International Orthopaedics

, Volume 42, Issue 6, pp 1339–1346 | Cite as

What is the best glenoid configuration in onlay reverse shoulder arthroplasty?

  • Alexandre LädermannEmail author
  • Patrick J. Denard
  • Pascal Boileau
  • Alain Farron
  • Pierric Deransart
  • Gilles Walch
Original Paper



The purpose of this study was to analyze the effect of different glenoid configurations on arm position and range of motion (ROM) following reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The hypothesis was that different glenoid configurations would lead to changes in humeral offset, acromio-humeral distance (AHD), ROM, and rotator cuff muscle length.


Using a three-dimensional (3D) computer model, implantation of an RSA was simulated with a 145° onlay humeral stem combined with five different glenoid configurations which varied in diameter and centre of rotation. Glenoid offset, the AHD, ROM, and muscle length were evaluated for each configuration.


Changing glenoid design led to up to a 10 mm change in offset and a 3 mm change in the AHD. There was 7° of improvement in abduction and flexion between the different glenoid designs. Two of the configurations, the 36 mm centered and the BIO-RSA, had an adduction deficit. In extension and external rotation arm with the arm at side, the eccentric 36 mm glenosphere was the best configuration while the centered 36 mm glenosphere was the worst configuration. The 42 mm glenosphere limited external rotation at 90° of abduction.


Varying the glenosphere configurations leads to ROM and muscle length changes following RSA. With a 145° onlay humeral stem, a 36 eccentric glenosphere theoretically optimizes ROM while limiting scapular notching.


Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty Onlay design Glenoid offset Arm position Complications Range of motion Muscle tension 


Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

Two authors (G.W., P.B.) of this study received royalties from the Wright Medical Group NV. One author (P.J.D.) is a paid consultant for Arthrex. One author (P.D.) of this study held stock from the Wright Medical Group NV.


  1. 1.
    Gerber C, Pennington SD, Nyffeler RW (2009) Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 17:284–295CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boileau P, Moineau G, Roussanne Y, O'Shea K (2011) Bony increased-offset reversed shoulder arthroplasty: minimizing scapular impingement while maximizing glenoid fixation. Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:2558–2567. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    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. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lädermann A, Gueorguiev B, Charbonnier C, Stimec BV, Fasel JH, Zderic I, Hagen J, Walch G (2015) Scapular notching on kinematic simulated range of motion after reverse shoulder arthroplasty is not the result of impingement in adduction. Medicine (Baltimore) 94:e1615. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Berhouet J, Garaud P, Favard L (2013) Evaluation of the role of glenosphere design and humeral component retroversion in avoiding scapular notching during reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg.
  6. 6.
    Collin P, Liu X, Denard PJ, Gain S, Nowak A, Ladermann A (2017) Standard versus bony increased-offset reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a retrospective comparative cohort study. J Shoulder Elb Surg.
  7. 7.
    Levigne C, Boileau P, Favard L, Garaud P, Mole D, Sirveaux F, Walch G (2008) Scapular notching in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 17:925–935. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Levigne C, Garret J, Boileau P, Alami G, Favard L, Walch G (2011) Scapular notching in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: is it important to avoid it and how? Clin Orthop Relat Res 469:2512–2520. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mizuno N, Denard PJ, Raiss P, Walch G (2012) The clinical and radiographical results of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with eccentric glenosphere. Int Orthop 36:1647–1653. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lädermann A, Denard PJ, Boileau P, Farron A, Deransart P, Terrier A, Ston J, Walch G (2015) Effect of humeral stem design on humeral position and range of motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Int Orthop 39:2205–2213. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    van Andel CJ, Wolterbeek N, Doorenbosch CA, Veeger DH, Harlaar J (2008) Complete 3D kinematics of upper extremity functional tasks. Gait & Posture 27:120–127. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    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 35:543–548PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Charbonnier C, Chague S, Ponzoni M, Bernardoni M, Hoffmeyer P, Christofilopoulos P (2014) Sexual activity after total hip arthroplasty: a motion capture study. J Arthroplast 29:640–647. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lädermann A, Edwards TB, Walch G (2014) Arm lengthening after reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a review. Int Orthop 38:991–1000. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lädermann A, Lubbeke A, Melis B, Stern R, Christofilopoulos P, Bacle G, Walch G (2011) Prevalence of neurologic lesions after total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:1288–1293. CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lädermann A, Walch G, Lubbeke A, Drake GN, Mélis B, Bacle G, Collin P, Edwards TB, Sirveaux F (2012) Influence of arm lengthening in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 21:336–341. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lädermann A, Williams MD, Mélis B, Hoffmeyer P, Walch G (2009) Objective evaluation of lengthening in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 18:588–595. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Greiner S, Schmidt C, Herrmann S, Pauly S, Perka C (2015) Clinical performance of lateralized versus non-lateralized reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24:1397–1404. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Athwal GS, MacDermid JC, Reddy KM, Marsh JP, Faber KJ, Drosdowech D (2015) Does bony increased-offset reverse shoulder arthroplasty decrease scapular notching? J Shoulder Elb Surg 24:468–473. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Erickson BJ, Harris JD, Romeo AA (2016) The effect of humeral inclination on range of motion in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review. Am J Orthop 45:E174–E179PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hettrich CM, Permeswaran VN, Goetz JE, Anderson DD (2015) Mechanical tradeoffs associated with glenosphere lateralization in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24:1774–1781. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Boileau P, Watkinson D, Hatzidakis AM, Hovorka I (2006) Neer award 2005: the Grammont reverse shoulder prosthesis: results in cuff tear arthritis, fracture sequelae, and revision arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 15:527–540. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Blix M (1891) Die lange und dle spannung des muskels. Skand Arch Physiol 3:295–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Halder AM, O'Driscoll SW, Heers G, Mura N, Zobitz ME, An KN, Kreusch-Brinker R (2002) Biomechanical comparison of effects of supraspinatus tendon detachments, tendon defects, and muscle retractions. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A:780–785CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lädermann A, Denard PJ, Tirefort J, Collin P, Nowak A, Schwitzguebel AJ (2017) Subscapularis- and deltoid-sparing vs traditional deltopectoral approach in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective case–control study. J Orthop Surg Res 12:112. CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lädermann A, Lo EY, Schwitzguebel AJ, Yates E (2016) Subscapularis and deltoid preserving anterior approach for reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery & Research: OTSR 102:905–908. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Moor BK, Bouaicha S, Rothenfluh DA, Sukthankar A, Gerber C (2013) Is there an association between the individual anatomy of the scapula and the development of rotator cuff tears or osteoarthritis of the glenohumeral joint?: a radiological study of the critical shoulder angle. The Bone & Joint Journal 95-B:935–941. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    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. Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery & Research: OTSR.

Copyright information

© SICOT aisbl 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Orthopaedics and Trauma SurgeryLa Tour HospitalMeyrinSwitzerland
  2. 2.Faculty of MedicineUniversity of GenevaGeneva 4Switzerland
  3. 3.Division of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Department of SurgeryGeneva University HospitalsGeneva 14Switzerland
  4. 4.Southern Oregon OrthopedicsMedfordUSA
  5. 5.Department of Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation, Oregon Health & Science UniversityPortlandUSA
  6. 6.Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Sports TraumatologyHôpital de L’ Archet–University of Nice Sophia–AntipolisNiceFrance
  7. 7.Division of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Department of SurgeryCentre Hospitalier Universitaire VaudoisLausanneSwitzerland
  8. 8.Imascap SASBrestFrance
  9. 9.Department of Orthopaedics, Shoulder UnitSanty Orthopaedic Center and Jean Mermoz HospitalLyonFrance

Personalised recommendations