Factors Influencing Appropriate Implant Selection and Position in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

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.

[Conversion of anatomic to reverse shoulder arthroplasty : Does it make sense?]

We can observe increasing numbers for the implantation of shoulder endoprostheses in developed industrial countries. This is accompanied by a certain number of revision surgeries. The conversion to reverse arthroplasty systems is by far the most common revision procedure. Depending on the primary implant and the individual situation, the surgical effort and consumption of resources can be substantial. Particularly favorable revision scenarios exist in the conversion of stemless primary implants that are part of a platform system and allow a partial exchange and easy conversion from anatomical to reverse implants.

Medium- to Long-Term Outcomes after Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty with a Standard Long Stem

Background: Long-term clinical and radiographic outcome data after standard cemented long-stem reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) remain underreported. The aim of this study is to report on medium- to long-term data of patients over 60 years of age. Methods: The same type of RSA (Aequalis Reverse II, Memphis, TN, USA) was implanted in 27 patients with a mean age of 73 years (range 61−84). Indications for RSA were cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) in 25 cases and osteoarthritis (OA) in two cases. Pre- and postoperative Constant Score was assessed and component loosening, polyethylene wear, scapular notching and revision rates were recorded at a mean clinical follow-up (FU) of 127.6 months (SD ± 33.7; range 83−185). Results: The mean-adjusted CS (aCS) improved from 30.0 (range 10−59) to 95.0 (range 33−141) points (p < 0.001). Glenoid loosening was found in two (9.1%) and stem loosening was found in three (13.6%) cases. Polyethylene wear was observed in four (18.2%) cases. Scapular notching appeared in 15 (68.2%) cases but was not associated with poor aCS (p = 0.423), high levels of pain (p = 0.798) or external rotation (p = 0.229). Revision surgery was necessary in three (11.1%) cases. Conclusions: RSA with a cemented standard long stem leads to improvement in forward elevation, abduction and pain after a mean FU of 10 years. However, external rotation does not improve with this prosthetic design. Moreover, scapular notching is observed in the majority of cases, and revision rates (11.1%) as well as humeral loosening rates (13.6%) remain a concern. Level of evidence: Level 4, retrospective cohort study.