Improved accuracy of K-wire positioning into the glenoid vault by intraoperative 3D image intensifier-based navigation for the glenoid component in shoulder arthroplasty

3D C-arm navigated suture button implantation for AC joint dislocations - the pilot study

PURPOSE

The surgical treatment of acute traumatic AC joint dislocations is still a subject of scientific debate in the literature. The arthroscopically assisted stabilization procedure with a suture button system has been successfully established and is widely used in daily practice. It is minimally invasive and allows the anatomical reconstruction of the torn coracoclavicular ligaments in one step with a permanent implant that does not have to be removed in a second operation. This clinical pilot study is the first to describe the new method of navigated suture button implantation with the future aim of further reducing surgical invasiveness and further increasing surgical precision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

10 patients with a Rockwood 3b/5 injury could be included in the prospective study (DRKS00031855) within 5 months according to inclusion and exclusion criteria. Surgical stabilization was performed with a suture button system via a navigated coracoclavicular drill tunnel. Demographic and radiological data as well as information on health and shoulder function were collected from patient records, X-rays, DVT scan and 3 questionnaires (DASH, NHS and Eq. 5D) at the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative (discharge, 6 weeks and 3 months) time points.

RESULTS

All operations could be performed within 8.8 days (± 6.81) after trauma. The average operation time was 50.3 min (± 8.81). The mean distance of the drill hole in the clavicle to the AC joint was 26.6 mm (± 2.63). The radiologically measured vertical coracoclavicular distance was 38.8 mm (± 6.16) at discharge and 41.11 mm (± 7.51) at 3 months. This loss of reduction was not statistically significant. In contrast, the DASH, NHS and Eq. 5D results showed significant improvement from discharge to 3 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Image-guided 3D C-arm navigated AC joint suture button stabilization is feasible in everyday surgical practice. It may be possible to achieve a further reduction in invasiveness while at the same time increasing the accuracy of implant positioning. Further clinical studies with a larger number of patients and a longer follow-up period are necessary to enable a comparison with conventional methods.

Advanced technology in shoulder arthroplasty

Background

Glenoid component positioning is an important and challenging aspect of total shoulder arthroplasty. The use of freehand technique with standard instrumentation or preoperative planning based on 2-dimensional computed tomography (CT) scans provides an opportunity for improvement in terms of component accuracy, precision, and deformity correction. These techniques have produced varying outcomes.

Methods

Preoperative planning software (PPS), patient specific instrumentation (PSI), and intraoperative navigation (NAV) have been developed to improve the accuracy of implant placement and deformity correction with the ultimate goals of improved patient outcomes and implant longevity. Literature search was conducted on published and available studies comparing the accuracy of glenoid component placement and improvements in surgical and patient outcomes amongst the aforementioned techniques.

Results

PPS, PSI, and NAV have demonstrated improved accuracy over freehand techniques with standard instrumentation. However, data demonstrating the clinical benefit and cost effectiveness of these new technologies are lacking.

Discussion

In this paper, we reviewed the evidence available to answer the question of whether or not advanced shoulder arthroplasty technologies have been beneficial and reviewed future technologies in development such as virtual/mixed-reality and robotic assisted shoulder surgery.

Level of Evidence

4.

The Value of Computer-Assisted Navigation for Glenoid Baseplate Implantation in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Glenoid baseplate malpositioning during reverse total shoulder arthroplasty can contribute to perimeter impingement, dislocation, and loosening. Despite advances in preoperative planning, conventional instrumentation may lead to considerable inaccuracy in implant positioning unless patient-specific guides are used. Optical navigation has the potential to improve accuracy and precision when implanting a reverse shoulder arthroplasty baseplate. This systematic review aimed to analyze the most recent evidence on the accuracy and precision of glenoid baseplate positioning using intraoperative navigation and its potential impact on component selection and surgical time.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses criteria. The PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were queried in July 2022 to identify all studies that compared navigation vs. conventional instrumentation for reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Data of deviation from the planned baseplate version and inclination, the use of standard or augmented glenoid components, and surgical time were extracted. Quantitative analysis from the included publications was performed using the inverse-variance approach and Mantel-Haenszel method.

RESULTS

Of the 2,048 records identified in the initial query, only 10 articles met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, comprising 667 shoulders that underwent reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The pooled mean difference (MD) of the deviation from the planned baseplate position for the clinical studies was -0.44 (95% confidence interval [CI], -3.26; p = 0.76; I2 = 36%) for version and -8.75 (95% CI, -16.83 to -0.68; p = 0.02; I2 = 83%) for inclination, both in favor of navigation. The odds ratio of selecting an augmented glenoid component after preoperative planning and navigation-assisted surgery was 8.09 (95% CI, 3.82-17.14; p < 0.00001; I2 = 60%). The average surgical time was 12 minutes longer in the navigation group (MD 12.46, 95% CI, 5.20-19.72; p = 0.0008; I2 = 71%).

CONCLUSIONS

Preoperative planning integrated with computer-assisted navigation surgery seems to increase the accuracy and precision of glenoid baseplate inclination compared with the preoperatively planned placement during reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The surgical time and proportion of augmented glenoid components significantly increase when using navigation. However, the clinical impact of these findings on improving prosthesis longevity, complications, and patient functional outcomes is still unknown.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, systematic review and meta-analysis. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Early clinical outcomes following navigation-assisted baseplate fixation in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Accurate placement of the glenoid baseplate is an important technical goal of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The use of computer navigated instrumentation has been shown to improve the accuracy and precision of intraoperative execution of preoperative planning. The purpose of this study was to compare early clinical outcomes of patients undergoing navigated RSA vs. a non-navigated matched cohort.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a prospectively collected shoulder arthroplasty database was used to identify 113 patients from a single institution who underwent navigated primary RSA with a minimum 2-year follow-up. A matched cohort of 113 non-navigated RSAs was created based on sex, age, follow-up, and preoperative diagnosis. Preoperative and postoperative range of motion, functional outcome scores, and complications were reported.

RESULTS

A total of 226 shoulders with a mean age of 71 years were evaluated after navigated (113) or non-navigated (113) RSAs. The mean follow-up was 32.8 months (range: 21-54 months). At the final postoperative follow-up, the navigated group had better active forward elevation (135° vs. 129°, P = .023), active external rotation (39° vs. 32°, P = .003), and Constant scores (71.1 vs. 65.5, P = .003). However, when comparing improvements from the preoperative state, there was no statistically significant difference in range of motion or functional outcome scores between the groups. Complications occurred in 1.8% (2) of patients undergoing navigated RSA compared with 5.3% (6) in the non-navigated group (P = .28). Scapular notching (3.1% vs. 8.0%, P = .21) and revision surgery (0.9% vs. 3.5%, P = .37) were more common in non-navigated shoulders.

CONCLUSION

At early follow-up, navigated and non-navigated RSAs yielded similar rates of improvement in range of motion and functional outcome scores. Notching and reoperation was more common in non-navigated shoulders, but did not reach statistical significance. Longer follow-up and larger cohort size are needed to determine if intraoperative navigation lengthens the durability of RSA results and reduces the incidence of postoperative complications.

Does fluoroscopy improve baseplate position compared to conventional technique in reverse shoulder arthroplasty? A preliminary study

Background

Accurate placement of glenoid component in reverse shoulder arthroplasty remains a challenge for surgeons of all levels of expertise; however, no studies have evaluated the utility of fluoroscopy as a surgical assistance method.

Methods

Prospective comparative study of 33 patients undergoing primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty during a 12-month period. Fifteen patients had a baseplate placed using the conventional "free hand" technique (control group), and 18 patients using intraoperative fluoroscopy assistance group, in a case-control design. Postoperative glenoid position was evaluated on postoperative Computed Tomography (CT) scan.

Results

The mean deviation of version and inclination for fluoroscopy assistance vs. control group was 1.75° (0.675-3.125) vs. 4.2° (1.975-10.45) (p = .015), and 3.85° (0-7.225) vs. 10.35° (4.35-18.75) (p = .009). The distance from the central peg midpoint to the inferior glenoid rim (fluoroscopy assistance 14.61 mm/control 4.75 mm, p = .581) and the surgical time (fluoroscopy assistance 1.93 ± 0.57/control 2.18 ± 0.44 h, p = .400) showed no differences, with an average radiation dose of 0.45 mGy and fluoroscopy time of 14 s.

Conclusions

Accurate axial and coronal scapular plane positioning of glenoid component is improved with intraoperative fluoroscopy at the cost of a greater radiation dose and without differences in surgical time. Comparative studies are needed to determine whether their use in relation to more expensive surgical assistance systems result in similar effectiveness.L evel of evidence : Level III, therapeutic study.

Does computer-assisted navigation improve baseplate screw configuration in reverse shoulder arthroplasty? A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

Introduction

Navigation technologies have improved accuracy and precision in positioning glenoid components during shoulder arthroplasty. The influence of navigation on baseplate screw placement has not been independently investigated. This study aimed to evaluate and synthesize the best scientific evidence on the influence of intraoperative navigation on the length and number of screws for primary baseplate fixation in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty procedures.

Methods

In August 2022, PubMed, Scopus, and Embase databases were accessed. We analyzed the screw purchase length, the number of screws required for the fixation of the baseplate, and the proportion of cases fixed with two screws in all clinical trials, comparing navigation to standard instrumentation for reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Following an evaluation of the heterogeneity of the studies, DerSimonian-Laird random-effects models were utilized to merge data from separate studies.

Results

The systematic search revealed a total of 2034 articles. After excluding duplicates and irrelevant studies, 633 shoulder arthroplasties from 6 trials were included in the analysis. The pooled mean difference in screw purchase length was 5.839 mm (95 %CI 4.496 to 7. 182) in favor of navigation (P < .001). In addition, significant differences were also found in the number of screws per case (- 0.547, 95 %CI -0.890 to -0.203, P = .002) and in the proportion of cases fixed with two screws (Odds Ratio 3.182 95 %CI 1.057 to 9.579, P = .040) in favor of the navigation group.

Conclusions

Intraoperative navigation improves the baseplate screw placement, allowing for a greater screw purchase length and fewer screws to achieve primary fixation of the glenoid component during reverse shoulder arthroplasty. It is unclear whether these improvements will increase the longevity of the prosthesis or the clinical outcomes of the patients.

Difference analysis of the glenoid centerline between 3D preoperative planning and 3D printed prosthesis manipulation in total shoulder arthroplasty

INTRODUCTION

Excessive version and inclination of the glenoid component during total shoulder arthroplasty can lead to glenohumeral instability, early loosening, and even failure. The orientation and position of the central pin determine the version and inclination of the glenoid component. The purpose of this study was to compare the differences in centerline position and orientation obtained using "3D preoperative planning based on the best-fit method for glenoid elements" and the surgeon's manipulation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-nine CT images of glenohumeral osteoarthritis of the shoulder were reconstructed into a 3D model, and a 3D printer was used to create an in vitro model for the surgeon to drill the center pin. The 3D shoulder model was also used for 3D preoperative planning (3DPP) using the best-fit method for glenoid elements. The in vitro model was scanned and the version, inclination and center position were measured to compare with the 3DPP results.

RESULTS

The respective mean inclinations (versions) of the surgeon and 3DPP were -2.63° ± 6.60 (2.87° ± 5.97) and -1.96° ± 4.24 (-3.21° ± 4.00), respectively. There was no significant difference in the inclination and version of the surgeon and 3DPP. For surgeons, the probability of the inclination and version being greater than 10° was 13.8% (4/29) and 10.3% (3/29), respectively. Compared to the 3DPP results, the surgeon's center position was shifted down an average of 1.63 mm. There was a significant difference in the center position of the surgeon and 3DPP (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The central pin drilled by surgeons using general instruments was significantly lower than those defined using 3D preoperative planning and standard central definitions. 3D preoperative planning prevents the version and inclination of the centerline from exceeding safe values (± 10°).

Navegação em cirurgia de artroplastia de ombro

The indication of shoulder arthroplasties has increased progressively. Accurate positioning of the components may have significant implications for clinical results. The navigation used to aid in the performance of anatomical and reverse total arthroplasties has provided greater precision in implant placement, especially on the glenoid. The development of the technique, material, and prosthesis design have shown encouraging results and led to a trend toward its expansion. In this way, we estimate a higher survival of the arthroplasties resulting from lower rates of dislocation and early loosening. We aim to describe the current technique and to present the results of the literature with navigation. However, comparative clinical studies with long term follow-up are necessary to prove the efficacy in the final results of total shoulder arthroplasties.

Three dimensional patient-specific guides for guide pin positioning in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: An experimental study on different glenoid types

INTRODUCTION

Incorrect positioning is one of the main factors for glenoid component loosening in reverse shoulder arthroplasty and component placement can be challenging. This study aimed to assess whether Patient-Specific Instrumentation (PSI) provides better guide pin positioning accuracy and is superior to standard guided and freehand instrumentation methods in cases of glenoid bone deformity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on the Walch classification, five different scapula types were acquired by computed tomography (CT). For each type, two different surgeons placed a guide pin into the scapula using three different methods: freehand method, conventional non-patient-specific guide, and PSI guide. Each method was repeated five times by both surgeons. In these experiments, a total of 150 samples of scapula models were used (5 × 2 × 3 × 5 = 150). Post-operative CT scans of the samples with the guide pin were digitally assessed and the accuracy of the pin placement was determined by comparison to the preoperative planning on a three-dimensional (3D) model.

RESULTS

The PSI method showed accuracies to the preoperative plan of 2.68 (SD 2.10) degrees for version angle (p < .05), 2.59 (SD 2.68) degrees for inclination angle (p < .05), and 1.55 (SD 1.26) mm for entry point offset (p < .05). The mean and standard deviation errors compared to planned values of version angle, inclination angle, and entry point offset were statistically significant for the PSI method for the type C defected glenoid and non-arthritic glenoid.

CONCLUSION

Using the PSI guide created by an image processing software tool for guide pin positioning showed advantages in glenoid component positioning over other methods, for defected and intact glenoid types, but correlation with clinical outcomes should be examined.

The Glenoid Vault Outer Cortex a new more accurate radiological reference for shoulder arthroplasty

Introduction: Correct positioning of the glenoid component is an important determinant of outcome in shoulder arthroplasty. We describe and assess a new radiological plane of reference for improving the accuracy of glenoid preparation prior to component implantation – the Glenoid Vault Outer Cortex (GvOC) plane. Methods: One hundred and five CT scans of normal scapulae were obtained. Forty six females and 59 males aged between 22 and 30 years. The accuracy of the GvOC plane was then compared against the current “gold standard” – the scapular border (SB). Measurements of glenoid inclination, version, rotation, and offset were obtained using both the GvOC and SB planes. These were then compared to actual values. Results: The mean difference between version obtained using the GvOC plane and the actual value was 1.8° (−2 to 5, SD 1.6) as compared to 6.7° (−2 to 17, SD 4.3) when the SB plane was used, (p < 0.001). The mean difference between estimates of inclination obtained using the GvOC plane and the actual were 1.9° (−4 to 6, SD 1.6) as compared to 11.2° (−4 to 25, SD 6.1) when the SB plane was used, (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The GvOC plane produced estimates of glenoid version and inclination closer to actual values with lower variance than when the SB plane was used. The GvOC may be a more accurate and reproducible radiological method for surgeons to use when defining glenoid anatomy prior to arthroplasty surgery.

Computer-Assisted Orthopedic and Trauma Surgery

BACKGROUND

There are many ways in which computer-assisted orthopedic and trauma surgery (CAOS) procedures can help surgeons to plan and execute an intervention.

METHODS

This study is based on data derived from a selective search of the literature in the PubMed database, supported by a Google Scholar search.

RESULTS

For most applications the evidence is weak. In no sector did the use of computer-assisted surgery yield any relevant clinical or functional improvement. In trauma surgery, 3D-navigated sacroiliac screw fixation has become clinically established for the treatment of pelvic fractures. One randomized controlled trial showed a reduction in the rate of screw misplacement: 0% with 3D navigation versus 20.4% with the conventional procedure und 16.6% with 2D navigation. Moreover, navigation-assisted pedicle screw stabilization lowers the misplacement rate. In joint replacements, the long-term results showed no difference in respect of clinical/functional scores, the time for which the implant remained in place, or aseptic loosening.

CONCLUSION

Computer-assisted procedures can improve the precision of certain surgical interventions. Particularly in joint replacement and spinal surgery, the research is moving away from navigation in the direction of robotic procedures. Future studies should place greater emphasis on clinical and functional results.

Clinical application of intraoperative O-arm navigation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Inaccurate fixation and positioning of the glenoid component using conventional techniques are problematic in reversed shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Our objective was to investigate the accuracy of O-arm navigation of the glenoid component in RSA.

METHODS

This retrospective case-control study comprised 2 groups of 25 patients who underwent reversed shoulder arthroplasty with or without intraoperative O-arm navigation. The intraoperative goal was to place the component neutrally in the glenoid in the axial plane and 10° inferiorly tilted in the scapular plane. Glenoid version angle and inclination were measured by computed tomography obtained preoperatively and a year postoperatively. Operative time, intraoperative bleeding, and the presence of postoperative complications were recorded.

RESULTS

Compared with the ideal, the range of error for version was 7.3° (SD 3.6°) in the control group and 5.6° (SD 3.6°) in the navigated group (P = 0.278), and the range of error for inclination was 18.3° (SD 11.7°) in the control group and 4.9° (SD 3.8°) in the navigated group (P = 0.0004). The mean operative time was 164.6 (SD 21.2) min in the control group and 192.0 (SD 16.2) min in the navigated group (P = 0.001). The mean intraoperative bleeding was 201.0 (SD 37.0) mL in the control group and 185.3 (SD 35.6) mL in the navigated group (P = 0.300). There were no complications reported related to the intraoperative O-arm navigation.

CONCLUSION

O-arm navigation may be a useful tool for the placement with inferior tilt of the glenoid procedure in reversed shoulder arthroplasty.

Glenoid component positioning and guidance techniques in anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Positioning of the glenoid component is one of the most challenging steps in shoulder arthroplasty, and prosthesis longevity as well as functional outcomes is considered highly dependent on accurate positioning. This review considers the evidence supporting surgical navigation and patient-specific instruments for glenoid implant positioning in anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for studies assessing glenoid implant positioning accuracy as measured by cross-sectional imaging on live subjects or cadaver models. Meta-analysis of controlled studies was performed to estimate the primary effects of navigation and patient-specific instruments on glenoid implant positioning error. Meta-analysis of absolute positioning outcomes was also performed for each group incorporating data from controlled and uncontrolled studies.

RESULTS

Nine studies, four controlled and five uncontrolled, with 258 total subjects were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis of controlled studies supported that both navigation and patient-specific instruments had a moderate statistically significant effect on improving glenoid implant positioning outcomes. Meta-analysis of absolute positioning outcomes demonstrates glenoid implant positioning with standard instrumentation results in a high rate of malposition.

DISCUSSION

Navigation and patient-specific instruments improve glenoid positioning outcomes. Whether the improvement in positioning outcomes achieved translate to better clinical outcomes is unknown.

Real-time intraoperative 3D image intensifier-based navigation in reversed shoulder arthroplasty- analyses of image quality

Background

Due to the high anatomical variability and limited visualization of the scapula, optimal screw placement for baseplate anchorage in reversed total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is challenging. Image quality plays a key role regarding the decision of an appropriate implant position. However, these data a currently missing for rTSA and were investigated in the present study. Furthermore, the rate of required K-wire changes for the central peg as well as post-implantation inclination and version were assessed.

Methods

In ten consecutive patients (8 female, 86 years, range 74–94) with proximal humeral fracture and indication for rTSA, an intraoperative 3D-scan of the shoulder with a 3D image intensifier (Ziehm Vision FD Vario 3D© [Ziehm Imaging GmbH, Nürnberg, Germany]) was performed after resection of the humeral head. Using the Vectorvision© Software (Brainlab AG, Feldkirchen, Germany), the virtual anatomy was compared to the visible anatomical landmarks. After implantation of the baseplate, a 3D scan was performed. All 3D scans included multiplanar reconstruction (MPR) and the cinemode to examine screw and baseplate placement. The rate of required K-wire changes was assessed. The intraoperative 3D image quality (modified visual analogue scale [VAS] and point system) was assessed before and after implantation of the glenoid component. Inclination and version were determined in post-implantation scans.

Results

The virtually presented anatomical landmarks always correlated to the anatomical visible points indicating an good virtual accuracy. The central K-wire position was corrected in three cases due to a deviation from the face plane technique position. The VAS was higher for the pre-implantation MPR (6.7, range 5–8) compared to the post-implantation acquired MPR (5.1, range 4–6; p = 0.0002). The point system showed a reduced quality in all subcategories, especially regarding the grading of the articular surfaces. The preoperative (7.9, range 6–9) and post-implantation (7.9, range 6–9) cinemode displayed no significant differences (p = 0.6).

Conclusion

The present study underlines the need for the improvement of 3D image intensifiers algorithms to reduce artifact associated impaired image quality to enhance the benefit of real-time intraoperative 3D scans and navigation.

Another Glenoid Measurements for Shoulder Surgery

Background

We analyzed the angle between the glenoid anterior surface and glenoid axis, the range of the glenoid apex and the location of the glenoid apex for assistance during shoulder surgery.

Methods

Sixty-two patients underwent a computed tomography of the shoulder with a proximal humerus fracture. In the range of the glenoid apex, the ratios of the distribution of triangles with a Constant anterior and posterior area of the glenoid were measured. The location of glenoid apex was confirmed as the percentage of the position with respect to the upper part of the glenoid with the center of the part, analyzed the angle between the glenoid anterior surface and glenoid axis was measured.

Results

The angle between the glenoid anterior surface and glenoid axis was 19.80° ± 3.88°. The location of the glenoid apex is 60.36% ± 9.31%, with the upper end of the glenoid as the reference. The range of the glenoid apex was 21.16% ± 4.98%. When the height of the glenoid becomes smaller, the range of the glenoid apex tends to become larger (p=0.001) and the range of the glenoid apex becomes wider (p=0.001) as the glenoid width narrows.

Conclusions

We believe the anatomical measurements of the glenoid will be helpful for a more accurate insertion in glenoid component. It is thought that more accurate insertion is possible if we can set other anatomical measurements using computed tomography imaging of the glenoid which can develop into the study of other anatomical measurements.