Skip to main content
Log in

Long-term survival of the glenoid components in total shoulder replacement for arthritis

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Aseptic glenoid component loosening remains a common problem in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). This study presents long-term prospective follow-up after implantation of a glenoid component using the “cancellous compaction technique” and its effect on clinical outcome and presence and progression of radiolucent lines (RLLs).

Method

Thirty-nine TSAs were performed for primary osteoarthritis by one surgeon using the same technique. For the glenoid side, a keeled, polyethylene, convex-backed component was implanted using the “cancellous compaction technique” consisting of minimal reaming, compaction bone grafting of the glenoid and minimal addition of cement. Postoperative clinical outcome was analysed using Constant scores and patient’s subjective evaluation. Independent observers evaluated postoperative X-rays for radiolucent lines (RLL) around the base plate and keel.

Results

At an average follow-up of 8.5 years (range 4.7–12.5), the Constant score improved from 33.5 to 73.0 points (P < 0.0001). Active anterior elevation improved from an average 95 ° to 140° (P < 0.0001), and active external rotation improved from 20° to 45° (P < 0.0001). Pain score improved from 3.1 to 13.6 (P < 0.0001). Radiologically, the RLL score increased from 1.09 (range, 0–3) postoperative to 5.7 (range, 0–18) (P < 0.0001) at final follow-up. The occurrence of definite radiological glenoid loosening was 15.5 %. Constant scores deteriorated with the progression of RLLs (P = 0.006). The rate of revision surgery for glenoid loosening was 2.5 %.

Conclusions

This study showed highly satisfactory clinical outcomes and low rates of revision for glenoid loosening using a bone-saving compaction technique for implantation of an all-polyethylene glenoid component.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barwood S, Setter KJ, Blaine TA, Bigliani LU (2008) The incidence of early radiolucencies about a pegged glenoid component using cement pressurization. J Should Elbow Surg ASES Proc 17(5):703–708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Edwards TB, Sabonghy EP, Elkousy H, Warnock KM, Hammerman SM, O’Connor DP, Gartsman GM (2007) Glenoid component insertion in total shoulder arthroplasty: comparison of three techniques for drying the glenoid before cementation. J Should Elbow Surg ASES Proc 16(3 Suppl):S107–S110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Maynou C, Petroff E, Mestdagh H, Dubois HH, Lerue O (1999) Clinical and radiologic outcome of humeral implants in shoulder arthroplasty. Acta Orthop Belg 65(1):57–64

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Nagels J, Valstar ER, Stokdijk M, Rozing PM (2002) Patterns of loosening of the glenoid component. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 84(1):83–87

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Rahme H, Mattsson P, Larsson S (2004) Stability of cemented all-polyethylene keeled glenoid components. A radiostereometric study with a 2-year follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 86(6):856–860

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Torchia ME, Cofield RH, Settergren CR (1997) Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis: long-term results. J Should Elbow Surg Am 6(6):495–505

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Wirth MA, Loredo R, Garcia G, Rockwood CA Jr, Southworth C, Iannotti JP (2012) Total shoulder arthroplasty with an all-polyethylene pegged bone-ingrowth glenoid component: a clinical and radiographic outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(3):260–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Lazarus MD, Jensen KL, Southworth C, Matsen FA 3rd (2002) The radiographic evaluation of keeled and pegged glenoid component insertion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A(7):1174–1182

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Pape G, Raiss P, Kleinschmidt K, Schuld C, Mohr G, Loew M, Rickert M (2010) Significance of bone mineral density and modern cementing technique for in vitro cement penetration in total shoulder arthroplasty. Z Orthop Unfall 148(6):680–684

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sanchez-Sotelo J, O’Driscoll SW, Torchia ME, Cofield RH, Rowland CM (2001) Radiographic assessment of cemented humeral components in shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elbow Surg Am 10(6):526–531

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Sperling JW, Cofield RH, O’Driscoll SW, Torchia ME, Rowland CM (2000) Radiographic assessment of ingrowth total shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elbow Surg Am 9(6):507–513

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Moineau G, Levigne C, Boileau P, Young A, Walch G (2012) Three-dimensional measurement method of arthritic glenoid cavity morphology: feasibility and reproducibility. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 98(6 Suppl):S139–S145

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Walch G, Young AA, Melis B, Gazielly D, Loew M, Boileau P (2011) Results of a convex-back cemented keeled glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis: multicenter study with a follow-up greater than 5 years. J Should Elbow Surg Am 20(3):385–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Walch G, Boulahia A, Boileau P, Kempf JF (1998) Primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: clinical and radiographic classification. Aequalis Group Acta Orthop Belg 64(Suppl 2):46–52

    Google Scholar 

  15. Walch G, Edwards TB, Boulahia A, Boileau P, Mole D, Adeleine P (2002) The influence of glenohumeral prosthetic mismatch on glenoid radiolucent lines: results of a multicenter study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A(12):2186–2191

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Constant CR, Murley AH (1987) A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 214:160–164

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Walch G, Boileau P, Noel E (2010) Shoulder arthroplasty: evolving techniques and indications. Joint Bone Spine 77(6):501–505

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Scarlat MM, Matsen FA 3rd (2001) Observations on retrieved polyethylene glenoid components. J Arthroplasty 16(6):795–801

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Walch G, Young AA, Boileau P, Loew M, Gazielly D, Mole D (2012) Patterns of loosening of polyethylene keeled glenoid components after shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis: results of a multicenter study with more than 5 years of follow-up. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(2):145–150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the three independent observers—Gilles Walch, MD, Vittorio Bellotti, MD and Olivier Verborgt, MD, who is one of the authors of the present study, and for the contribution to the evaluation of the radiology follow-up.

Conflict of interest

D. F. Gazielly and M. M. Scarlat have no conflict of interest to declare.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marius M. Scarlat.

Additional information

Dr Verborgt is a consultant for Zimmer, Smith & Nephew and receives royalties from Acco Medical who is a book publisher.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gazielly, D.F., Scarlat, M.M. & Verborgt, O. Long-term survival of the glenoid components in total shoulder replacement for arthritis. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 39, 285–289 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2637-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-014-2637-y

Keywords

Navigation