Comparison of early and late aseptic baseplate failure in primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty with and without structural glenoid autograft.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS
Eddie Y Lo, Austin Witt, Alvin Ouseph, Paolo Montemaggi, Raffaele Garofalo, Alexander Sanders, Temilola Majekodunmi, Jeffrey Sodl, Sumant G Krishnan
{"title":"Comparison of early and late aseptic baseplate failure in primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty with and without structural glenoid autograft.","authors":"Eddie Y Lo, Austin Witt, Alvin Ouseph, Paolo Montemaggi, Raffaele Garofalo, Alexander Sanders, Temilola Majekodunmi, Jeffrey Sodl, Sumant G Krishnan","doi":"10.1016/j.jse.2024.05.038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) designs demonstrated high glenoid baseplate complication and revision rates. Although contemporary designs have reduced the incidence of glenoid baseplate failures, there are reports of elevated failure risks in RTSA with glenoid bone grafting within the first 2 years. This study aims to evaluate the incidence and etiology of aseptic glenoid baseplate failure with a contemporary central screw baseplate. The null hypothesis is that majority of the baseplate failure occurs within the first 2 years and that use of glenoid bone grafting does not lead to a higher risk of baseplate failure.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In 2014-2019, a total of 753 consecutive patients who underwent primary RSA using the same inlay press-fit humeral stem and monoblock central screw baseplate were retrospectively reviewed. Fracture and septic arthropathy cases were excluded. All patients underwent preoperative radiographic and computed tomographic evaluation. If there was significant glenoid erosion (Walch A2, B2, B3, C1, C2, E2, E3, and/or E4 variants), patient-specific structural glenoid bone grafting was performed. All patients underwent standardized radiographic follow-up, and failure was strictly defined as any hardware breakage and/or shift in glenoid baseplate position. Failures were defined as \"early\" if occurring within 2 years and \"late\" if occurring >2 years after surgery. Comparative analysis was performed to evaluate demographics, glenoid graft use, and graft union rates between the cohorts.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 23 patients with baseplate failures (23 of 753, 3.0%) at a mean of 23 months. Twenty-two failures (96%) occurred in patients who received structural glenoid bone grafting. Only 1 failure (0.2%) occurred when bone grafting was not indicated (P < .001). The most common failure pattern was associated with the B2 glenoid (16 of 23, 70%). There were 5 early failures (22%) and 18 late failures (78%). There were no differences in any patient demographic characteristics between cohorts. All 5 early failures had graft nonunion, and 4 of them occurred without trauma. In the 18 late failures, 9 (50%) occurred without trauma (P = .135). Seventeen of these patients had glenoid grafting, among which 9 (53%) had graft nonunion.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Contemporary RTSA glenoid baseplate designs have an acceptably low incidence of failure. However, the addition of structural bone graft to correct glenoid wear leads to higher aseptic baseplate failure rate. The majority of these patients suffer failure after the 2-year postoperative mark, highlighting the necessity of longer follow-up. Further analysis is necessary to quantify glenoid characteristics (severity of glenoid erosion, critical size of graft) associated with failure.</p>","PeriodicalId":50051,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2024.05.038","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Early reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) designs demonstrated high glenoid baseplate complication and revision rates. Although contemporary designs have reduced the incidence of glenoid baseplate failures, there are reports of elevated failure risks in RTSA with glenoid bone grafting within the first 2 years. This study aims to evaluate the incidence and etiology of aseptic glenoid baseplate failure with a contemporary central screw baseplate. The null hypothesis is that majority of the baseplate failure occurs within the first 2 years and that use of glenoid bone grafting does not lead to a higher risk of baseplate failure.

Methods: In 2014-2019, a total of 753 consecutive patients who underwent primary RSA using the same inlay press-fit humeral stem and monoblock central screw baseplate were retrospectively reviewed. Fracture and septic arthropathy cases were excluded. All patients underwent preoperative radiographic and computed tomographic evaluation. If there was significant glenoid erosion (Walch A2, B2, B3, C1, C2, E2, E3, and/or E4 variants), patient-specific structural glenoid bone grafting was performed. All patients underwent standardized radiographic follow-up, and failure was strictly defined as any hardware breakage and/or shift in glenoid baseplate position. Failures were defined as "early" if occurring within 2 years and "late" if occurring >2 years after surgery. Comparative analysis was performed to evaluate demographics, glenoid graft use, and graft union rates between the cohorts.

Results: There were 23 patients with baseplate failures (23 of 753, 3.0%) at a mean of 23 months. Twenty-two failures (96%) occurred in patients who received structural glenoid bone grafting. Only 1 failure (0.2%) occurred when bone grafting was not indicated (P < .001). The most common failure pattern was associated with the B2 glenoid (16 of 23, 70%). There were 5 early failures (22%) and 18 late failures (78%). There were no differences in any patient demographic characteristics between cohorts. All 5 early failures had graft nonunion, and 4 of them occurred without trauma. In the 18 late failures, 9 (50%) occurred without trauma (P = .135). Seventeen of these patients had glenoid grafting, among which 9 (53%) had graft nonunion.

Conclusions: Contemporary RTSA glenoid baseplate designs have an acceptably low incidence of failure. However, the addition of structural bone graft to correct glenoid wear leads to higher aseptic baseplate failure rate. The majority of these patients suffer failure after the 2-year postoperative mark, highlighting the necessity of longer follow-up. Further analysis is necessary to quantify glenoid characteristics (severity of glenoid erosion, critical size of graft) associated with failure.

初次反向肩关节置换术中有无结构性盂成形自体移植物的早期和晚期无菌基底板失败比较
简介:早期的反向全肩关节置换术(RTSA)设计显示出较高的盂基底板并发症和翻修率。虽然现代设计已降低了盂基底板失败的发生率,但有报道称,在最初两年内进行盂骨移植的反向全肩关节置换术的失败风险较高。本研究旨在评估使用现代中央螺钉基板的无菌性盂骨基板失败的发生率和病因。零假设是大多数基板失败发生在头两年内,而使用盂骨移植不会导致基板失败的风险升高:方法:回顾性研究了2014-2019年间连续753例使用相同的嵌体压配肱骨柄和整体中心螺钉基底板进行初次RSA手术的患者。排除了骨折和化脓性关节病病例。所有患者均接受了术前放射学和计算机断层扫描评估。如果存在明显的盂骨侵蚀(Walch A2、B2、B3、C1、C2、E2、E3 和/或 E4 变体),则进行患者特异性结构性盂骨移植。所有患者都接受了标准化的放射学随访,失败严格定义为任何硬件破损和/或盂基板位置移动。如果失败发生在术后两年内,则定义为 "早期";如果发生在术后两年以上,则定义为 "晚期"。对两组患者的人口统计学、髋臼移植物的使用和移植物结合率进行了比较分析:平均23个月后,有23名患者的基底板出现故障(23/753,3.0%)。22例失败(96%)发生在接受结构性盂骨移植的患者身上。只有1例失败(0.2%)发生在没有植骨指征的情况下(P结论:当代 RTSA 髋臼基底板设计的失败率较低,可以接受。然而,为矫正髋臼磨损而进行的结构性植骨会导致更高的无菌性基底板失败率。这些患者中的大多数在术后2年后就出现了失效,这说明有必要进行更长时间的随访。有必要进一步分析与失败相关的盂特点(盂侵蚀的严重程度、植骨的临界尺寸)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
23.30%
发文量
604
审稿时长
11.2 weeks
期刊介绍: The official publication for eight leading specialty organizations, this authoritative journal is the only publication to focus exclusively on medical, surgical, and physical techniques for treating injury/disease of the upper extremity, including the shoulder girdle, arm, and elbow. Clinically oriented and peer-reviewed, the Journal provides an international forum for the exchange of information on new techniques, instruments, and materials. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery features vivid photos, professional illustrations, and explicit diagrams that demonstrate surgical approaches and depict implant devices. Topics covered include fractures, dislocations, diseases and injuries of the rotator cuff, imaging techniques, arthritis, arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and rehabilitation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信