Abstract
Background
The purpose of this study was to analyze and report functional and radiological results obtained with the Durom™ Shoulder Cup.
Methods
From 2004 to 2009, 42 consecutive shoulder resurfacing prostheses were implanted in a cohort of forty patients with morphologically and functionally healthy rotator cuff. Those cases were evaluated preoperatively and postoperatively after an average of 33.5 months on the basis of Constant score, ASES score, and X-rays.
Results
The Constant score increased from 29.88 points preoperatively to 82.34 after a mean follow-up period of 33.5 months. The ASES score went from 30.55 points preoperatively to 76.61. Radiologically we noticed neither radiolucent lines nor any aseptic loosening of the prosthetic cup. In the post-operative X-rays evaluation we found no significant central migration of the humeral head from the first postoperative X-ray.
Conclusions
The good functional results observed with a mean follow-up of approximately 3 years doubtless resulted from the reduction in implant-placement error, as a result of the resurfacing procedure, and from the normal rotator cuff function. This technique facilitates surgical reconstruction of the anatomical and biomechanical conditions required for physiological function of the shoulder.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Levy O, Copeland SA. Cementless surface replacement arthroplasty of the shoulder. 5- to 10-year results with the Copeland Mark-2 prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001;83:213–21.
Levy O, Funk L, Sforza G, Copeland SA. Copeland surface replacement arthroplasty of the shoulder in rheumatoid arthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2004;86:512.
Burgess DL, McGrath MS, Bonutti PM, Marker DR, Delanois RE, Mont MA. Shoulder resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009;91:1228–38.
Jensen KL. Humeral resurfacing arthroplasty: rationale, indications, technique and results. Am J Orthop. 2007;36(12 Suppl 1):4–8.
Copeland S. The continuing development of shoulder replacement: ‘‘reaching the surface’’. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:900–5.
Thomas SR, Sforza G, Levy O, Copeland SA. Geometrical analysis of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty in relation to normal anatomy. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005;14:186–92.
Walch G, Badet R, Boulahia A, Khoury A. Morphologic study of the glenoid in primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Arthroplas. 1999;14(6):756–60.
Williams GR Jr, Wong KL, Pepe MD, Tan V, Silverberg D, Ramsey ML, Karduna A, Iannotti JP. The effect of articular malposition after total shoulder arthroplasty on glenohumeral translations, range of motion, and subacromial impingement. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2001;10:399–409.
Ruther W, Fink B. Der endoprosthtische Oberflachenersatz des Humeruskopfes (Durom Shoulder Cup). In: Schulterinstabilita—Rotatorenmanschette, Imhoff, Konig, Steinkopff. 1999:326–29.
Conflict of interest
None of the authors has any conflict of interests to disclose.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
About this article
Cite this article
Giannotti, S., Bottai, V., Ghilardi, M. et al. Shoulder resurfacing with Durom Cup: clinical and radiological re-assessment. J Orthop Sci 17, 545–550 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-012-0256-2
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00776-012-0256-2