Showing posts with label 155 degree. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 155 degree. Show all posts

Sunday, May 12, 2019

Does humeral inclination matter in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty?

Can a functional difference be detected in reverse arthroplasty with 135° versus 155° prosthesis for the treatment of rotator cuff arthropathy: a prospective randomized study

These authors compared the postoperative range of motion, functional outcome, and rate of scapular notching in a randomized control trial of 100 primary reverse total shoulders with humeral inclinations of 135° and 155° at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively.

There was no difference in range of motion between the 2 groups. In the 155° group, forward flexion improved from 76° to 135° (P < .001) and external rotation remained unchanged (29° vs. 30°; P = .835). In the 135° group, postoperative forward flexion improved from 78° to 132° (P < .001) and external rotation was unchanged (28° vs. 29°; P = .814). The Simple Shoulder Test improved  from 3±2.7 to 7±2.2 in the 155° group and from 3±2.8 to 8±3.0 in the 135° group.
Scapular notching was observed in 58% of cases with a 155° inclination compared with 21% with a 135° inclination (P = .009).




The complications are listed below







The authors suggest that the lack of improvement in ER and high rate of scapular notching in their 135 group may therefore be explained by their use of a neutral glenosphere lacking lateral offset.

Comment: There are many variables to consider in selecting a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty design. Inclination (discussed in this article) is one, offset of the glenosphere is another. The discussion in a prior post seems relevant here: 



These authors observe that different techniques have been described to determine postoperative lengthening of the arm after reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. They evaluated the reliability of the acromiohumeral distance (AHD) in determining arm lengthening after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. 
The AHD was defined as distance between the most lateral part of the undersurface of the acromion perpendicular to a line parallel to the top of the greater tuberosity.

They studied 44 patients who had received a reverse shoulder arthroplasty, examining preoperative and postoperative radiographs on anteroposterior view in neutral rotation. 

Mean arm lengthening averaged 2.5 cm (range, 0.3-3.9 cm) according to AHD measurement. Significant differences in interobserver and intraobserver variability for postoperative AHD measurements were found (P < .01). The mean intrapatient difference was 0.5 cm (range, 0.02-1.5 cm). They concluded that the AHD is not a reliable measurement technique to determine arm lengthening after reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Two patients sustaining a fracture of the scapular spine were successfully treated conservatively; postoperative arm lengthening in these cases averaged 2.5 cm.

Comment:  These authors state "Reverse shoulder arthroplasty leads to arm lengthening." This is surely borne out by this study in which the average arm lengthening was one inch and the maximum lengthening was one and one half inch. This lengthening results in part from the nature of the reverse and in part from the technique of positioning the glenoid baseplate flush or below the inferior aspect of the glenoid and with some inferior inclination.

The inferior displacement of the humeral tuberosity results in an increase in the distance between the acromion and the greater tuberosity and carries the potential risk of acromial fatigue fracture (see this link) and  excessive traction on the brachial plexus (see this link). A recent article (see this link) concludes "Excessive arm lengthening should be avoided, with zero to two centimeters of lengthening being a reasonable goal to avoid postoperative neurological impairment."

We note that another way of assessing inferior humeral displacement is to look at the integrity of the Arch formed by the medial proximal humerus and the lateral border of the scapula. By comparing the preoperative and postoperative views one can see the discontinuity of the Arch in this particular case of reverse total shoulder.

 

We will leave it to the reader to decide if the normal shoulder has a Roman Arch like the Arch of Caracalla at Volubilis


Or a Gothic Arch like the portal of Notre Dame in Paris


Some refer to the Arch as "Shenton's line," but we know that the Shenton line is one drawn along the inferior border of the superior pubic rams and along the inferior medial border of the neck of the femur. 

Others refer to the Arch as "Bani's line" which was described in 1981 (Bandi W (1981) Die Läsion der Rotatorenmanschette. Helv Chir Acta 48:537-549). 

We like just calling it the Arch; any disruption is apparent.




An approach to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty that relies more on "East-West" soft tissue tensioning rather than only on "Southern" deltoid tensioning may reduce the amount of arm lengthening as shown by less disruption of the Arch.




=====
We have a new set of shoulder youtubes about the shoulder, check them out at this link.

Be sure to visit "Ream and Run - the state of the art" regarding this radically conservative approach to shoulder arthritis at this link and this link

Use the "Search" box to the right to find other topics of interest to you.

Sunday, July 17, 2016

Reverse total shoulder - the effect of implant design on external rotation range of motion

The Effect of Humeral Inclination on Range of Motion in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review.


These authors conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating reverse total shoulders (RTSA) that reported the type of prosthesis as well as active postoperative ROM at a minimum of 12 months after surgery. Preoperative range of motion, postoperative range of motion and the difference in range of motion was compared between RTSA humeral components with cup inclination 135° and 155°.



Sixty-five studies with 3302 patients (3434 shoulders; 1211 in the 135° group and 2223 in the 155° group) were included. 

Patients in the 135° group had significantly greater improvement in external rotation (P < .001) and significantly more overall external rotation compared to the 155° group. No significant difference were found between the 135° and 155° groups in range of motion improvements in forward elevation or abduction.

Comment: As the authors point out, the 135° neck shaft angle humeral prosthesis is usually used with a laterally offset glenosphere

whereas the 155° humeral prosthesis is usually used with a medialized glenosphere
So the effects of the humeral neck shaft angle may not be separable from the effects of the glenosphere design.

While the authors do not suggest why the 135° neck shaft angle humeral prosthesis is associated with more rotation, it is possible that the steeper angle and the lateral glenosphere offset reduce the risk of humeral abutment against the glenoid in external rotation as suggested by this axillary view.


Our approach to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty is shown in this link. Our goal, whenever possible, is a cementless impaction grafted humeral stem with a 135 degree angle and a laterally offset glenopshere securely fixed with screws in the high quality bone at the base of the subscapularis fossa with minimal inferior placement to avoid excess tension on the acromion and the brachial plexus. This combination may allow for a greater range of external rotation.

===



Use the "Search" box to the right to find other topics of interest to you.

You may be interested in some of our most visited web pages including:shoulder arthritis, total shoulder, ream and runreverse total shoulderCTA arthroplasty, and rotator cuff surgery as well as the 'ream and run essentials'