Efi Kazum, Jean Kany, Frantzeska Zampeli, Philippe Valenti
{"title":"反向肩关节置换术后的不稳定性:对 31 个病例的回顾性研究。","authors":"Efi Kazum, Jean Kany, Frantzeska Zampeli, Philippe Valenti","doi":"10.1007/s00264-024-06302-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>A retrospectively analyze of instability after RSA in terms of aetiology, treatment and final functional outcome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A bicentric retrospective study of 31 patients (mean age 67.6 years; 42-83) treated for RSA instability using RSA Arrow System (FH Orthopedics, Mulhouse, France), mean follow-up 41months (range 12-158). Aetiologies for dislocation were evaluated using a previously described classification system for RSA instability. Actions performed during the Revision Surgeries were analyzed and grouped into five categories. Clinical outcome measures included range of motion, SSV, VAS, Constant-Murley scores, satisfaction level and recurrence of instability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most frequent aetiology for RSA instability was loss of compression (18), followed by impingement (8) and loss containment (5). Total RSA revision (bipolar procedure) involving both distalization and lateralization occurred in 13 instances. Isolated distalization through the humerus was performed in ten patients and Isolated lateralization through the glenoid in three patients. Three cases of components exchange due to mechanical failure were noted. Bone graft was used in nine instances. Three patients (10%) suffered recurrent instability following Revision Surgery and required an additional stabilizing procedure. At final follow-up all 31 RSA were reported as stable with a mean VAS of 1.1, SSV 54.5%, constant score 48.3, constant ponderate 74.9%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The management of unstable RSA represent a challenge that can be successfully overcome with a revision surgery with compromised functional results. Loss of compression was the most common cause for primary and recurrent RSA instability that were treated principally with bipolar revisions involving component lateralization and distalization.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Instability after reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a retrospective review of thirty one cases.\",\"authors\":\"Efi Kazum, Jean Kany, Frantzeska Zampeli, Philippe Valenti\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00264-024-06302-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>A retrospectively analyze of instability after RSA in terms of aetiology, treatment and final functional outcome.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A bicentric retrospective study of 31 patients (mean age 67.6 years; 42-83) treated for RSA instability using RSA Arrow System (FH Orthopedics, Mulhouse, France), mean follow-up 41months (range 12-158). Aetiologies for dislocation were evaluated using a previously described classification system for RSA instability. Actions performed during the Revision Surgeries were analyzed and grouped into five categories. Clinical outcome measures included range of motion, SSV, VAS, Constant-Murley scores, satisfaction level and recurrence of instability.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The most frequent aetiology for RSA instability was loss of compression (18), followed by impingement (8) and loss containment (5). Total RSA revision (bipolar procedure) involving both distalization and lateralization occurred in 13 instances. Isolated distalization through the humerus was performed in ten patients and Isolated lateralization through the glenoid in three patients. Three cases of components exchange due to mechanical failure were noted. Bone graft was used in nine instances. Three patients (10%) suffered recurrent instability following Revision Surgery and required an additional stabilizing procedure. At final follow-up all 31 RSA were reported as stable with a mean VAS of 1.1, SSV 54.5%, constant score 48.3, constant ponderate 74.9%.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The management of unstable RSA represent a challenge that can be successfully overcome with a revision surgery with compromised functional results. Loss of compression was the most common cause for primary and recurrent RSA instability that were treated principally with bipolar revisions involving component lateralization and distalization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-024-06302-5\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-024-06302-5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Instability after reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a retrospective review of thirty one cases.
Purpose: A retrospectively analyze of instability after RSA in terms of aetiology, treatment and final functional outcome.
Methods: A bicentric retrospective study of 31 patients (mean age 67.6 years; 42-83) treated for RSA instability using RSA Arrow System (FH Orthopedics, Mulhouse, France), mean follow-up 41months (range 12-158). Aetiologies for dislocation were evaluated using a previously described classification system for RSA instability. Actions performed during the Revision Surgeries were analyzed and grouped into five categories. Clinical outcome measures included range of motion, SSV, VAS, Constant-Murley scores, satisfaction level and recurrence of instability.
Results: The most frequent aetiology for RSA instability was loss of compression (18), followed by impingement (8) and loss containment (5). Total RSA revision (bipolar procedure) involving both distalization and lateralization occurred in 13 instances. Isolated distalization through the humerus was performed in ten patients and Isolated lateralization through the glenoid in three patients. Three cases of components exchange due to mechanical failure were noted. Bone graft was used in nine instances. Three patients (10%) suffered recurrent instability following Revision Surgery and required an additional stabilizing procedure. At final follow-up all 31 RSA were reported as stable with a mean VAS of 1.1, SSV 54.5%, constant score 48.3, constant ponderate 74.9%.
Conclusion: The management of unstable RSA represent a challenge that can be successfully overcome with a revision surgery with compromised functional results. Loss of compression was the most common cause for primary and recurrent RSA instability that were treated principally with bipolar revisions involving component lateralization and distalization.