Benefit of intraoperative navigation on glenoid component positioning during total shoulder arthroplasty
- 562 Downloads
The objective of this study was to review and synthesize the current best evidence for the use of intraoperative navigation in the implantation of glenoid components in total shoulder prostheses.
We conducted a systematic, online search using PubMed, EMBASE, CCTR, and CINAHL using “Arthroplasty, Replacement”(Mesh) AND (shoulder) AND (navi* OR computer). Data on study design and quality as well as accuracy of positioning and complications were extracted independently and in duplicate. After assessment of study heterogeneity, DerSimonian-Laird random effect models were used to pool data from the individual studies.
The systematic search revealed 359 manuscripts in total. After exclusion of duplicates and irrelevant publications, 6 groups of 247 shoulders from 5 studies were included. The pooled weighted mean difference for deviation from neutral version was −6.4° (95 %CI −7.9 to −5.3) in favor of navigation, which is consistent with a statistically significant difference (p < 0.01). In the navigation group, 2 superior glenoid screws were reported as perforating compared to 5 screws (1 inferior, 4 superior) in the control group. There was no difference in tilt at a WMD of 2.7 (95 %CI −1.4 to 6.8, p = 0.192).
Navigation allows for significantly more accurate glenoid version, but the clinical meaningfulness of the absolute improvement over standard techniques is questionable. However, navigation is a valuable teaching tool that might prove very beneficial not for the patient at hand, but for those treated by the operating surgeon in the future.
Level of evidence
Level II—meta-analysis of non-homogenous controlled trials.
KeywordsTotal shoulder arthroplasty Glenoid Computer-assisted navigation
This project was funded by the “Forschungsförderung 2012” of the Association for Orthopaedic Research (AFOR).
Conflict of interest
- 2.Boileau P, Avidor C, Krishnan SG, Walch G, Kempf JF, Mole D (2002) Cemented polyethylene versus uncemented metal-backed glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized study. J Shoulder Elb Surg 11:351–359. doi: 10.1067/mse.2002.125807 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Briem D, Ruecker AH, Neumann J, Gebauer M, Kendoff D, Gehrke T, Lehmann W, Schumacher U, Rueger JM, Grossterlinden LG (2011) 3D fluoroscopic navigated reaming of the glenoid for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Comput Aided Surg 16(2):93–99. doi: 10.3109/10929088.2010.546076 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Bryant D, Litchfield R, Sandow M, Gartsman GM, Guyatt G, Kirkley A (2005) A comparison of pain, strength, range of motion, and functional outcomes after hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:1947–1956. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02854 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Gregory TM, Sankey A, Augereau B, Vandenbussche E, Amis A, Emery R et al (2013) Accuracy of glenoid component placement in total shoulder arthroplasty and its effect on clinical and radiological outcome in a retrospective, longitudinal, monocentric open study. PLoS One 8:e75791. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075791 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Hart ND, Clark JC, Wade Krause FR, Kissenberth MJ, Bragg WE, Hawkins RJ (2012) Glenoid screw position in the Encore Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis: an anatomic dissection study of screw relationship to surrounding structures. J Shoulder Elb Surg 22:814–820. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.08.013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 13.Kircher J, Wiedemann M, Magosch P, Lichtenberg S, Habermeyer P (2009) Improved accuracy of glenoid positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty with intraoperative navigation: a prospective-randomized clinical study. J Shoulder Elb Surg 18:515–520. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.03.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Liberati A, Altman DG, Tetzlaff J, Mulrow C, Gotzsche PC, Ioannidis JP et al (2009) The PRISMA statement for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies that evaluate health care interventions: explanation and elaboration. PLoS Med 6:e1000100. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000100 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Litchfield RB, McKee MD, Balyk R, Mandel S, Holtby R, Hollinshead R et al (2011) Cemented versus uncemented fixation of humeral components in total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial-A JOINTs Canada Project. J Shoulder Elb Surg 20:529–536. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.01.041 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 21.Moska M, Duckworth D, Matsen F (1998) Contrasting the position of prosthetic joint surfaces in successful and failed shoulder arthroplasties. In: 7th International Congress on Shoulder Surgery, SydneyGoogle Scholar
- 22.Nguyen D, Ferreira LM, Brownhill JR, King GJ, Drosdowech DS, Faber KJ et al (2009) Improved accuracy of computer assisted glenoid implantation in total shoulder arthroplasty: an in vitro randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elb Surg 18:907–914. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.02.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Vavken P, Dorotka R Modeling the “minimally invasive surgery effect” in total joint replacement. Surgical Innovation 2011 (ahead of print)Google Scholar