Elliptical and spherical heads show similar obligate glenohumeral translation during axial rotation in total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Elliptical shape humeral head prostheses have been recently proposed to reflect a more anatomic shoulder replacement. However, its effect on obligate glenohumeral translation during axial rotation compared to a standard spherical head is still not well understood. The purpose of the study was to compare obligate humeral translation during axial rotation using spherical and elliptical shaped humeral head prostheses. It was hypothesized that the spherical head design would show significantly more obligate translation when compared to the elliptical design. METHODS: Six fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were utilized for biomechanical testing of internal (IR) and external (ER) rotation at various levels of abduction (0°, 30°, 45°, 60°) with lines of pull along each of the rotator cuff muscles. Each specimen underwent the following three conditions: (1) native; total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) using (2) an elliptical and (3) spherical humeral head implant. Obligate translation during IR and ER was quantified using a 3-dimensional digitizer. The radius of curvature of the superoinferior and anteroposterior dimensions of the implants was calculated across each condition. RESULTS: Posterior and inferior translation as well as compound motion of spherical and elliptical heads during ER was similar at all abduction angles (P > 0.05, respectively). Compared to the native humeral head, both implants demonstrated significantly decreased posterior translation at 45° (elliptical: P = 0.003; spherical: P = 0.004) and 60° of abduction (elliptical: P < 0.001; spherical: P < 0.001). During internal rotation at 0° abduction, the spherical head showed significantly more compound motion (P = 0.042) compared to the elliptical head. The spherical implant also demonstrated increased anterior translation and compound motion during internal rotation at 60° abduction (P < 0.001) compared to the resting state. This difference was not significant for the native or elliptical head design at this angle (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In the setting of TSA, elliptical and spherical head implants showed similar obligate translation and overall compound motion during axial rotation. A gained understanding of the consequences of implant head shape in TSA may guide future surgical implant choice for better recreation of native shoulder kinematics and potentially improved patient outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Controlled Laboratory Study.

Elliptical heads result in increased glenohumeral translation along with micro-motion of the glenoid component during axial rotation in total shoulder arthroplasty.

INTRODUCTION: Elliptical-shaped humeral head prostheses have recently been proposed to reflect a more anatomic shoulder replacement. However, its subsequent effect on micro-motion of the glenoid component is still not understood. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Six fresh-frozen, cadaveric shoulders (mean age: 62.7 ± 9.2 years) were used for the study. Each specimen underwent total shoulder arthroplasty using an anatomic stemless implant. At 15°, 30°, 45° and 60° of glenohumeral abduction, 50° of internal and external rotations in the axial plane were alternatingly applied to the humerus with both an elliptical and spherical humeral head design. Glenohumeral translation was assessed by means of a 3-dimensional digitizer. Micro-motion of the glenoid component was evaluated using four high-resolution differential variable reluctance transducer strain gauges, placed at the anterior, posterior, superior, and inferior aspect of the glenoid component. RESULTS: The elliptical head design showed significantly more micro-motion in total and at the superior aspect of glenoid component during external rotation at 15° (total: P = 0.004; superior: P = 0.004) and 30° (total: P = 0.045; superior: P = 0.033) of abduction when compared to the spherical design. However, during internal rotation, elliptical and spherical heads showed similar amounts of micro-motion at the glenoid component at all tested abduction angles. When looking at glenohumeral translation, elliptical and spherical heads showed similar anteroposterior and superoinferior translation as well as compound motion during external rotation at all tested abduction angles. During internal rotation, the elliptical design resulted in significantly more anteroposterior translation and compound motion at all abduction angles when compared to the spherical design (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In the setting of total shoulder arthroplasty, the elliptical head design demonstrated greater glenohumeral translation and micro-motion at the glenoid component during axial rotation when compared to the spherical design, potentially increasing the risk for glenoid loosening in the long term. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Controlled Laboratory Study.