold less adverse events requiring revision (P < .01) when compared with the BG rTSA cohort. Aside from SCB for abduction, the Aug rTSA cohort achieved higher rates of exceeding MCID and SCB for every PROM compared with BG rTSA. More specifically, 77.6% and 70.2% of the Aug rTSA achieved SCB for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index vs. 55% and 48.6% in the BG rTSA, respectively (P = .003 and P = .013).

CONCLUSION

The present midterm clinical and radiographic study demonstrates that the utilization of an augmented baseplate for insufficient glenoid bone stock is superior as judged by multiple PROMs and range of motion metrics when compared with bone graft augmentation at minimum 2-year follow-up. In addition, when analyzed according to MCID and SCB thresholds, the use of augmented baseplates outperforms the use of glenoid bone grafting. Complication and revision rates also favor the use of augmented glenoid baseplates over glenoid bone grafting. Long-term clinical and radiographic follow-up is necessary to confirm that these promising midterm results are durable.

Baseplate retroversion does not affect postoperative outcomes after reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

There is concern that excessive glenoid component retroversion leads to altered biomechanics and baseplate failure in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). However, much of this has been rooted in the total shoulder arthroplasty experience. In the current literature, it is not well defined whether glenoid baseplate positioning in reverse arthroplasty affects functional outcomes. Our practice has been to preserve glenoid bone stock without aiming for a certain degree of retroversion. We aimed to evaluate the correlation between pre- and postoperative retroversion in a cohort of RSAs and determine the effect of glenoid retroversion on functional outcomes, range of motion, and postoperative complications.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who had an RSA between 2017 and 2019 was performed. Preoperative computed tomography scans were used to assess preoperative retroversion, and axillary radiographs were used for postoperative retroversion. Outcome measures included American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, visual analog scale for pain score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, range of motion, radiographic lucency, and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 271 patients were eligible for the study. There was a 76.9% 2-year follow-up rate. In total 161 patients had postoperative retroversion ≤15° (group A), and 110 patients had retroversion >15° (group B). There were no significant differences in American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, visual analog scale, or Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores. There were also no significant differences in postoperative range of motion. There was 1 baseplate failure in each group, and there was 1 patient in group B with asymptomatic radiographic loosening (baseplate at risk). The mean change in pre- to postoperative retroversion was 1° and 4° in groups A and B, respectively.

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in postoperative functional outcomes, range of motion, or complications between patients who had baseplate retroversion ≤15° vs. those who had retroversion >15°.

Considerations for Shoulder Arthroplasty Implant Selection in Primary Glenohumeral Arthritis With Posterior Glenoid Deformity

Glenoid deformity has an important effect on outcomes and complication rates after shoulder arthroplasty for primary glenohumeral arthritis. The B2/B3 glenoid has particularly been associated with a poorer outcome with shoulder arthroplasty compared with other glenoid types. One of the primary challenges is striking a balance between deformity correction and joint line preservation. Recently, there has been a proliferation of both anatomic and reverse implants that may be used to address glenoid deformity. The purpose of this review was to provide an evidence-based approach for addressing glenoid deformity associated with primary glenohumeral arthritis.

Mid- to long-term outcomes of augmented and nonaugmented anatomic shoulder arthroplasty in Walch B3 glenoids

BACKGROUND

In cases of severe osteoarthritis, posterior glenoid wear leads to acquired retroversion of the glenoid. Surgical treatment of glenoids with acquired retroversion and posterior humeral subluxation with anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) is controversial. The purpose of this study was to determine mid- to long-term outcomes and reoperation rates of augmented and nonaugmented aTSA for treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis with Walch B3 glenoid deformity.

METHODS

This observational cohort study reviewed patients with a Walch B3 glenoid undergoing aTSA at a single institution between 2007 and 2014. Patients were contacted to complete updated patient-reported outcome measures at a minimum of 6 years postoperatively. Outcome measures collected included the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES) score and Single Alpha Numeric Evaluation (SANE) score. Secondary outcomes included any additional surgery on the operative shoulder, patient satisfaction, and willingness to undergo aTSA again.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine patients met inclusion criteria, and thirty-five (89.7%) were able to be contacted for final outcomes evaluation. Mean follow-up was 8.7 years (range 6-13) after surgery. Sixteen patients were treated with an augmented glenoid component, and 19 patients were treated with a standard glenoid component. Of those with standard components, all were partially corrected with asymmetric reaming. At final follow-up, there were no statistically significant differences between those with augmented and standard glenoid components for mean ASES score (93.3 vs. 85.7, P = .217), ASES pain score (47.2 vs. 41.6, P = .161), SANE score (87.8 vs. 86.0, P = .692), and percentage patient satisfaction (95.6% vs. 96.8%, P = .735), forward elevation (148° vs. 149°, P = .852), or external rotation (36° vs. 39°, P = .202). No patient in either group had undergone revision surgery of the operative shoulder over the study period and all patients stated that they would undergo the same surgery again.

DISCUSSION

Both augmented and standard aTSA can provide satisfactory and sustained improvements in patient-reported outcomes in patients with acquired glenoid retroversion due to glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Despite a trend toward alternative treatment options, anatomic shoulder arthroplasty should remain a surgical consideration even in the setting of a Walch B3 glenoid deformity.