Preoperative three-dimensional computer planning for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty and bone grafting for severe glenoid deformity

2020 ◽  
pp. 175857322090890
Author(s):  
Robert Z Tashjian ◽  
Lindsay Beck ◽  
Irene Stertz ◽  
Peter N Chalmers

Background Computer assisted planning without patient specific instrumentation may be utilized to guide reverse total shoulder arthroplasty baseplate placement. The purpose of this study was to determine the difference between planned and achieved inclination and retroversion correction with three-dimensional preoperative computer assisted planning in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty without patient specific instrumentation with bone grafting for severe glenoid erosion. Methods Preoperative three-dimensional computer assisted planning without patient specific instrumentation was performed on 15 patients undergoing primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with glenoid bone grafting for severe glenoid erosion. On preoperative and immediate postoperative computed tomography slices, two-dimensional retroversion and inclination were measured. Preoperative three-dimensional baseline retroversion and inclination and planned postoperative three-dimensional retroversion and inclination were measured. Planned and achieved version and inclination changes were compared. Results The planned and achieved retroversion corrections were 18° and 12°, respectively (p < 0.001). The planned and achieved inclination corrections were 11° and 11°, respectively (p = 0.803). Conclusions Three-dimensional computer assisted planning without patient specific instrumentation in the setting of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with severe glenoid erosion requiring bone grafting can accurately guide baseplate placement. All cases in which failure to correct retroversion or inclination within 10° of planning occurred in patients with severe erosion (B3 or E3 glenoids), therefore patient specific guides may be warranted in these cases to improve accuracy of implantation. Level of evidence Level IV, retrospective case series.

2020 ◽  
Vol 20 ◽  
pp. 78-86 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael-Alexander Malahias ◽  
Dimitrios Chytas ◽  
Lazaros Kostretzis ◽  
Emmanouil Brilakis ◽  
Emmanouil Fandridis ◽  
...  

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (8) ◽  
pp. 1441-1447 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lukas Ernstbrunner ◽  
Jean-David Werthel ◽  
Eric Wagner ◽  
Taku Hatta ◽  
John W. Sperling ◽  
...  

10.29007/hcd6 ◽  
2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexander Greene ◽  
Sandrine Polakovic ◽  
Christopher Roche ◽  
Yifei Dai

Placement of the glenoid component in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is of paramount importance and can affect a patient’s range of motion postoperatively. Preoperative planning and computer assisted surgery (CAS) can improve upon glenoid placement, but such systems for rTSA have experienced limited commercial success. Postoperative surgical reports from the first 1702 clinical cases of a commercially available CAS rTSA system were collected and analyzed for implant selection, implant placement, and incision start to incision close operative time, and compared to similar date cohorts for non-navigated cases. Navigated rTSA cases had a significantly longer incision time than non-navigated cases. Augmented glenoid components were used in a much higher percentage of navigated cases than non-navigated cases, suggesting that augmented glenoid components provide utility for correcting pathologic glenoid wear. The average resultant version and inclination of the implanted component increased with the size of augment used, suggesting there may not be a clear consensus on optimal version or inclination. Long term clinical follow up will need to be collected to determine if preoperative planning combined with more precise and accurate glenoid component positioning leads to improved clinical outcomes and implant longevity.


2021 ◽  
Vol 6 (3) ◽  
pp. 189-201
Author(s):  
Thomas Kozak ◽  
Stefan Bauer ◽  
Gilles Walch ◽  
Saad Al-karawi ◽  
William Blakeney

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) was originally developed because of unsatisfactory results with anatomic shoulder arthroplasty options for the majority of degenerative shoulder conditions and fractures. After initial concerns about RTSA longevity, indications were extended to primary osteoarthritis with glenoid deficiency, massive cuff tears in younger patients, fracture, tumour and failed anatomic total shoulder replacement. Traditional RTSA by Grammont has undergone a number of iterations such as glenoid lateralization, reduced neck-shaft angle, modular, stemless components and onlay systems. The incidence of complications such as dislocation, notching and acromial fractures has also evolved. Computer navigation, 3D planning and patient-specific implantation have been in use for several years and mixed-reality guided implantation is currently being trialled. Controversies in RTSA include lateralization, stemless humeral components, subscapularis repair and treatment of acromial fractures. Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:189-201. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.200085


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document