Effect of humeral stem design on humeral position and range of motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty
- 887 Downloads
The impacts of humeral offset and stem design after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) have not been well-studied, particularly with regard to newer stems which have a lower humeral inclination. The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of different humeral stem designs on range of motion and humeral position following RSA.
Using a three-dimensional computer model of RSA, a traditional inlay Grammont stem was compared to a short curved onlay stem with different inclinations (155°, 145°, 135°) and offset (lateralised vs medialised). Humeral offset, the acromiohumeral distance (AHD), and range of motion were evaluated for each configuration.
Altering stem design led to a nearly 7-mm change in humeral offset and 4 mm in the AHD. Different inclinations of the onlay stems had little influence on humeral offset and larger influence on decreasing the AHD. There was a 10° decrease in abduction and a 5° increase in adduction between an inlay Grammont design and an onlay design with the same inclination. Compared to the 155° model, the 135° model improved adduction by 28°, extension by 24° and external rotation of the elbow at the side by 15°, but led to a decrease in abduction of 9°. When the tray was placed medially, on the 145° model, a 9° loss of abduction was observed.
With varus inclination prostheses (135° and 145°), elevation remains unchanged, abduction slightly decreases, but a dramatic improvement in adduction, extension and external rotation with the elbow at the side are observed.
KeywordsReverse total shoulder arthroplasty Inlay and onlay design Reverse tray Impingement Humeral offset Arm position Range of motion Complications
Conflicts of interest
Two authors (G.W., P.B.) of this study received royalties from Tornier. One author (P.J.D.) is a paid consultant for Arthrex. One author (P.D.) of this study is employee and held stock from Tornier.
- 2.Mélis B, DeFranco M, Lädermann A, Mole D, Favard L, Nerot C, Maynou C, Walch G (2011) An evaluation of the radiological changes around the Grammont reverse geometry shoulder arthroplasty after eight to 12 years. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 93:1240–1246. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B9.25926 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Skikumaran U, Salari N, Garzon-Muvdi J, Skolasky R, Peterson S, Tantisricharoenkul G, McFarland EG (2013) Prosthetic design of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty contributes to scapular notching and instability. Twelveth InternationalCongress of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, April 10-13, Nagoya, p 180Google Scholar
- 7.Trouilloud P, Gonzalvez M, Martz P, Charles H, Handelberg F, Nyffeler RW, Baulot E, Duocentric G (2014) Duocentric(R) reversed shoulder prosthesis and Personal Fit(R) templates: innovative strategies to optimize prosthesis positioning and prevent scapular notching. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 24:483–495. doi: 10.1007/s00590-013-1213-2 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 8.Gutierrez S, Comiskey CA, Luo ZP, Pupello DR, Frankle MA (2008) Range of impingement-free abduction and adduction deficit after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Hierarchy of surgical and implant-design-related factors. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:2606–2615. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00012 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 13.Wu G, Siegler S, Allard P, Kirtley C, Leardini A, Rosenbaum D, Whittle M, D’Lima DD, Cristofolini L, Witte H, Schmid O, Stokes I (2002) ISB recommendation on definitions of joint coordinate system of various joints for the reporting of human joint motion—part I: ankle, hip, and spine. International Society of Biomechanics. J Biomech 35:543–548CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 15.Jobin CM, Brown GD, Bahu MJ, Gardner TR, Bigliani LU, Levine WN, Ahmad CS (2012) Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for cuff tear arthropathy: the clinical effect of deltoid lengthening and center of rotation medialization. J Shoulder Elb Surg 21:1269–1277. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.08.049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 24.Berhouet J, Garaud P, Slimane M, Nicot J, Banah J, Waynberger E, Favard L (2014) Effect of scapular pillar anatomy on scapular impingement in adduction and rotation after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 100:495-502. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2014.03.021 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar