Inter and intra-system size variability of reverse shoulder arthroplasty polyethylene inserts

Q Medicine
M. Teeter, Matthew T. Dawson, G. Athwal
{"title":"Inter and intra-system size variability of reverse shoulder arthroplasty polyethylene inserts","authors":"M. Teeter, Matthew T. Dawson, G. Athwal","doi":"10.4103/0973-6042.174512","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: As the incidence of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) increases, so will the revision burden. At times, the revision surgeon may be faced with a well-fixed component on one side of the joint and revision implants from a different manufacturer. The ability to use glenoid and humeral implants from different manufacturers could simplify the revision procedure. This study hypothesized that across a range of RSA systems, some implants would demonstrate high size compatibility and others would demonstrate low compatibility. Materials and Methods: Six polyethylene inserts each from eight reverse total shoulder arthroplasty systems were examined (48 total inserts). All inserts were scanned using a laboratory micro-computed tomography scanner at 50 μm isotropic voxel spacing, and their surface geometries were reconstructed. The different implant geometries were co-registered, and the three-dimensional (3D) variability between the articular surfaces of the different implant systems was measured. Intrasystem manufacturing variability was also determined by measuring the 3D variability of inserts from the same system. Results: The intersystem polyethylene articular surface deviations between same-size systems were not significantly different (P = 0.61) and were a mean maximum of 60 ± 16 μm (range: 30-80 μm). Intrasystem manufacturing variability was equivalent between all but two models, averaging 49 ± 17 μm (range: 23-99 μm). Discussion: Differences in articular geometry between same-size inserts from different systems were on the same scale as intrasystem manufacturing variability, suggesting that different implant systems of the same nominal diameter could potentially be used interchangeably in revision or extenuating circumstances. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that surgeons can theoretically interchange same-sized implant components from the different RSA systems tested when conducting revisions.","PeriodicalId":51295,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Shoulder Surgery","volume":"10 1","pages":"10 - 14"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Shoulder Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4103/0973-6042.174512","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Background: As the incidence of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) increases, so will the revision burden. At times, the revision surgeon may be faced with a well-fixed component on one side of the joint and revision implants from a different manufacturer. The ability to use glenoid and humeral implants from different manufacturers could simplify the revision procedure. This study hypothesized that across a range of RSA systems, some implants would demonstrate high size compatibility and others would demonstrate low compatibility. Materials and Methods: Six polyethylene inserts each from eight reverse total shoulder arthroplasty systems were examined (48 total inserts). All inserts were scanned using a laboratory micro-computed tomography scanner at 50 μm isotropic voxel spacing, and their surface geometries were reconstructed. The different implant geometries were co-registered, and the three-dimensional (3D) variability between the articular surfaces of the different implant systems was measured. Intrasystem manufacturing variability was also determined by measuring the 3D variability of inserts from the same system. Results: The intersystem polyethylene articular surface deviations between same-size systems were not significantly different (P = 0.61) and were a mean maximum of 60 ± 16 μm (range: 30-80 μm). Intrasystem manufacturing variability was equivalent between all but two models, averaging 49 ± 17 μm (range: 23-99 μm). Discussion: Differences in articular geometry between same-size inserts from different systems were on the same scale as intrasystem manufacturing variability, suggesting that different implant systems of the same nominal diameter could potentially be used interchangeably in revision or extenuating circumstances. Conclusion: The results of this study suggest that surgeons can theoretically interchange same-sized implant components from the different RSA systems tested when conducting revisions.
反向肩关节置换术聚乙烯植入物的系统内和系统内尺寸变异性
背景:随着反向肩关节置换术(RSA)发生率的增加,翻修负担也随之增加。有时,翻修外科医生可能会面对关节一侧固定良好的部件和来自不同制造商的翻修植入物。使用不同厂家的盂骨和肱骨假体可以简化翻修程序。本研究假设在一系列RSA系统中,一些植入物会表现出高尺寸兼容性,而另一些则表现出低兼容性。材料和方法:从8个反向全肩关节置换术系统中分别检查了6个聚乙烯植入物(共48个植入物)。使用实验室微计算机断层扫描仪以50 μm各向同性体素间距对所有插入物进行扫描,并重建其表面几何形状。不同的种植体几何形状共同注册,并测量不同种植体系统关节表面之间的三维(3D)可变性。通过测量同一系统内刀片的三维变异性,还可以确定系统内制造变异性。结果:相同尺寸系统间聚乙烯关节面偏差无显著性差异(P = 0.61),平均最大值为60±16 μm(范围30 ~ 80 μm)。除了两种模型外,系统内部制造变异性在所有模型之间都是相等的,平均为49±17 μm(范围:23-99 μm)。讨论:来自不同系统的相同尺寸内嵌体之间关节几何形状的差异与系统内制造的可变性相同,这表明相同公称直径的不同内嵌体系统可能在翻修或减轻情况下互换使用。结论:本研究的结果表明,外科医生在进行翻修时理论上可以交换来自不同RSA系统测试的相同尺寸的种植体组件。
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
1.21
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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