Primary and revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using a patient-matched glenoid implant for severe glenoid bone deficiency.

BACKGROUND: Severe glenoid bone loss in the setting of both primary and revision reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) continues to remain a significant challenge. The purpose of this study was to report on radiographic and clinical outcomes of primary and revision rTSA using a patient-matched, 3-dimensionally printed metal glenoid implant to address severe glenoid bone deficiency. This is a follow-up study to previously reported preliminary results. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on 62 patients with severe glenoid bone deficiency who underwent either primary or revision rTSA using the Comprehensive Vault Reconstruction System (VRS) (Zimmer Biomet) at a single institution. Preoperative and postoperative values for the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH), Constant, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), Simple Shoulder Test (SST), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores as well as active range of motion (ROM) were collected and compared using the Wilcoxon signed rank test with the level of statistical significance set at P < .05. The percentage of patients achieving minimal clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) was also calculated. RESULTS: Fifty-five of 62 shoulders (88.7%) were able to be contacted at a minimum of 2 years postoperatively, with 47 of 62 (75.8%) having complete clinical and radiographic follow-up with a mean age of 67.5 years (range, 48-85 years) and follow-up of 39.2 months (range, 25-56 months). There were 19 primary and 28 revision rTSAs. Significant improvements were seen in mean active forward flexion (63.1° ± 30.3° to 116.8° ± 35°), abduction (48.1° ± 16.1 to 76.2° ± 13.4°) (P < .001), external rotation (16° ± 23.7° to 32.1° ± 24.5°) (P < .005), DASH (59.9 ± 17.7 to 35.7 ± 24.3), Constant (23.4 ± 13.1 to 53.1 ± 17.4), ASES (27.8 ± 16.2 to 69.1 ± 25.2), SST (3.3 ± 2.5 to 7.6 ± 3.5), SANE (28.9 ± 18.3 to 66.7 ± 21.2), and VAS pain (7.1 ± 2.4 to 1.8 ± 2.6) scores (P < .001). MCID and SCB was achieved in a majority of patients postoperatively. The overall complication rate was 29.1%, with only 1 baseplate failure. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates promising evidence that the VRS implant can be used as a viable option to achieve clinically important improvement in a majority of patients treated for severe glenoid bone deficiency with rTSA in both the primary and revision setting.

Augmented baseplates yield optimum outcomes when compared with bone graft augmentation for managing glenoid deformity during reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a retrospective comparative study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to compare the outcomes of primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) using glenoid bone grafting (BG rTSA) with primary rTSA using augmented glenoid baseplates (Aug rTSA) with a minimum 2-year follow-up. METHODS: A total of 520 primary rTSA patients treated with 8° posterior glenoid augments (n = 246), 10° superior glenoid augments (n = 97), or combined 10° superior/8° posterior glenoid augments (n = 177) were compared with 47 patients undergoing glenoid bone grafting for glenoid bone insufficiency. The mean follow-up was 37.0(±16) and 53.0(±27) months, respectively. Outcomes were analyzed preoperatively and at the latest follow-up using conventional statistics and stratification by minimum clinically important difference (MCID) and substantial clinical benefit (SCB) thresholds where applicable. Radiographs were analyzed for baseplate failure, and the incidences of postoperative complications and revisions were recorded. RESULTS: The glenoid Aug rTSA cohort had greater improvements in patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and range of motion when compared with the BG rTSA group at a minimum of 2-year follow-up, including Simple Shoulder Test, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, University of California Los Angeles score, Shoulder Pain and Disability Index score, shoulder function, Shoulder Arthroplasty Smart score, abduction, and external rotation (P < .05). Patient satisfaction was higher in the Aug rTSA group compared with the BG rTSA group (P = .006). The utilization of an augmented glenoid component instead of glenoid bone grafting resulted in approximately 50% less total intraoperative time (P < .001), nearly 33% less intraoperative blood loss volume (P < .001), approximately 3-fold less scapular notching (P < .01), and approximately 8-fold less adverse events requiring revision (P < .01) when compared with the BG rTSA cohort. Aside from SCB for abduction, the Aug rTSA cohort achieved higher rates of exceeding MCID and SCB for every PROM compared with BG rTSA. More specifically, 77.6% and 70.2% of the Aug rTSA achieved SCB for American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons and Shoulder Pain and Disability Index vs. 55% and 48.6% in the BG rTSA, respectively (P = .003 and P = .013). CONCLUSION: The present midterm clinical and radiographic study demonstrates that the utilization of an augmented baseplate for insufficient glenoid bone stock is superior as judged by multiple PROMs and range of motion metrics when compared with bone graft augmentation at minimum 2-year follow-up. In addition, when analyzed according to MCID and SCB thresholds, the use of augmented baseplates outperforms the use of glenoid bone grafting. Complication and revision rates also favor the use of augmented glenoid baseplates over glenoid bone grafting. Long-term clinical and radiographic follow-up is necessary to confirm that these promising midterm results are durable.

Short-term outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty using a custom baseplate for severe glenoid deficiency.

HYPOTHESIS AND BACKGROUND: Complex glenoid bone loss and deformity present a challenge for the shoulder arthroplasty surgeon. Eccentric reaming, bone grafting, augmented glenoid components, and salvage hemiarthroplasty are common strategies for managing these patients. The glenoid vault reconstruction system (VRS; Zimmer-Biomet) is a novel solution for both primary and revision arthroplasty using a custom glenoid baseplate. We hypothesized that patients undergoing reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) with VRS would have acceptable short-term outcomes and complication rates. METHODS: Patients who underwent RSA with VRS for severe glenoid deformity or bone loss by one of 4 board-certified, fellowship-trained shoulder and elbow surgeons at 3 academic tertiary referral centers between September 2015 and November 2018 were eligible for inclusion. Patient data were obtained via medical record review and telephone questionnaires. The Numeric Pain Rating Scale (NPRS), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Standardized Shoulder Assessment Form (ASES), Penn Shoulder Scores, and range of motion (ROM) measurements were obtained pre- and postoperatively. Radiographs were reviewed at final follow-up for evidence of component loosening or hardware failure. Any complication was documented. Outcomes were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank tests with P <. 05 considered significant. RESULTS: Twelve shoulders (11 patients) were included with a mean age of 68 years; 7 were primary arthroplasties and 5 were revisions. At an average follow-up time of 30 months, median improvement in NPRS score was 7 points, SANE score 43%, ASES score 45 points, and Penn Shoulder Score 49 points. There were statistically significant improvements in median ROM measurements (forward elevation 20°, external rotation 40°, internal rotation 2 spinal levels). At final follow-up, all implants were radiographically stable without loosening. There were no complications. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that RSA using the custom VRS glenoid implant is a safe and effective technique addressing complex glenoid deformity or bone loss in both primary and revision settings. At short-term follow-up, all patient-reported outcomes and ROM measures improved significantly, and there were no complications. Future work should determine mid- and long-term outcomes, preferably in a prospective manner with defined patient populations.

[Shoulder instability: review of current concepts of diagnosis and treatment]. / Nestabil'nost' plechevogo sustava: obzor sovremennykh podkhodov k diagnostike i lecheniyu.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review of modern literature data on the modern approaches in diagnosis and treatment of shoulder instability. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Searching for literature data was performed using the Pubmed and Google Scholar databases. RESULTS: The authors analyzed the results of conservative treatment of patients with shoulder instability and emphasized higher risk of instability recurrence, degeneration of anatomical structures and functional impairment in these patients. Surgery is advisable to restore shoulder stability and normalize its function. Several methods for stabilizing the shoulder have been proposed.The approaches to diagnosis and treatment of shoulder instability have been updated. CONCLUSION: Successful treatment of shoulder instability is based on qualitative and complete assessment of soft tissues and bone structures. An individual approach considering bone tissue deficiency and individual needs of the patient is required.

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.

Is there a difference in outcome of arthroscopic iliac crest autograft and allograft in recurrent anterior shoulder instability?

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare outcomes of arthroscopic tricortical iliac crest autograft and allograft bone blocks for recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability in terms of bone resorption, union and recurrent instability and assess which one is a better graft choice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-two consecutive patients treated for recurrent traumatic anterior shoulder instability that required reconstruction with bone block were included in the study. Surgical reconstruction was carried out arthroscopically with contoured tricortical iliac crest autograft or allograft. At follow-up, patients were assessed for Oxford Shoulder Instability Score (OSIS), recurrent dislocation, apprehension testing, complications, and 3-dimensional computed tomography (CT) for resorption and union rate at a mean of 10.89 months. RESULTS: There were 10 patients in the allograft group with a median age of 27.7 years and a mean follow-up of 26.6 months. In the autograft group, there were 12 patients with a median age of 29 years and a mean follow-up of 28.7 months. The OSIS increased in both groups but was significantly higher in the autograft group (54.1 vs 48.2, p = 0.02). There were 2 failures in each group but no hardware complications. Allograft had higher resorption rate in comparison (75% in allograft vs 40% in autograft) and higher non-union rate (62.5% in allograft vs 16.5% in autograft). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that both tricortical iliac crest autograft and allograft can improve shoulder instability symptoms. However, the results suggest that autograft may lead to significantly improved instability score, higher union rate and less bone resorption. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV, retrospective study.

Mid-term results of reverse shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis with posterior glenoid deficiency and humeral subluxation.

BACKGROUND: Results of anatomic shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis with severe glenoid retroversion are unpredictable with a high rate of glenoid loosening. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has been suggested as an alternative, with good early results. We sought to confirm this at longer follow-up (minimum 5 years). The study hypothesis was that early results would endure over time. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all RSAs performed in 7 centers from 1998 to 2010. The inclusion criteria were primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis with B1, B2, B3, or C glenoid. Forty-nine shoulders in 45 patients fulfilled the criteria. Bone grafting was performed in 16 cases. Clinical outcomes were evaluated with the Constant score (CS) and shoulder range of motion. RESULTS: The mean total CS increased from 30 preoperatively to 68 points (P < .001) with significant improvements in all the subsections of the CS and range of motion. Scapular notching was observed in 20 shoulders (43%), grade 1 in 5 (11%), grade 2 in 7 (15%), grade 3 in 5 (11%), and grade 4 in 3 (6%). The glenoid bone graft healed in all the shoulders. Partial inferior lysis of the bone graft was present in 8 cases (50%). Scapular notching and glenoid bone graft resorption had no influence on the CS (P = .147 and P = .798). CONCLUSION: RSA for the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis in patients with posterior glenoid deficiency and humeral subluxation without rotator cuff insufficiency resulted in excellent clinical outcomes at a minimum of 5 years of follow-up.

Treatment of severe glenoid deficiencies in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: the Glenius Glenoid Reconstruction System experience.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of glenoid bone deficiencies in primary or revision total shoulder arthroplasty is challenging. This retrospective study evaluated the short-term clinical and radiologic results of a new custom-made patient-specific glenoid implant. METHODS: We treated 10 patients with severe glenoid deficiencies with the Glenius Glenoid Reconstruction System (Materialise NV, Leuven, Belgium). Outcome data included a patient-derived Constant-Murley score, a visual analog score (VAS), a satisfaction score, the 11-item version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score, and the Simple Shoulder Test. We compared the postoperative position of the implant with the preoperative planned position on computed tomography scans. RESULTS: At an average follow-up period of 30.5 months, the mean patient-derived Constant-Murley score was 41.3 ± 17.5 points (range, 18-76 points) with a visual analog scale of 3.3 ± 2.5 points (range, 0-7 points). The mean 11-item version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand score was 35.8 ± 18.4 (range, 2-71), and the mean Simple Shoulder Test was 47.5% ± 25.3% (range, 8%-92%). Eight patients reported the result as better (n = 3) or much better (n = 5). One patient had an elongation of the brachial plexus, and 1 patient had a period of instability. The average preoperative glenoid defect size was 9 ± 4 cm3 (range, 1-14 cm3). The mean deviation between the preoperative planned and the postoperative version and inclination was 6° ± 4° (range 1°-16°) and 4° ± 4° (range 0°-11°), respectively. CONCLUSION: Early results of the Glenius Glenoid Reconstruction System are encouraging. Adequate pain relief, a reasonable functionality, and good patient satisfaction can be obtained in these difficult cases. Further follow-up will determine the bony ingrowth and subsequent longevity of this patient-specific glenoid component.

Benefits of a metallic lateralized baseplate prolonged by a long metallic post in reverse shoulder arthroplasty to address glenoid bone loss.

BACKGROUND: Severe glenoid bone loss remains a surgical challenge. This condition is known to be associated with high rates of glenoid component failure. PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to evaluate clinical and radiological outcomes of a lateralized metal-backed 15.2-mm keeled baseplate prolonged by a thin 24.8-mm metallic post fixed directly in the subscapularis fossa in primary cases of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for severe glenoid bone loss and in revision cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 2011 and December 2014, 51 shoulders (50 patients) underwent primary or revision RSA using this baseplate. Forty-five shoulders in 44 patients were followed for a minimum of two years (mean, 33 months; range, 24-60 months). The mean age of the patients was 76 years (range, 55-93 years). Outcome measures included pain, range of motion, Constant Score, and complications. RESULTS: The complication rate was 12% in primary cases and 25% in revision cases. One glenoid implant (4%) failed in primary cases and one glenoid implant (5%) failed in revision cases. Pain and range of motion were significantly improved in both groups. The mean Constant Score improved from 24 (± 7) to 62 (± 9) in primary cases and from 24 (± 10) to 58 (± 12) in revision cases. CONCLUSION: A lateralized metal-backed 15.2-mm keeled baseplate prolonged by a thin 24.8-mm metallic post fixed directly in the subscapularis fossa may provide satisfactory mid-term outcomes in patients with large glenoid bone defects where initial press-fit of a regular baseplate is impossible to obtain.

Arthroscopic posterior bone block stabilization-early results of an effective procedure for the recurrent posterior instability.

PURPOSE: In the current study the clinical outcome of an arthroscopic posterior bone block augmentation in combination with a posterior capsular repair was investigated. METHODS: Twenty-four shoulders (18 patients) with unidirectional posterior shoulder instability were treated with an arthroscopic posterior bone block and capsular reconstruction. The mean follow up period was 26 months. The patients were examined pre- and postoperatively using the Constant-Murley score, the Rowe score, Walch-Duplay score and Western Ontario Shoulder index. RESULTS: At the follow up examination 21 shoulders were classified to be stable, while one patient reported a single redislocation and two further patients reported recurrent posterior subluxation or posterior apprehension. Thus, the recurrence rate was defined to be 12.5%. The Rowe-Score significantly improved from 50 points preoperatively to 75 points postoperatively (p = 0.0003). The WOSI-score significantly improved from 37% preoperatively to 66% postoperatively (p = 0.0001). Revision surgery commonly was required for screw removal. CONCLUSION: The early clinical results of this arthroscopic bone block augmentation and capsular repair are promising. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.

Primary shoulder arthroplasty using a custom-made hip-inspired implant for the treatment of advanced glenohumeral arthritis in the presence of severe glenoid bone loss.

BACKGROUND: Total shoulder arthroplasty for end-stage glenohumeral arthritis with severe glenoid bone loss poses a unique challenge for shoulder surgeons. Current surgical solutions are limited and associated with high complication rates. We hypothesized that a custom-made computer-aided design-computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) total shoulder replacement (TSR; Stanmore Implants Worldwide, Elstree, UK) resembling a total hip prosthesis could offer a reliable alternative for this challenging subset of patients. METHODS: Thirty-seven patients with rotator cuff-deficient end-stage glenohumeral arthritis and severe glenoid bone loss (assessed as not amenable to treatment with standard anatomic or reverse total shoulder implants) were treated with the CAD-CAM TSR between 2006 and 2013. Clinical data were collected prospectively and analyzed at a mean follow-up of 5 years. RESULTS: Postoperatively, the pain level with activity decreased from 9.2 ± 1.7 to 2.4 ± 2.9 (P < .001). The Oxford Shoulder Score improved from 11 ± 8 points to 27 ± 11 points (P < .001), and the Subjective Shoulder Value (on a 0%-100% scale) improved from 23% ± 14% to 60% ± 24% (P < .001). Active forward elevation improved from 39° ± 23° to 63° ± 38° (P < .001), and external rotation improved from 6° ± 16° to 15° ± 17° (P = .001). Component revision was required in 6 of 37 patients (16%) (glenoid loosening in 1, humeral stem loosening in 3, periprosthetic fracture in 1, and prosthesis dislocation in 1). CONCLUSION: The CAD-CAM TSR offers a reliable alternative for the treatment of end-stage glenohumeral arthritis with severe glenoid deficiency not amenable to standard anatomic or reverse total shoulder implants, with maintenance of significant pain relief and clinical-functional improvement at 5-year postoperative follow-up.

Total shoulder arthroplasty using an inlay mini-glenoid component for glenoid deficiency: a 2-year follow-up of 9 shoulders in 7 patients.

BACKGROUND: Glenoid bone loss and severe retroversion can pose difficulties when implanting a glenoid component for total shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis. Mini-glenoid implants may be useful in the setting of severe glenoid wear in which a standard pegged glenoid component cannot be placed. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This study is a retrospective review, performed over a 3-year period, of patients who received a total shoulder arthroplasty using an inset mini-glenoid in the setting of severe glenoid dysplasia and/or medial glenoid bone loss. We identified patients with a minimum of 2 years' follow-up and evaluated preoperative and postoperative range of motion, visual analog scale scores, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores, complications, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Seven patients (4 female and 3 male patients; 9 shoulders) with a mean age of 66 years were treated with the described procedure and had a mean follow-up of 34 months. There were 6 primary arthroplasties and 3 revision cases. Four shoulders were classified as Walch type A2 glenoids, 2 were classified as Walch type C, and 3 were unable to be classified. There was a statistically significant increase in range of motion (forward elevation, 48°; external rotation, 14°), decrease in pain scores (8 points to 1 point), and improvement in Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores (31.7% to 89.4%). The mean patient satisfaction score was 8.6 points on a 10-point scale. CONCLUSION: At 2-year follow-up, total shoulder arthroplasty with a mini-glenoid component can offer adequate pain relief and functional results in the setting of glenoid bone loss or severe retroversion.

Structural bone grafting for glenoid deficiency in primary total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Glenoid bone grafting can be useful to restore an asymmetrically eroded glenoid to better support the glenoid component and improve positioning. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the clinical and radiographic results of patients undergoing structural bone grafting for glenoid deficiency with placement of a cemented glenoid component during primary total shoulder arthroplasty. METHODS: Between January 1, 1976, and December 31, 2008, 24 patients (25 shoulders) of 2607 shoulders undergoing primary total shoulder arthroplasty (0.96%) had structural bone grafting with a humeral head autograft and screw fixation. The mean clinical follow-up was 8.7 years, and the mean radiographic follow-up was 7.6 years. RESULTS: Twenty-three shoulders experienced pain relief, and patients expressed satisfaction with the operation in these shoulders. Postoperative active elevation averaged 148°, and external rotation with the arm at the side averaged 60°. On radiographic evaluation, 10 shoulders had glenoids at risk for component loosening. Two of these shoulders were symptomatic and underwent revision surgery to address glenoid component loosening. The Neer result rating was excellent in 18 shoulders, satisfactory in 5, and unsatisfactory in the 2 shoulders undergoing revision. CONCLUSION: Structural bone grafting in primary total shoulder arthroplasty is uncommonly necessary. When it is performed, the clinical outcomes are favorable; however, radiographic analysis shows a moderate rate of failure of glenoid component fixation. It seems likely that alternative treatment methods may prove to be more effective in addressing glenoid wear.

Revision arthroplasty with a hip-inspired computer-assisted design/computer-assisted manufacturing implant for glenoid-deficient shoulders.

BACKGROUND: Revision arthroplasty for failed post-traumatic humeral head replacement associated with rotator cuff and glenoid deficiency is challenging. Current surgical solutions are fraught with complications, and no best-practice strategy has been established. We hypothesized that the computer-assisted design/computer-assisted manufacturing (CAD/CAM) shoulder (Stanmore Implants, Elstree, UK), a total shoulder design resembling a total hip prosthesis, can offer a reliable alternative in this surgically challenging subset of patients with rotator cuff deficiency and advanced glenoid bone loss. METHODS: Twenty-one patients with failed post-traumatic humeral head replacement associated with rotator cuff and glenoid deficiency underwent revision with CAD/CAM shoulders between 2005 and 2010. Clinical data were collected prospectively and analyzed at a mean follow-up of 3 years. RESULTS: After revision, the pain rating at rest (on a 0-10 numerical scale) decreased from 5.6 ± 1.3 to 1.1 ± 1.3 (P < .001) and pain during activity decreased from 7.4 ± 1.2 to 2.1 ± 1.8 (P < .001). The Oxford shoulder score improved from 47 ± 6 to 31 ± 9 (P < .001), and the subjective shoulder value (on a 0%-100% scale) improved from 22% ± 14% to 45% ± 18% (P < .001). Active shoulder range of motion was similar before and after revision. Postoperative complications occurred in 9 patients and included 1 infection, 2 periprosthetic fractures, 2 prosthetic dislocations, and 4 fixation screw fractures. No case of glenoid loosening occurred. CONCLUSION: The CAD/CAM shoulder offers a reliable method of securing a glenoid component in shoulders with advanced glenoid deficiency and should be considered as an alternative to other surgical methods in these challenging cases. At 3 years' follow-up, pain and clinical scores improved significantly and no case of glenoid loosening occurred.

Survivorship analysis of CAD-CAM total shoulder replacement.

Background: Glenoid bone loss represents a challenge in shoulder arthroplasty and often precludes standard implants. The CAD-CAM total shoulder replacement (TSR) is an option in these cases. This study aimed to assess survivorship and long-term patient outcomes of the CAD-CAM TSR. Methods: Fifty-eight patients that underwent a CAD-CAM TSR by three surgeons at a single tertiary referral centre between 2009 and 2017 were reviewed. The mean follow-up was 70 months (28-130). Data was collected on survivorship, range of movement, Oxford shoulder score (OSS, 0-48), subjective shoulder value (SSV, 0-100%), pain score (0-10), and overall patient satisfaction. Results: CAD-CAM TSR was undertaken as a primary procedure in 28% (n = 16) for end-stage arthritis with severe glenoid bone loss, and as a revision procedure in 72% (n = 42). Of the total, 17% (n = 10) required component revision at a mean of 24 months (4x prosthesis loosening, 3x infection, 3x periprosthetic fracture). Forward elevation improved from 45° ± 27° to 59° ± 29° (P = 0.0056), abduction from 43° ± 29° to 55° ± 26° (P = 0.034) and external rotation from 8° ± 11° to 16° ± 14° (P = 0.031). OSS improved from 15 ± 8 to 29 ± 9 (P = 0.0009), SSV from 18 ± 16 to 62 ± 23 (P < 0.0001), and pain score from 8 ± 2 to 2 ± 2 (P < 0.0001). 88% of patients would undergo the procedure again. Conclusion: CAD-CAM TSR is reserved for complex cases involving severe glenoid bone loss, offering significant improvements in pain and function with overall positive patient satisfaction.

Mid-term results of the use of structural humeral head autograft to correct glenoid bone loss in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Background: Native glenoid bone loss presents technical challenges in shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study is to report the mid-term clinical and radiographic outcomes of patients treated with structural humeral head autograft reconstruction of glenoid bone loss in the setting of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). Methods: Retrospective review of 30 shoulders in 28 patients undergoing rTSA with a structural humeral head autograft to correct glenoid bone loss. Demographics, comorbidities, anatomic details, and patient-reported outcome measures were collected for analysis. Results: Range of motion and patient-reported outcome measures were all significantly improved postoperatively (P < .001). Bone grafts were found to incorporate into 100% of shoulders, with no protheses displaying signs of loosening or other structural concerns. No revision procedures were performed, and all patients were satisfied with their shoulder postoperatively. Two patients developed scapular notching on follow-up. Discussion: The use of a humeral head autograft to reconstruct glenoid bone loss in patients undergoing rTSA is a safe and effective procedure. It allows for a local graft source to be utilized thus avoiding potential comorbidity and complications associated with the use of alternative site autografts or allografts and has the advantage of nearly congruent fit within the defect.

Mid-term to long-term results of open posterior bone block grafting in recurrent posterior shoulder instability: a clinical and CT-based analysis.

Background: There is little consensus on the best treatment after failed conservative management of recurrent posterior shoulder instability. The purpose of this study was to analyze our clinical and radiological mid-term to long-term results of an open, posterior bone block procedure for the treatment of recurrent posterior shoulder instability. Methods: From 1999 to 2015, 14 patients were included in the study and available for clinical and radiographic follow-up (FU). FU included a standardized physical examination, assessment of the Constant-Murley-Score, subjective shoulder value, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, and Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index. Conventional radiographs and a computed tomography (CT)-scan were performed preoperatively and at latest FU. Glenohumeral arthropathy was classified as per Samilson and Prieto. The CT scans were used to evaluate the structure of the graft (resorption, union), graft positioning, glenoid version, centering of the humeral head, and glenoid erosion and morphology. Results: The median age at the time of surgery was 26 years (range 16-41 years) and the median FU period was 9 years (range 4-20 years). The rate of reported dynamic postoperative subluxation and instability was 46% (n = 6) and the rate of dynamic posterior instability during clinical testing at FU was 31% (n = 4). The tested instability rate in the traumatic group was 14% (n = 1) compared to the atraumatic group with 50% (n = 3) during clinical FU. The mean Constant-Murley-Score increased from preoperatively (77 ± 11 points) to postoperatively (83 ± 14 points, P = .158). The last FU showed an American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score of 85 ± 12; the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score was 715 ± 475 points. The mean subjective shoulder value increased from 58% ± 19 preoperatively to 73% ± 17 at final FU (P = .005). Degenerative changes increased by at least one grade in 67% of the patients. Mean preoperative glenoid retroversion (CT) was 7.5° ± 6°. The position of the graft was optimal in 86% (n = 12). In 62% of the cases, a major resorption of the graft (Zhu grade II) was observed. Conclusion: The rate of tested recurrent instability at last FU was as high as 31% (n = 4, atraumatic [n = 3] vs. traumatic [n = 1]) after a median FU of 9 years. Given the moderate improvement of clinical outcome scores, shoulder stability and the increase of degenerative joint changes by at least one grade (Samilson/Prieto) in 67% of patients, a posterior bone block procedure is not a uniformly satisfying treatment option for recurrent posterior shoulder subluxation, especially in cases of atraumatic posterior instability.

Mid- to long-term clinical and radiological results of anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with B2 glenoids.

Background: Eccentric biconcave (B2) glenoid erosion in primary glenohumeral arthritis is common. There are serious concerns regarding the longevity of fixation of cemented glenoids if anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties (aTSAs) are used in B2 glenoid. The purpose of this study is to analyze the mid- to long-term results of aTSA with B2 glenoids. Methods: This is a retrospective study of a single center experience. Thirty patients (32 shoulders) at an average of 9.2 years (range, 5.0-16.6, ±3.2) after primary TSA were evaluated. Clinical and radiographic outcomes were analyzed. Results: The mean preoperative intermediate glenoid version was -14° ± 7° (range, -2° to -29°) and the mean humeral subluxation according to the plane of the scapula was 67% ± 9% (range, 49%-87%). There was a significant improvement for all the postoperative clinical outcome parameters including the mean absolute and relative Constant Score, subjective shoulder value, active elevation, external rotation, abduction, internal rotation, pain scores, and strength (P < .001). The complication rate was 15.6% and the revision rate was 12.5% at a mean follow-up of 9.2 years (range, 5.0-16.6, ±3.2). The estimated survivorship without revision was 94% at 5 years and 85% at 10 years (12.1-14.7 years). The survival rate without advanced glenoid component loosening (defined as Lazarus grade ≥ 4 or modified Molé scores ≥ 6) was 91% at 5 years and 84% at 10 years (12.2-15.8 years). Conclusion: In this case series, aTSA with asymmetric reaming for the treatment of shoulder osteoarthritis with milder forms of B2 glenoid is a viable option with good to excellent clinical results and an 85% prosthetic survivorship at 10 years.

Early outcomes of augmented glenoid components in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review.

Background: The objective was to evaluate the short-term clinical and radiological outcomes following augmented anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with posterior glenoid deficiency. Methods: An electronic search of EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed identified studies reporting clinical and radiographic outcomes following augmented anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty among patients with posterior glenoid deficiency. Results: Nine studies including 312 shoulders underwent anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty using an augmented glenoid implant between 2015 and 2020. A statistically significant improvement in range of motion (ROM), visual analog scale (VAS), American Shoulder & Elbow Surgeons (ASES), Constant, University of California - Los Angeles and Simple Shoulder Test (SST) scores was demonstrated at mean follow-up of 37.1 months. Glenoid retroversion improved from 21.8° to 9.5°. At final follow-up, radiolucency was reported in 35.1% of shoulders. The 16° full-wedge augment led to higher and more severe radiographic lucency, while high peg perforation rates (44%) were observed among 5-mm augment stepped implants. The overall rate of complication was 2.6%. Rate of revision surgery was 1.9%. Conclusions: Overall, early- to mid-term outcomes following augmented anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty for posterior glenoid deficiency demonstrate good to excellent overall clinical results. More radiographic and clinical failures were reported in larger full wedge (16°) augments and stepped augments (5 mm). Prospective studies examining mid- and long-term outcomes will help further elucidate safety and efficacy of these relatively new implants.

Glenoid bone augmentation: a contemporary and comprehensive systematic review of open procedures.

Introduction: There is a trend towards arthroscopically treating shoulder instability with glenoid deficiency. Despite this, there remains the option for treatment through an open technique. Multiple bone augmentation options are available for recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Objective: To provide a systematic review of recent studies for recurrent anterior shoulder instability necessitating glenoid bone augmentation specifically through open procedures using coracoid bone or free bone blocks [iliac crest bone autograft/allograft or distal tibia allograft (DTA)]. Methods: PubMed, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar were searched for studies reporting open glenoid bone augmentation procedures with iliac crest, tibia, or coracoid bones within 10 years. Extracted data included study/patient characteristics, techniques, prior surgeries, prior dislocations, radiographic findings, range of motion (ROM), recurrent instability, patient-reported outcomes, and complications. Results: 92 met inclusion criteria (5693 total patients). Six were studies of iliac crest bone, four of DTA, and 84 using the coracoid bone. 29 studies measured postoperative arthritis showing no development or mild arthritis. 26 studies reported postoperative graft position. 62 studies reported ROM noting decline in internal/external rotation. 87 studies measured postoperative instability with low rates. Rowe Scores with noted improvement across 31/59 (52.5%) studies were seen. Common post operative complications included infection, hematoma, graft fracture, nerve injury, pain, and screw-related irritation. Conclusion: Despite a trend towards arthroscopic management of recurrent anterior shoulder instability with glenoid deficiency, open procedures continue to provide satisfactory outcomes. Additionally, studies have demonstrated safe and efficacious use of free bone block graft options in the primary and revision setting.