Varus-valgus alignment of humeral short stem in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: does it really matter?

BACKGROUND: The utilization of short humeral stems in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty has gained attention in recent times. However, concerns regarding the risk of misalignment during implant insertion are associated with their use. METHODS: Eight fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were prepared for dissection and biomechanical testing. A bespoke humeral implant was fabricated to facilitate assessment of neutral, varus, and valgus alignments using a single stem, and 10° was established as the maximum permissible angle for misalignments. Shift in humerus position and changes in deltoid length attributable to misalignments relative to the neutral position were evaluated using a Microscribe 3DLx system. The impingement-free range of motion, encompassing abduction, adduction, internal rotation, and external rotation (ER), was gauged using a digital goniometer. The capacity for abduction was evaluated at maximal abduction angles under successive loading on the middle deltoid. A specialized traction system coupled with a force transducer was employed to measure anterior dislocation forces. RESULTS: Relative to the neutral alignment, valgus alignment resulted in a more distal (10.5 ± 2.4 mm) and medial (8.3 ± 2.2 mm) translation of the humeral component, whereas the varus alignment resulted in the humerus shifting more superiorly (11.2 ± 1.3 mm) and laterally (9.9 ± 0.9 mm) at 0° abduction. The valgus alignment exhibited the highest abduction angle than neutral alignment (86.2°, P < .001). Conversely, the varus alignment demonstrated significantly higher adduction (18.4 ± 7.4°, P < .001), internal rotation (68.9 ± 15.0°, P = .014), and ER (45.2 ± 10.5°, P = .002) at 0° abduction compared to the neutral alignments. Anterior dislocation forces were considerably lower (23.8 N) in the varus group compared to the neutral group at 0°ER (P = .047). Additionally, abduction capability was markedly higher in varus alignment at low deltoid loads than the neutral alignment (5N, P = .009; 7.5 N, P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: The varus position enhances rotational range of motion (ROM) but increases instability, while the valgus position does not significantly impact ROM or instability compared to the neutral position.

Biomechanical Comparison of FiberLock Suspensionplasty and Flexor Carpi Radialis Ligament Reconstruction for Treatment of Thumb Carpometacarpal Osteoarthritis.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to compare the cyclic and load to failure characteristics of post-trapeziectomy suspensionplasty with the FiberLock Suspension System (FLSS; Arthrex Inc., Naples, Florida) to flexor carpi radialis ligament reconstruction (FCRLR). We hypothesized that the FLSS will have increased stiffness, yield, and ultimate load compared with FCRLR. METHODS: Ten matched pairs of cadaveric hands were used. One side of each pair was randomly assigned to receive the FCRLR or FLSS and the contralateral side received the other suspensionplasty. A complete trapeziectomy was performed followed by FLSS or FCRLR. Cyclic and load to failure characteristics were measured with loading in the distal to proximal direction. A preload of 1 N with 30 cycles of 1 N to 10 N was applied, followed by load to failure. A paired t test was used for statistical analysis (P < .05). RESULTS: The FLSS had significantly decreased nonrecoverable deformation and deformation at peak load during cyclic loading (P < .04). The FLSS also had significantly increased stiffness, yield load, ultimate load, and load and energy absorbed at 10 mm displacement compared with FCRLR (P < .04). All 10 FCRLR specimens failed with suture tearing through the tendon. Nine FLSS specimens failed due to suture slipping from the SwiveLock anchor (Arthrex Inc., Naples, Florida) and 1 failed due to the FiberTak anchor (Arthrex Inc., Naples, Florida) pulling through the index metacarpal. CONCLUSION: Suspensionplasty with the FLSS demonstrated greater structural integrity compared with FCRLR following trapeziectomy. The FLSS procedure may result in decreased thumb subsidence and decreased construct failure.

Do Magnets Have the Potential to Serve as a Stabilizer for the Shoulder Joint in Massive Rotator Cuff Tears?: A Biomechanical Cadaveric Study.

Background: Disruption of the rotator cuff muscles compromises concavity compression force, which leads to superior migration of the humeral head and loss of stability. A novel idea of using the magnetic force to achieve shoulder stabilization in massive rotator cuff tears (MRCTs) was considered because the magnets can stabilize two separate entities with an attraction force. This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical effect of the magnetic force on shoulder stabilization in MRCTs. Methods: Seven fresh frozen cadaveric specimens were used with a customized shoulder testing system. Three testing conditions were set up: condition 1, intact rotator cuff without magnets; condition 2, an MRCT without magnets; condition 3, an MRCT with magnets. For each condition, anterior-posterior translation, superior translation, superior migration, and subacromial contact pressure were measured at 0°, 30°, and 60° of abduction. The abduction capability of condition 2 was compared with that of condition 3. Results: The anterior-posterior and superior translations increased in condition 2; however, they decreased compared to condition 2 when the magnets were applied (condition 3) in multiple test positions and loadings (p < 0.05). Abduction capability improved significantly in condition 3 compared with that in condition 2, even for less deltoid loading (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The magnet biomechanically played a positive role in stabilizing the shoulder joint and enabled abduction with less deltoid force in MRCTs. However, to ensure that the magnet is clinically applicable as a stabilizer for the shoulder joint, it is necessary to thoroughly verify its safety in the human body and to conduct further research on technical challenges.

Biomechanical characteristics of a new looping stitch versus the classic Krackow stitch for distal biceps fixation.

Background: The purpose of this study was to quantify the biomechanical characteristics of a new looping stitch, developed with the concepts of a looping, locking stitch that decreases needle penetrations of the tendon, and compare it to a classic Krackow stitch for distal biceps suture-tendon fixation. Methods: The Krackow stitch with No. 2 braided suture and the looping stitch with a No. 2 braided suture loop attached to a 25-mm-length by 1.3-mm-width polyblend suture tape were compared. The Looping stitch was performed with single strand locking loops and wrapping suture around the tendon, resulting in half the needle penetrations through the graft compared to the Krackow stitch. Ten matched pairs of human distal biceps tendons were used. One side of each pair was randomly assigned to either the Krackow or the looping stitch, and the contralateral side was used for the other stitch. For biomechanical testing, each construct was preloaded to 5 N for 60 seconds, followed by cyclic loading to 20 N, 40 N, and 60 N for 10 cycles each, and then loaded to failure. The deformation of the suture-tendon construct, stiffness, yield load, and ultimate load were quantified. Comparisons between the Krackow and looping stitches were performed with a paired t-test using P < .05 as statistically significant. Results: The Krackow stitch and looping stitch had no significant difference in stiffness, peak deformation, or nonrecoverable deformation after 10 cycles of loading to 20 N, 40 N, and 60 N. There was no difference between the Krackow stitch and looping stitch in load applied to displacement of 1 mm, 2 mm, and 3 mm. The ultimate load showed that the looping stitch was significantly stronger compared to the Krackow stitch (Krackow stitch: 223.7 ± 50.3 N; looping stitch: 312.7 ± 53.8 N) (P = .002). The failure modes were either suture breakage or tendon cut through. For the Krakow stitch, there was 1 suture breakage and 9 tendons cut through. For the looping stitch, there were five suture breakages, and five tendons cut through. Conclusions: With fewer needle penetrations, incorporation of 100% of the tendon diameter, and a higher ultimate load to failure compared to the Krackow stitch, the Looping stitch may be a viable option to reduce deformation, failure, and cut-out of the suture-tendon construct.

Biomechanical consequences of glenoid and humeral lateralization in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: The objective of our study was to quantify the biomechanical effectiveness of lateralization in RTSA with respect to glenoid and humeral component configurations. METHODS: Eight cadaveric shoulders were tested in a custom shoulder testing system. Three parameters, including the glenosphere thickness, humeral tray offset, and insert thickness, were assessed by implanting 8 configurations on each specimen. Humeral position, maximum internal rotation, and maximum external rotation (ER) before impingement were quantified at 0° and 30° glenohumeral abduction. The adduction angle at which the humeral component contacted the inferior scapular neck and the abduction angle where acromial notching occurred were also measured. The simulated active range of motion, including ER and abduction capability, was tested by increasing the load applied to the remaining posterior cuff and middle deltoid, respectively. Stability was evaluated by the forces that induced anterior dislocation at 30° abduction. RESULTS: The thicker glenosphere affected only lateralization, whereas the centric humeral tray and thicker insert significantly affected humeral lateralization and distalization simultaneously. Greater adduction and ER angles were found in more lateralized humerus. A significant positive correlation between humeral lateralization and ER capability was observed; however, lateralization did not significantly improve implant stability in this cadaveric testing system. CONCLUSION: Lateralization is achievable at both the glenoid and humeral sides but has different effects; therefore, lateralized implant options should be selected according to patients' needs. Lateralization is an effective strategy for reducing adduction notching while increasing ER capability. Thicker glenospheres only affected humeral lateralization. The centric humeral tray would be selected for less distalization to avoid overlengthening, whereas an eccentric humeral tray is the most effective for distalization and medialization in reducing abduction notching to the acromion and for patients with pseudoparalysis.

Latissimus Dorsi and Teres major tendon transfer increases internal rotation torque following lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty with subscapularis insufficiency.

INTRODUCTION: Limitation of active Internal Rotation (IR) following Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty (RSA) in patients with massive Rotator Cuff Tears (mRCTs) with subscapularis insufficiency remains a challenge. Recently, RSA with Latissimus dorsi and Teres major (LDTM) transfer in patients with limited active IR has been demonstrated as a reliable treatment option. The purpose of this study was to biomechanically compare the IR torque following LDTM transfer with RSA in mRCT with subscapularis insufficiency to RSA without tendon transfer. METHODS: Eight cadaveric shoulders were tested (mean age: 64.5 ± 1.9 years) using a custom shoulder testing system that permits loading conditions of mRCT with subscapularis insufficiency. Two conditions were tested and compared. The first condition was RSA alone and the second condition was RSA with LDTM transfer. RSA with a medialized glenoid and lateralized humerus design was used for all specimens. The specimens were tested at 0°, 20° and 40° abduction at three different muscle loads: baseline, double, and triple, while the Teres minor and deltoid loads were kept constant. IR torque was measured with a torque wrench at 0°, 20°, and 40° abduction and 60° and 45° IR positions. Force required for anterior dislocation was measured at 20° abduction and 10° IR position. RESULTS: RSA with LDTM transfer had significantly higher IR torque at all abductions and muscle loading compared with RSA without transfer (average at all positions; RSA without transfer: 0.80 ± 0.02 Nm, LDTM transfer for all loads: 1.43 ± 0.10 Nm). RSA with LDTM transfer (91.4 ± 3.9 N) needed higher force for anterior dislocation compared to RSA alone (89.4 ± 4.1 N), but there was no significant difference. CONCLUSION: LDTM transfer with RSA increases IR torque compared to RSA without tendon transfer in a cadaveric model. LDTM transfer with RSA may be a reliable treatment option for patients with mRCT and subscapularis insufficiency who are expected to have limited active IR following RSA.

2022 Bernard Morrey Award: the elbow ulnar collateral ligament complex demonstrates region specific stretching and recovery characteristics with valgus loading.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to quantify the valgus laxity and strain of the elbow ulnar collateral ligament (UCL) complex after repeated valgus stretching and subsequent recovery. Understanding these changes may have important implications in improving strategies for injury prevention and treatment. The hypothesis was that the UCL complex will demonstrate a permanent increase in valgus laxity and region-specific increase in strain as well as region-specific recovery characteristics. METHODS: Ten cadaveric elbows (7M, 3F, 61.7 ± 2.7 years) were used. Valgus angle and strain of the anterior and posterior bands of the anterior bundle and the posterior bundle were measured at 1 Nm, 2.5 Nm, 5 Nm, 7.5 Nm, and 10 Nm of valgus torque at 70° of flexion for: (1) intact UCL, (2) stretched UCL, and (3) rested UCL. To stretch the UCL, elbows were cycled with increasing valgus torque at 70° of flexion (10 Nm-20 Nm in 1 Nm increments) until the valgus angle increased 8° from the intact valgus angle measured at 1Nm. This position was held for 30 minutes. Specimens were then unloaded and rested for 2 hours. Linear mixed effects model with Tukey's post hoc test was used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: Stretching significantly increased valgus angle compared to the intact condition 3.2° ± 0.2° (P < .001). Strains of both the anterior and posterior bands of the anterior bundle were significantly increased from intact by 2.8% ± 0.9% (P = .015) and 3.1% ± 0.9% (P = .018), respectively at 10 Nm. Strain in the distal segment of the anterior band was significantly higher than the proximal segment with loads of 5 Nm and higher (P < .030). After resting, the valgus angle significantly decreased from the stretched condition by 1.0° ± 0.1° (P < .001) but failed to recover to intact levels (P < .004). After resting, the posterior band had a significantly increased strain compared to the intact state of 2.6% ± 1.4% (P = .049) while the anterior band was not significantly different from intact. CONCLUSION: After repeated valgus loading and subsequent resting, the UCL complex demonstrated permanent stretching with some recovery but not to intact levels. The anterior band demonstrated increased strain in the distal segment compared to the proximal segment with valgus loading. The anterior band was able to recover to strain levels similar to intact after resting, while the posterior band did not.

Latissimus dorsi and teres major tendon transfer for irreparable anterosuperior rotator cuff tear improves kinematics and internal rotation compared to latissimus dorsi tendon transfer.

INTRODUCTION: Latissimus dorsi and teres major (LDTM) tendon transfer has demonstrated better clinical outcomes compared to Latissimus dorsi (LD) transfer for irreparable anterosuperior cuff (subscapularis/supraspinatus) tears; however, the biomechanical effects of these procedures are unknown. Therefore, the objective of this study was to compare kinematics and internal rotation of LDTM transfer to LD transfer for anterosuperior cuff tear. METHODS: Eight cadaveric shoulders were tested in four conditions; (1) intact, (2) anterosuperior rotator cuff tear, (3) LDTM transfer, and (4) LD transfer. Glenohumeral kinematics and internal rotation at 0°, 30°, and 60° of glenohumeral abduction in the scapular plane were measured. Muscle loading was applied based on physiological cross-sectional area ratios with three muscle loading conditions to simulate potentially increased tension due to the advanced insertion site of the transferred tendons. RESULTS: The anterosuperior rotator cuff tear leads to a significant superior shift of the humeral head compared to intact at 0° and 30° abduction (p < 0.039). Both the LDTM (p < 0.047) and LD transfers (p < 0.032) significantly shifted the humeral head inferiorly compared to the tear condition.; however, the LDTM transfer shifted the head in the anteroinferior direction compared to the LD transfer at 60° abduction and 30° ER (p < 0.045). Both LDTM and LD transfer significantly increased internal resting rotation (p < 0.008) and maximum internal rotation (p < 0.008) compared to anterosuperior rotator cuff tear and intact at 30° and 60° abduction. LDTM transfer resulted in a significant internal resting rotation compared with the LD transfer at 30° abduction with double muscle loading (p = 0.02). At 0° abduction, the LDTM transfer (p < 0.027) significantly increased maximum internal rotation compared to anterosuperior rotator cuff tear and intact. CONCLUSION: Although both LDTM and LD tendon transfer improved the abnormal humeral head apex position and internal rotation compared with the tear condition, the LDTM transfer was biomechanically superior to the LD transfer in a cadaveric model.

Biomechanical comparison of combined latissimus dorsi and teres major tendon transfer vs. latissimus dorsi tendon transfer in shoulders with irreparable anterosuperior rotator cuff tears.

BACKGROUND: Irreparable anterosuperior rotator cuff tears (IASRCTs) can result in a gradual loss of active elevation and internal rotation, superior and anterior translation of the humeral head, and cuff tear arthropathy. Joint-preserving treatment options for IASRCTs in young and high-demand elderly patients remain a subject of ongoing debate. The aim of the study was to evaluate the biomechanical efficacy of the combined latissimus dorsi and teres major tendon (LDTM) transfer and compare it to an isolated latissimus dorsi (LD) transfer in a cadaveric IASRCT model. METHODS: Eight cadaveric shoulders (mean age, 68.3 ± 5.2 years; range 58-71) were tested with a custom shoulder testing system. All specimens were tested at 0°, 30°, and 60° of glenohumeral abduction in the scapular plane under 4 conditions: (1) intact, (2) IASRCT, (3) combined LDTM transfer, and (4) isolated LD transfer. The superior and anteroinferior translation and subacromial contact pressure were measured. The effects of 3 different LD and LDTM muscle loading conditions were investigated to determine the effectiveness of the muscle transfer conditions. A linear mixed effect model was used for statistical analysis, followed by a Tukey post hoc test. RESULTS: IASRCTs significantly increased superior translation, anteroinferior translation, and subacromial peak contact pressure. Combined LDTM transfer significantly decreased superior and anteroinferior translation compared with IASRCTs in all positions and muscle loadings. Isolated LD transfer did not significantly decrease superior (P > .115) and anteroinferior translation (P > .151) compared to IASRCT at any abduction and muscle loads except superior translation at 60° abduction and 90° of external rotation (ER) (P < .036). LDTM transfer also significantly decreased peak contact pressure from the IASRCT condition at every abduction angle (P < .046). However, isolated LD transfer significantly decreased subacromial peak contact pressure only at 30° abduction and 0° and 30° of ER with triple loading (P < .048), as well as at 60° abduction and 90° of ER (P < .003). CONCLUSIONS: Combined LDTM transfer decreased superior translation, anteroinferior translation, and subacromial contact pressure compared with the IASRCT condition. Isolated LD transfer did not improve glenohumeral translation and subacromial contact pressure. Combined LDTM transfer may be a more reliable treatment option than isolated LD transfer in patients with an IASRCT.