Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2019 / Cilt: 53 - Sayı: 3

Mid-term results with an anatomic stemless shoulder prosthesis in patients with primary osteoarthritis

Pages
170–174
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

These results are comparable with the results achieved with long-established arthroplasty designs.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The introduction of a stemless prosthesis in shoulder arthroplasty represents a novel design whereby the proximal humerus is restored anatomically, while leaving the diaphysis of the humerus untouched.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: The study included 38 consecutive patients (18 men and 20 women; mean age: 66 years; range: 55-81 years) treated with shoulder arthroplasty between 2009 and 2011 with TESS for primary glenohumeral arthritis.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:These results are comparable with the results achieved with long-established arthroplasty designs.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2009 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

Objective: The introduction of a stemless prosthesis in shoulder arthroplasty represents a novel design whereby the proximal humerus is restored anatomically, while leaving the diaphysis of the humerus untouched. The aim of this study was to present the mid-term results of total evolutive shoulder system (TESS; Biomet®), a stemless shoulder prosthesis. Methods: The study included 38 consecutive patients (18 men and 20 women; mean age: 66 years; range: 55-81 years) treated with shoulder arthroplasty between 2009 and 2011 with TESS for primary glenohumeral arthritis. Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) was performed in 28 cases (74%), hemishoulder arthroplasty (HSA) in 10 (26%). Constant score, active range of motion, patient satisfaction rate, and radiological assessment were analyzed. Mean time of follow-up was 37 months. Results: Constant score improved from 21.8 points (28.6 adjusted for age) preoperatively to 74.1 points (86.6 adjusted for age) postoperatively. Active range of motion increased significantly from the pre- to postoperative status. Eighty-nine percent were very satisfied or satisfied with shoulder replacement surgery. One cemented glenoid was revised due to aseptic loosening. None of the components were found to be loose at the final follow-up. No signs of stress shielding were seen. Conclusions: This study shows promising results of this implant concept in the short- to mid-term. These results are comparable with the results achieved with long-established arthroplasty designs.

🔖

Cite This Article

BÜLHOFF, M., SPRANZ, D., MAİER, M., RAİSS, P., BRUCKNER, T., ZEİFANG, F. (2019). Mid-term results with an anatomic stemless shoulder prosthesis in patients with primary osteoarthritis. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 53 - Sayı: 3, 170–174. https://ajindex.com/articles/353499

References (4)

  1. KhanA,Bunker TD, KitsonJB.Clinicalandradiologicalfollow-up ofthe Aequalis third-generation cemented total shoulder replacement: a minimum ten-year study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2009;91(12):1594e1600. https://doi.org/10.1302/ 0301-620X.91B12.22139. Raiss P, Schmitt M, Bruckner T, et al. Results of cemented total shoulder replacement with a minimum follow-up of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(23). https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.K.00580. e1711-10. Young A, Walch G, Boileau P, et al. A multicentre study of the long-term results of using a flat-back polyethylene glenoid component in shoulder replacement for primary osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93(2):210e216. https:// doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.93B2.25086. Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Schleck CD, Harmsen WS. Total shoulder arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for rheumatoid arthritis ofthe shoulder: results of303 consecutive cases. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16(6):683e690. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jse.2007.02.135. Boyd AD, Thomas WH, Scott RD, Sledge CB, Thornhill TS. Total shoulder arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty. Indications for glenoid resurfacing. J Arthroplasty. 1990;5(4):329e336. Matsen FA, Clinton J, Lynch J, Bertelsen A, Richardson ML. Glenoid component failure in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(4): 885e896. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.G.01263.
  2. Papadonikolakis A, Neradilek MB, Matsen FA. Failure of the glenoid component in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review of the Englishlanguage literature between 2006 and 2012. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(24):2205e2212. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.L.00552.
  3. Raiss P, Bruckner T, Rickert M, Walch G. Longitudinal observational study of total shoulder replacements with cement: fifteen to twenty-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(3):198e205. https://doi.org/10.2106/ JBJS.M.00079. Williams GR, Wong KL, Pepe MD, et al. The effect of articular malposition after total shoulder arthroplasty on glenohumeral translations, range of motion, and subacromial impingement. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2001;10(5):399e409. https:// doi.org/10.1067/mse.2001.116871. Jonsson E, Egund N, Kelly I, Rydholm U, Lidgren L. Cup arthroplasty of the rheumatoid shoulder. Acta Orthop Scand. 1986;57(6):542e546. https://doi.org/ 10.3109/17453678609014790. Boileau P, Sinnerton RJ, Chuinard C, Walch G. Arthroplasty of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006;88(5):562e575. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301620X.88B5.16466.
  4. Walch G, Bad