SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2021 / Cilt: 55 - Sayı: 6

Does correction of reverse shoulder arthroplasty angle improve clinical outcomes in cuff tear arthropathy?

Murat Sarıkaş
Vahdet Uçan
Anıl Pulatkan
Mehmet Kapıcıoğlu
Kerem Bilsel
Pages
466–472
Publication Date
2022-10-10
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)

It was found that patients with good postoperative functional scores tended to have an RSA angle of 0-10° postoperatively.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of correction of the reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) angle on clinical outcomes in patients with cuff tear arthropathy (CTA).
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: This single-center retrospective study was conducted in patients with CTA treated with RSA between 2013 and 2018.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:It was found that patients with good postoperative functional scores tended to have an RSA angle of 0-10° postoperatively.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2013 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of correction of the reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) angle on clinical outcomes in patients with cuff tear arthropathy (CTA). Methods: This single-center retrospective study was conducted in patients with CTA treated with RSA between 2013 and 2018. A structured questionnaire collecting demographic data, postoperative follow-up time, pre- and postoperative range of motion (ROM), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) and Constant functional scores as well as scapular notching according to the Sirveaux Classification and RSA angle were evaluated by independent observers. The association between functional outcomes and RSA angle was analyzed using a curve estimation approach. Results: Seventy-four patients with a mean age of 69.4 ± 8 years and mean follow-up period of 38.2 ± 10.8 months were included the study. The medialized inlay component was implanted in 35 patients, and the lateralized onlay component was used in 39 patients. The mean preoperative ASES and Constant scores improved from 28.4 ± 5.1 and 31.1 ± 5.9 to 73.4 ± 23.3 and 70.5 ± 16, respectively, at the last follow-up (both P < 0.001). The mean pre- and postoperative RSA angles were measured to be 21.3 ± 9.3° and 5.5 ± 10.1°, respectively, on X-ray. The postoperative RSA angle was 10.4 ± 10.3° in computerized tomography (CT) scans. There was an excellent correlation between X-ray and CT measurements (rs: 0.971, P < 0.001). It was found that patients with good postoperative functional scores tended to have an RSA angle of 0-10° postoperatively. The delta internal rotation of the medialized design group was greater than that of the lateralized design group (P = 0.029). Conclusion: In patients undergoing RSA for CTA, satisfactory clinical outcomes can be obtained by achieving a postoperative RSA angle of 0-10° with an asymmetrical inferior reaming technique.

🔖

Cite This Article

Sarıkaş, M., Uçan, V., Pulatkan, A., Kapıcıoğlu, M., Bilsel, K. (2022). Does correction of reverse shoulder arthroplasty angle improve clinical outcomes in cuff tear arthropathy?. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 55 - Sayı: 6, 466–472. https://ajindex.com/articles/428003

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (3)

  1. Grammont PTP, Laffay JP, Deries X. Concept study and realization of a new total shoulder prosthesis. Rhumatologie. 1987;39 (1):407-418
  2. Familiari F, Rojas J, Nedim Doral M, Huri G, McFarland EG. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. EFORT Open Rev. 2018;3(2):58-69. 10.1302/2058-5241. 3.170044 3. Rugg CM, Coughlan MJ, Lansdown DA. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: Biomechanics and indications. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2019;12(4):542- 553. 10.1007/s12178-019-09586-y 4. Boileau P, Moineau G, Roussanne Y, O’Shea K. Bony increased-offset reversed shoulder arthroplasty: Minimizing scapular impingement while maximizing glenoid fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(9):2558-2567. 10.1007/ s11999-011-1775-4 5. Dilisio MF, Warner JJ, Walch G. Accuracy of the subchondral smile and surface referencing techniques in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Orthopedics. 2016;39 (4):e615-620. 10.3928/01477447-20160610-04 6. Edwards TB, Trappey GJ, Riley C, O’Connor DP, Elkousy HA, Gartsman GM. Inferior tilt of the glenoid component does not decrease scapular notching in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: Results of a prospective randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21(5):641-646. 10.1016/j.jse.2011.08.057 7. Laver L, Garrigues GE. Avoiding superior tilt in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: A review of the literature and technical recommendations. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23(10):1582-1590. 10.1016/j.jse.2014.06.029 8. Nyffeler RW, Werner CM, Gerber C. Biomechanical relevance of glenoid component positioning in the reverse delta iii total shoulder prosthesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005;14(5):524-528. 10.1016/j.jse.2004.09.010 9. Boileau P, Gauci MO, Wagner ER, et al. The reverse shoulder arthroplasty angle: A new measurement of glenoid inclination for reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2019;28(7):1281-1290. 10.1016/j.jse.2018.11.074 10. Constant CR MA. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1. 1987;(214):160-164
  3. Michener LA, McClure PW, Sennett BJ. American shoulder and elbow sur- geons standardized shoulder assessment form, patient self-report section: Re- liability, validity, and responsiveness. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(6):587- 594. 10.1067/mse.2002.127096 12. Sirveaux F, Favard L, Oudet D, Huquet D, Walch G, Mole D. Grammont inverted total shoulder arthroplasty in the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis with massive rupture of the cuff. Results of a multicentre study of 80 shoulder