International Orthopaedics

, Volume 38, Issue 4, pp 775–782 | Cite as

Outcomes after shoulder arthroplasty revision with glenoid reconstruction and bone grafting

  • Thomas Hoffelner
  • Philipp Moroder
  • Alexander Auffarth
  • Mark Tauber
  • Herbert Resch
Original Paper



Extensive glenoid bone loss after failed shoulder arthroplasty represents a challenge for revision arthroplasty. Treatment options vary widely and have been a source of controversy among experts.


Between 2004 and 2010, a total of 17 patients underwent glenoid reconstruction surgery using an autologous iliac crest bone graft and secondary revision arthroplasty due to extensive glenoid bone loss after failed previous total shoulder arthroplasty. The outcomes were assessed by means of clinical examination, Constant score, and bi-plane radiography as well as pre-, postoperative and follow-up CT.


Before the revision surgery, the mean Constant score was 24 ± 17 and improved to 40 ± 13 after the glenoid rebuilding and revision arthroplasty. CT imaging revealed adequate glenoid bone stock restoration with no relevant graft resorption or loosening of the glenoid. The average postoperative antero-posterior diameter of the glenoid was 28 ± 3 mm which had decreased to 25 ± 3 mm at follow-up. The average postoperative version of the glenoid was 95.7° ± 6° and had decreased to 98.5° ± 4° at follow-up. Both the glenoid version and diameter had changed significantly (P < 0.001) comparing postoperative and follow-up CT-scans.


Glenoid reconstruction surgery using an iliac crest bone-block autograft prior to revision arthroplasty represents a valuable salvage procedure in cases of extensive glenoid bone loss after primary shoulder arthroplasty. Sufficient glenoid bone stock restoration is indispensable for reliable fixation of glenoid components and in turn a satisfactory clinical outcome.


Glenoid loosening Glenoid bone loss Glenoid reconstruction Iliac crest bone-block autograft Shoulder arthroplasty Revision surgery 


Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval



  1. 1.
    Antuna SA, Sperling JW, Cofield RH et al (2001) Glenoid revision surgery after total shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elb Surg 10:217–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Neyton L, Boileau P, Nove-Josserand L et al (2007) Glenoid bone grafting with a reverse design prosthesis. J Should Elb Surg 16:71–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Singh JA, Sperling JW, Cofield RH (2011) Revision surgery following total shoulder arthroplasty: analysis of 2588 shoulders over three decades (1976 to 2008). J Bone Joint Surg Br 93:1513–1517. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B11.26938 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Churchill RS (2012) Post-treatment glenoid classification system for total shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elb Surg 21:537–544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bell RH, Noble JS (2000) The management of significant glenoid deficiency in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elb Surg 9:248–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Iannotti JP, Norris TR (2003) Influence of preoperative factors on outcome of shoulder arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:251–258PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kircher J, Wiedemann M, Magosch P et al (2009) Improved accuracy of glenoid positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty with intraoperative navigation: a prospective-randomized clinical study. J Should Elb Surg 18:515–520. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.03.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Steinmann SP, Cofield RH (2000) Bone grafting for glenoid deficiency in total shoulder replacement. J Should Elb Surg 9:361–367CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shapiro TA, Gupta A, McGarry MH et al (2012) Biomechanical effects of arthroscopic capsulorrhaphy in line with the fibers of the anterior band of the inferior glenohumeral ligament. Am J Sports Med 40:672–680. doi: 10.1177/0363546511430307 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Scalise JJ, Iannotti JP (2008) Bone grafting severe glenoid defects in revision shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 466:139–145. doi: 10.1007/s11999-007-0065-7 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Iannotti JP, Frangiamore SJ (2012) Fate of large structural allograft for treatment of severe uncontained glenoid bone deficiency. J Should Elb Surg 21:765–771. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.08.069 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sperling JW, Cofield RH, O’Driscoll SW et al (2000) Radiographic assessment of ingrowth total shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elb Surg 9:507–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Friedman RJ, Hawthorne KB, Genez BM (1992) The use of computerized-tomography in the measurement of glenoid version. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74:1032–1037PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hill JM, Norris TR (2001) Long-term results of total shoulder arthroplasty following bone-grafting of the glenoid. J Bone Joint Surg Am 83:877–883PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neer CS 2nd, Morrison DS (1988) Glenoid bone-grafting in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 70:1154–1162PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cofield RH (2007) Bone grafting for glenoid bone deficiencies in shoulder arthritis: a review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16:273–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Cheung EV, Sperling JW, Cofield RH (2007) Reimplantation of a glenoid component following component removal and allogenic bone-grafting. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:1777–1783PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Melis B, Bonnevialle N, Neyton L et al (2012) Glenoid loosening and failure in anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty: is revision with a reverse shoulder arthroplasty a reliable option? J Should Elb Surg 21:342–349. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.05.021 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Frost HM (2000) The Utah paradigm of skeletal physiology: an overview of its insights for bone, cartilage and collagenous tissue organs. J Bone Miner Metab 18:305–316PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moroder P, Hirzinger C, Lederer S et al (2012) Restoration of anterior glenoid bone defects in posttraumatic recurrent anterior shoulder instability using the J-bone graft shows anatomic graft remodeling. Am J Sports Med 40:1544–1550. doi: 10.1177/0363546512446681 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nyffeler RW, Sheikh R, Atkinson TS et al (2006) Effects of glenoid component version on humeral head displacement and joint reaction forces: an experimental study. J Should Elb Surg 15:625–629CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Rowland CM (2000) Heterotopic ossification after total shoulder arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 15:179–182PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Walch G, Young AA, Melis B et al (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 Elb Surg 20:385–394. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.07.011 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sutton LG, Werner FW, Jones AK et al (2010) Optimization of glenoid fixation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty using 3-dimensional modeling. J Should Elb Surg 19:664–669. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.12.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Collins D, Tencer A, Sidles J et al (1992) Edge displacement and deformation of glenoid components in response to eccentric loading. The effect of preparation of the glenoid bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74:501–507PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Williams GR Jr, Iannotti JP (2007) Options for glenoid bone loss: composites of prosthetics and biologics. J Should Elb Surg 16:267–272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cofield RH, Edgerton BC (1990) Total shoulder arthroplasty: complications and revision surgery. Instr Course Lect 39:449–462PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ortmaier R, Resch H, Hitzl W et al (2013) Reverse shoulder arthroplasty in revision of failed shoulder arthroplasty-outcome and follow-up. Int Orthop 37:67–75. doi: 10.1007/s00264-012-1742-z PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Farshad M, Gerber C (2010) Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty-from the most to the least common complication. Int Orthop 34:1075–1082. doi: 10.1007/s00264-010-1125-2 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Scarlat MM (2013) Complications with reverse total shoulder arthroplasty and recent evolutions. Int Orthop 37:843–851. doi: 10.1007/s00264-013-1832-6 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Hoffelner
    • 1
  • Philipp Moroder
    • 1
  • Alexander Auffarth
    • 1
  • Mark Tauber
    • 2
  • Herbert Resch
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Traumatology and Sports InjuriesParacelsus Medical University SalzburgMuellner Hauptstrasse 48Austria
  2. 2.Shoulder and Elbow SurgeryATOS Clinic MunichMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations