Der Orthopäde

, Volume 46, Issue 12, pp 1034–1044 | Cite as

Pyrocarbon interposition shoulder arthroplasty in advanced collapse of the humeral head

Originalien

Abstract

Background

Pyrocarbon (PyC) interposition shoulder arthroplasty can be used to treat advanced collapse of the humeral head after avascular necrosis.

Objectives

We examined outcomes for this bone-preserving implant which has a PyC coating and a novel biomechanical concept.

Materials and methods

For a minimum of 2 years, we followed 10 patients (4 men, 6 women, 55.6 ± 12.9 years) treated with a free interposition PyC arthroplasty (“snookerball”) due to advanced humeral head collapse but with an intact glenoid and rotator cuff. Anteroposterior radiographs, the Constant score (CS), adjusted CS, DASH score, and the EuroQol 5D–5L score from the preoperative and the latest follow-up presentation were compared.

Results

At a mean of 3.6 years (±15 months), the mean absolute CS was 70.6 (±13.6; adjusted CS 81.4 ± 16.4), the DASH score was 25.6 (±16.1), the mean EQ subjective VAS score was 72.6 (±15.9), and the EQ index score was 0.9 (±0.11). Scores improved: CS: +63.2 ± 12.9; adjusted CS: +72.9 ± 15.5; DASH: +47.2 ± 14.7; EQ VAS: +42.6 ± 16.8; EQ index score +0.52 ± 0.23. Mean glenoid erosion was 1.4 mm (±1.3 mm), thinning of the tuberosities was −0.8 mm (±3.3 mm), and superior migration of the implant was 2.0 mm (±2.2). A thin radiolucent zone around the implant with bone densification on the metaphyseal side was observed in all cases (mean 1.8 ± 0.6 mm).

Conclusions

Excellent improvement of function and quality of life which are comparable to total shoulder arthroplasty data were observed. Significant bone remodeling occurs in the metaphysis around the implant. Further studies are needed to evaluate longevity and applicability of the implant. These results indicate that advanced collapse of the humeral head with an intact glenoid and rotator cuff are an optimal indication for this implant.

Keywords

Hemiarthroplasty Osteonecrosis Avasular necrosis humerus Humeral head collapse Shoulder prosthesis 

Abbreviations

AP

Anteroposterior

AVN

Avascular humeral head necrosis

CS

Constant score

DASH

Disabilities of Arm, Shoulder, and Hand

EQ

EuroQol EQ 5D–5L

FU

Follow-up

HA

Hemiarthroplasty

LOA

Limits of agreement

MALDI-TOF

Matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time of flight

MRI

Magnetic resonance imaging

PyC

Pyrocarbon

ROM

Range of motion

SD

Standard deviation

TSA

Total shoulder arthroplasty

VAS

Visual analog scale

Interpositions-Hemiprothese aus Pyrocarbon bei fortgeschrittener Humeruskopfnekrose

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund

Eine Interpositions-Hemiprothese aus Pyrocarbon (PyC) ist eine Option zur Behandlung der ausgeprägten avaskulären Humeruskopfnekrose.

Fragestellung

Die Ergebnisse dieses knochensparenden Implantats mit neuartiger Biomechanik wurden ermittelt.

Material und Methoden

Zehn Patienten (4 m., 6 w., Alter: 55,6 ± 12,9 Jahre) wurden wegen fortgeschrittener Humeruskopfnekrose mit pyrocarbonbeschichteter Interpositions-Hemiprothese („Snookerball“) behandelt und mindestens 2 Jahre postoperativ beobachtet. Glenoid und Rotatorenmanschette waren intakt. a.-p.-Röntgenbilder, Constant Score (CS), angepasster CS, DASH und EuroQol 5D–5 L (EQ) aus präoperativer und aktuellster Kontrolluntersuchung wurden verglichen.

Ergebnisse

Nach durchschnittlich 3,6 Jahren (±15 Monate) postoperativ lag der absolute CS im Durchschnitt bei 70,6 (±13,6), der angepasste CS bei 81,4 (±16,4). Der DASH lag bei 25,6 (±16,1), der EQ VAS bei 72,6 (±15,9) und der EQ-Index bei 0,9 (±0,11). Die Werte verbesserten sich: CS: +63,2 ± 12,9; angepasster CS: +72,9 ± 15,5; DASH: +47,2 ± 14,7; EQ VAS: +42,6 ± 16,8; EQ-Index: +0,52 ± 0,23. Die Glenoiderosion erreichte im Durchschnitt 1,4 mm (±1,3 mm), die knöcherne Substanz der Tubercula verschmälerte sich um −0,8 mm (±3,3 mm), und das Implantat verschob sich um 2,0 mm (±2,2) nach kranial. Eine schmale, röntgentransparente Zone mit metaphysärem Sklerosierungssaum bildete sich bei allen rund um das Implantat aus (1,8 mm, ±0,6 mm).

Schlussfolgerung

Funktion und Lebensqualität verbesserten sich ausgezeichnet und waren vergleichbar mit den Ergebnissen nach Totalendoprothese. Knöcherne Umbauprozesse traten in der Metaphyse rund um das Implantat auf. Weitere Studien sind nötig, um die Langlebigkeit und Anwendbarkeit des Implantats zu ermitteln. Den bisherigen Ergebnissen zufolge ist die fortgeschrittene Humeruskopfnekrose bei erhaltenem Glenoid und intakter Rotatorenmanschette eine optimale Indikation für das neuartige Implantat.

Schlüsselwörter

Hemiprothese Osteonekrose Avaskuläre Humeruskopfnekrose Einbruch des Humeruskopfes Schulterendoprothese 

Notes

Compliance with ethical guidelines

Conflict of interest

R. Hudek, B. Werner, A. Abdelkawi and F. Gohlke declare that they have no competing interests.

Ethical committee approval: Given by the Freiburger Ethik-Kommission, Feki Code: 014/1483. Written consent was given by each patient prior to surgery. The manuscript has been read and approved by all authors, and all authors believe that the manuscript presents honest work.

References

  1. 1.
    Barlow JD, Abboud J (2016) Surgical options for the young patient with glenohumeral arthritis. Int J Shoulder Surg 10:28–36CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bhatia S, Hsu A, Lin EC et al (2012) Surgical treatment options for the young and active middle-aged patient with glenohumeral arthritis. Adv Orthop 2012:846843CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bokros JC (1989) Carbon in prosthetic heart valves. Ann Thorac Surg 48:S49–S50CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Campochiaro G, Rebuzzi M, Baudi P et al (2015) Complex proximal humerus fractures: Hertel’s criteria reliability to predict head necrosis. Musculoskelet Surg 99(Suppl 1):S9–S15CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carter MJ, Mikuls TR, Nayak S et al (2012) Impact of total shoulder arthroplasty on generic and shoulder-specific health-related quality-of-life measures: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94:e127CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cook SD, Klawitter JJ, Weinstein AM (1981) The influence of implant elastic modulus on the stress distribution around LTI carbon and aluminum oxide dental implants. J Biomed Mater Res 15:879–887CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cook SD, Thomas KA, Kester MA (1989) Wear characteristics of the canine acetabulum against different femoral prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br 71:189–197CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Denard PJ, Wirth MA, Orfaly RM (2011) Management of glenohumeral arthritis in the young adult. J Bone Joint Surg Am 93:885–892CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fuchs B, Weishaupt D, Zanetti M et al (1999) Fatty degeneration of the muscles of the rotator cuff: assessment by computed tomography versus magnetic resonance imaging. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 8:599–605CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garret J, Godeneche A, Boileau P et al (2017) Pyrocarbon interposition shoulder arthroplasty: preliminary results from a prospective multicenter study at 2 years of follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 26:1143–1151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gauci MO, Winter M, Dumontier C et al (2016) Clinical and radiologic outcomes of pyrocarbon radial head prosthesis: midterm results. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 25:98–104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gras M, Wahegaonkar AL, Mathoulin C (2012) Treatment of avascular necrosis of the proximal pole of the scaphoid by arthroscopic resection and prosthetic semireplacement arthroplasty using the pyrocarbon Adaptive Proximal Scaphoid Implant (APSI): long-term functional outcomes. J Wrist Surg 1:159–164CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hassler M (2015) Pyrocarbon properties. In: Hudek DR (ed) Tornier SAS, Montbonnot Saint Martin, p 7Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hussey MM, Steen BM, Cusick MC et al (2015) The effects of glenoid wear patterns on patients with osteoarthritis in total shoulder arthroplasty: an assessment of outcomes and value. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 24:682–690CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Katolik LI, Romeo AA, Cole BJ et al (2005) Normalization of the constant score. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14:279–285CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Levine WN, Fischer CR, Nguyen D et al (2012) Long-term follow-up of shoulder hemiarthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94:e164CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Matsen FA 3rd, Clinton J, Lynch J et al (2008) Glenoid component failure in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 90:885–896CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mcguire DT, White CD, Carter SL et al (2012) Pyrocarbon proximal interphalangeal joint arthroplasty: outcomes of a cohort study. J Hand Surg Eur Vol 37:490–496CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nagels J, Valstar ER, Stokdijk M et al (2002) Patterns of loosening of the glenoid component. J Bone Joint Surg Br 84:83–87CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Nagels J, Stokdijk M, Rozing PM (2003) Stress shielding and bone resorption in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 12:35–39CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Ouenzerfi GHM, Trunflo-Sfarghiu A, Nallet a, Berthier Y (2015) Triboligical behavior of pyrolytic carbon against bone promotes cartilage regeneration? Proceedings of the 42nd Leeds-Lyon Symposium on Tribology 2015, Lyon.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Papadonikolakis A, Neradilek MB, Matsen FA 3rd (2013) Failure of the glenoid component in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review of the English-language literature between 2006 and 2012. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95:2205–2212CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pettersson K, Amilon A, Rizzo M (2015) Pyrolytic carbon hemiarthroplasty in the management of proximal interphalangeal joint arthritis. J Hand Surg Am 40:462–468CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Sandow MJ, David H, Bentall SJ (2013) Hemiarthroplasty vs total shoulder replacement for rotator cuff intact osteoarthritis: how do they fare after a decade? J Shoulder Elbow Surg 22:877–885CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Medizin Verlag GmbH 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • R. Hudek
    • 1
  • B. Werner
    • 1
  • A. F. Abdelkawi
    • 1
  • F. Gohlke
    • 1
  1. 1.Klinik für Schulter- und EllbogenchirurgieRHÖN Klinikum AGBad NeustadtGermany

Personalised recommendations