Early results of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using a patient-matched glenoid implant for severe glenoid bone deficiency.

BACKGROUND: Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) in the presence of significant glenoid bone loss remains a challenge. This study presents preliminary clinical and radiographic outcomes of primary and revision rTSA using a patient-matched, 3-dimensionally printed custom metal glenoid implant to address severe glenoid bone deficiency. METHODS: Between September 2017 and November 2018, 19 patients with severe glenoid bone deficiency underwent primary (n = 9) or revision rTSA (n = 10) using the Comprehensive Vault Reconstruction System (VRS) (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN, USA) at a single institution. Preoperative and postoperative values for the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, Simple Shoulder Test score, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score, and visual analog scale pain score and active range of motion were compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test with the level of statistical significance set at P < .05. RESULTS: Complications occurred in 4 patients (21%), including a nondisplaced greater tuberosity fracture treated conservatively in 1, intraoperative cortical perforation during humeral cement removal treated with an allograft strut in 1, and recurrent instability and hematoma formation treated with humeral component revision in 1. One patient with an early periprosthetic infection was treated with component removal and antibiotic spacer placement at an outside facility and was subsequently lost to follow-up. Eighteen patients with 1-year minimum clinical and radiographic follow-up were evaluated (mean, 18.2 months; range, 12-27 months). Significant improvements were noted in the mean Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score (57.4 ± 16.5 vs. 29.4 ± 19.5, P < .001), mean Constant score (24.6 ± 10.2 vs. 60.4 ± 14.5, P < .001), mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (32 ± 18.2 vs. 79 ± 15.6, P < .001), mean Simple Shoulder Test score (4.5 ± 2.6 vs. 9.3 ± 1.8, P < .001), mean Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (25.4 ± 13.7 vs. 72.2 ± 17.8, P < .001), mean visual analog scale pain score (6.2 ± 2.9 vs. 0.7 ± 1.3, P < .001), mean active forward flexion (53° ± 27° vs. 124° ± 23°, P < .001), and mean active abduction (42° ± 17° to 77° ± 15°, P < .001). Mean external rotation changed from 17° ± 19° to 32° ± 24° (P = .06). No radiographic evidence of component loosening, scapular notching, or hardware failure was observed at last follow-up in any patient. CONCLUSION: The preliminary results of rTSA using the VRS to manage severe glenoid bone deficiency are promising, but longer follow-up is necessary to determine the longevity of this implant.

Variations of magnetic resonance imaging findings in asymptomatic elbows.

BACKGROUND: Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) findings in asymptomatic patients have been described for hips, knees, ankles, shoulders, and intervertebral disks. No such description exists for the elbow. METHODS: MRI scans of 189 asymptomatic elbows divided into 3 groups by age (group 1, 20-39 years; group 2, 40-59 years; and group 3, ≥60 years) were evaluated for abnormalities within 13 anatomic structures using a novel classification system. RESULTS: At least 1 variation was found in all elbows. Of the 13 structures, 8 showed an increase in the prevalence and intensity of signal changes with aging, 2 remained the same, and 2 showed a decrease. One anatomic structure showed no variations in any elbow. CONCLUSIONS: Elbow MRI variations may be seen regardless of symptoms. These changes appear to increase in prevalence and intensity with age. Results from this study can be used to help guide the clinician in interpreting MRI findings of the elbow. We hope this study helps provide a contextual background for discussing MRI findings with patients and differentiating age-related variations from true pathology.