A comparison of patient-specific instrumentation to navigation for conducting humeral head osteotomies during shoulder arthroplasty

Three-dimensional planning, navigation, patient-specific instrumentation and mixed reality in shoulder arthroplasty: a digital orthopedic renaissance

Accurate component placement in shoulder arthroplasty is crucial for avoiding complications, achieving superior biomechanical performance and optimizing functional outcomes. Shoulder and elbow surgeons have explored various methods to improve surgical understanding and precise execution including preoperative planning with 3D computed tomography (CT), patient-specific instrumentation (PSI), intraoperative navigation, and mixed reality (MR). 3D preoperative planning facilitated by CT scans and advanced software, enhances surgical precision, influences decision-making for implant types and approaches, reduces errors in guide pin placement, and contributes to cost-effectiveness. Navigation demonstrates benefits in reducing malpositioning, optimizing baseplate stability, improving humeral cut, and potentially conserving bone stock, although challenges such as varied operating times and costs warrant further investigation. The personalized patient care and enhanced operational efficiency associated with PSI are not only attractive for achieving desired component positions but also hold promise for improved outcomes in complex cases involving glenoid bone loss. Augmented reality (AR) and virtual reality (VR) technologies play a pivotal role in reshaping shoulder arthroplasty. They offer benefits in preoperative planning, intraoperative guidance, and interactive surgery. Studies demonstrate their effectiveness in AR-guided guidewire placement, providing real-time surgical advice during reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA). Additionally, these technologies show promise in orthopedic training, delivering superior realism and accelerating learning compared to conventional methods.

Preoperative planning in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: plain radiographs vs. computed tomography scan vs. navigation vs. augmented reality

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has become a highly successful treatment option for various shoulder conditions, leading to a significant increase in its utilization since its approval in 2003. However, postoperative complications, including scapular notching, prosthetic instability, and component loosening, remain a concern. These complications can often be attributed to technical errors during component implantation, emphasizing the importance of proper preoperative planning and accurate positioning of prosthetic components. Improper baseplate and glenosphere positioning in RSA have been linked to impingement, reduced range of motion, and increased scapular notching. Additionally, the relationship between component positioning and intrinsic stability of RSA has been established, with glenoid component retroversion exceeding 10° posing a risk to implant stability. Adequate initial glenoid baseplate fixation, achieved through optimal seating and the use of appropriate screws, is crucial for long-term success and prevention of early failure. Factors such as lateralization and distalization also influence outcomes and complications in RSA, yet standardized guidelines for preoperative planning in these parameters are still lacking. Despite the impact of component position on outcomes, glenoid component implantation remains challenging, with position errors being common even among experienced surgeons. Challenges arise due to factors such as deformity, bone defects, limited exposure, and the absence of reliable bony landmarks intraoperatively. With the evolving understanding of RSA biomechanics and the significance of implant configuration and positioning, advancements in preoperative planning and surgical aids have emerged. This review article explores the current evidence on preoperative planning techniques in RSA, including plain radiographs, three-dimensional imaging, computer planning software, intraoperative navigation, and augmented reality (AR), highlighting their potential benefits and advancements in improving implant position accuracy.

Emerging Technologies in Shoulder Arthroplasty: Navigation, Mixed Reality, and Preoperative Planning

Shoulder arthroplasty is a rapidly improving and utilized management for end-stage arthritis that is associated with improved functional outcomes, pain relief, and long-term implant survival. Accurate placement of the glenoid and humeral components is critical for improved outcomes. Traditionally, preoperative planning was limited to radiographs and 2-dimensional computed tomography (CT); however, 3-dimensional CT is becoming more commonly utilized and necessary to understand complex glenoid and humeral deformities. To further increase accurate component placement, intraoperative assistive devices-patient-specific instrumentation, navigation, and mixed reality-minimize malpositioning, increase surgeon accuracy, and maximize fixation. These intraoperative technologies likely represent the future of shoulder arthroplasty.

Patient-specific instrumentation reduces deviations between planned and postosteotomy humeral retrotorsion and height in shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) may potentially improve humeral osteotomy in shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to compare the deviation between planned and postosteotomy humeral inclination, retrotorsion, and height in shoulder arthroplasty, using PSI vs. standard cutting guides (SCG).

METHODS

Twenty fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens were allocated to undergo humeral osteotomy using either PSI or SCG, such that the 2 groups have similar age, gender, and side. Preosteotomy computed tomography (CT) scan was performed and used for the 3-dimensional (3D) planning. The osteotomy procedure was performed using a PSI designed for each specimen or an SCG depending on the group. A postosteotomy CT scan was performed. The preosteotomy and postosteotomy 3D CT scan reconstructions were superimposed to calculate the deviation between planned and postosteotomy inclination, retrotorsion, and height. Outliers were defined as cases with 1 or more of the following deviations: >5° inclination, >10° retrotorsion, and >3 mm height. The deviation and outliers in inclination, retrotorsion, and height were compared between the 2 groups.

RESULTS

The deviations between planned and postosteotomy parameters were similar among the PSI and SCG groups for inclination (P = .260), whereas they were significantly greater in the SCG group for retrotorsion (P < .001) and height (P = .003). There were 8 outliers in the SCG group, compared with only 1 outlier in the PSI group (P = .005). Most outliers in the SCG group were due to deviation >10° in retrotorsion.

CONCLUSION

After 3D planning, PSI had less deviation between planned and postosteotomy humeral retrotorsion and height, relative to SCG.