Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Protesi di rivestimento e stemless in chirurgia della spalla. Indicazioni, limiti e prospettive

Resurfacing and stemless arthroplasty in shoulder surgery. Indications, limits and perspectives

  • Aggiornamenti
  • Published:
LO SCALPELLO-OTODI Educational

Abstract

Small implants in shoulder replacement surgery represent a viable alternative to traditional surgery in specific conditions. Resurfacing and stemless implants have been introduced with the goal of preserving bone, reduce the risk of humeral periprosthetic fractures and simplify revision procedures. Clinical studies show very good clinical results and low complication rates in selected patients when correctly implanted. The use of small implants in shoulder replacement surgery appears to be a viable option for shoulder replacement, especially in young patients, even though future studies are required to assess the long-term outcomes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Bibliografia

  1. Torre M (2016) Registro italiano artroprotesi: Report 2016, 101° Congresso SIOT, Torino 28–31 Ottobre 2016

  2. AAVV (2017) RIAP. Potenziare la qualità dei dati per migliorare la sicurezza dei pazienti. Quarto Report 2017. Il Pensiero Scientifico Editore, Roma

  3. Wirth MA, Rockwood CA Jr (1996) Complications of total shoulder replacement arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 78:603–616

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Athwal GS, Sperling JW, Rispoli DM, Cofield RH (2009) Periprosthetic humeral fractures during shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg, Am 91:594–603

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bohsali KI, Wirth MA, Rockwood CA Jr (2006) Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg 88(10):2279–2292

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chin PY, Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Schleck C (2006) Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty: are they fewer or different? J Shoulder Elb Surg 15:19–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Deshmuk AV, Koris M, Zurakowski D, Thornhill TS (2005) Total shoulder arthroplasty: long-term survivorship, functional outcome and quality of life. J Shoulder Elb Surg 14:471–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Farng E, Zingmond D, Krenek L, Soohoo NF (2011) Factors predicting complications rates after primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 20:557–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kumar S, Sperling JW, Haidukewych GH, Cofield RH (2004) Periprosthetic humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg, Am 86:680–689

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Rowland CM (2004) Minimum fifteen-year follow-up of Neer hemi arthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged fifty years or younger. J Shoulder Elb Surg 13:604–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Cil A, Veillette CJ, Sanchez-Sotelo J et al. (2010) Survivorship of the humeral component in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 19(1):143–150

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Salesky MA, Grace TR, Feeley BT et al. (2018) Effects of cemented versus press-fit primary humeral stem fixation in the setting of revision shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 27(5):801–807

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Mackenzie DB (1993) The antero-superior exposure for total shoulder replacement. Orthop Traumatol 2:71–77

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Johnson M, Scott Paxton E, Green A (2015) Shoulder arthroplasty in young (<50 years old) patients: review of current concepts. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24(2):317–325

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Churchill RS (2014) Stemless shoulder arthroplasty: current status. J Shoulder Elb Surg 23:1409–1414

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Berth A, Marz V, Wissel H et al. (2016) SPECT/CT demonstrates the osseointegrative response of a stemless shoulder prosthesis. J Shoulder Elb Surg 25(4):e96–e103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Copeland S (2006) The continuing development of shoulder replacement: “reaching the surface”. J Bone Jt Surg, Am 88:900–905

    Google Scholar 

  18. Thomas SR, Sforza G, Levy O, Copeland SA (2005) Geometrical analysis of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty in relation to normal anatomy. J Shoulder Elb Surg 14:186–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Habermeyer P, Lichtenberg S, Tauber M, Magosch P (2015) Midterm results of stemless shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective study. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24(9):1463–1472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Mizuno N, Denard PJ, Raiss P, Walch G (2013) Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty for primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis in patients with a biconcave glenoid. J Bone Jt Surg, Am 95(14):1297–1304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Walch G, Moraga C, Young A, Castellanos-Rosas J (2012) Results of anatomic nonconstrained prosthesis in primary osteoarthritis with biconcave glenoid. J Shoulder Elb Surg 21(11):1526–1533

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Levy O, Copeland SA (2001) Cementless surface replacement arthroplasty of the shoulder. 5 to 10-year results with the Copeland Mark-2 prosthesis. J Bone Jt Surg, Br Vol 83:213–221

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Levy O, Copeland SA (2004) Cementless surface replacement arthroplasty (Copeland CSRA) for osteoarthritis of the shoulder. J Shoulder Elb Surg 13:266–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Thomas SR, Wilson AJ, Chambler A et al. (2005) Outcome of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 14:485–491

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Thomas SR, Sforza G, Levy O, Copeland SA (2005) Geometrical analysis of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty in relation to normal anatomy. J Shoulder Elb Surg 14:186–192

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Lebon J, Delclaux S, Bonnevialle N et al. (French Society for Shoulder, Elbow (SOFEC)) (2014) Stemmed hemiarthroplasty versus resurfacing in primary shoulder osteoarthritis: a single-center retrospective series of 78 patients. Orthop Traumatol, Surg Res 100(6 Suppl):S327–S332

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Levy O, Tsvieli O, Merchant J et al. (2015) Surface replacement arthroplasty for glenohumeral arthropathy in patients aged younger than fifty years: results after a minimum ten-year follow-up. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24(7):1049–1060

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Verstraelen FU, Horta LA, Schotanus MG et al. (2018) Clinical and radiological results 7 years after Copeland shoulder resurfacing arthroplasty in patients with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: an independent multicentre retrospective study. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 28(1):15–22

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Rasmussen JV, Olsen BS, Al-Hamdani A, Brorson S (2016) Outcome of revision shoulder arthroplasty after resurfacing hemiarthroplasty in patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Bone Jt Surg, Am 98(19):1631–1637

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Jaiswal A, Malhotra A, Hay S, Kelly CP (2019) Revision shoulder arthroplasty for failed surface replacement hemiarthroplasty. Musculoskelet Surg 103(1):69–75

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Buchner M, Eschbach N, Loew M (2008) Comparison of the short-term functional results after replacement and total shoulder arthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: a matched-pair analysis. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 128:347–354

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Mullett H, Levy O, Raj D et al. (2007) Copeland surface replacement of the shoulder: results of an hydroxyapatite-coated cementless implant in patients over 80 years of age. J Bone Jt Surg, Br Vol 89:1466–1469

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Bailie DS, Llinas PJ, Ellenbecker TS (2008) Cementless humeral resurfacing arthroplasty in active patients less than fifty-five years of age. J Bone Jt Surg, Am 90:110–117

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Churchill RS, Athwal GS (2016) Stemless shoulder arthroplasty-current results and designs. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 9:10–16

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Huguet D, DeClercq G, Rio B et al. (TESS Group) (2010) Results of anew stemless shoulder prosthesis: radiologic proof of maintained fixation and stability after a minimum of three years’ follow up. J Shoulder Elb Surg 19(6):847–852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Hawi N, Magosch P, Tauber M et al. (2017) Nine-year outcome after anatomic stemless shoulder prosthesis: clinical and radiological results. J Shoulder Elb Surg 9:1609–1615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Berth A, Pap G (2013) Stemless shoulder prosthesis versus conventional anatomic shoulder prosthesis in patients with osteoarthritis. J Orthop Traumatol 14(1):31–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Habermeyer P, Lichtenberg S, Tauber M, Magosch P (2015) Midterm results of stemless shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective study. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24(9):1463–1472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Krukenberg MJ, Bartsch S et al. (2018) Sidus Stem-Free Shoulder System for primary osteoarthritis: short-term results of a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elb Surg 27(8):1483–1490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Ballas R, Beguin L (2013) Results of a stemless reverse shoulder prosthesis at more than 58 months mean without loosening. J Shoulder Elb Surg 22(9):e1–e6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Teissier P, Teissier J, Kouyoumdjian P, Asencio G (2015) The TESS reverse shoulder arthroplasty without a stem in the treatment of cuff-deficient shoulder conditions: clinical and radiological results. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24(1):45–51

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Kadum B, Hassany H, Wadsten M et al. (2016) Geometrical analysis of stemless shoulder arthroplasty: a radiological study of seventy TESS total shoulder prostheses. Int Orthop 40(4):715–718

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Boileau P, Trojani C, Walch G et al. (2001) Shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of the sequelae of fractures of the proximal humerus. J Shoulder Elb Surg 10(4):299–308

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Athwal GS (2016) Spare the canal: stemless shoulder arthroplasty in finally here: commentary on an article by R. Sean Churchill, MD, et al: “Clinical and radiographic outcomes of the Simplicity canal-sparing shoulder arthroplasty system. A prospective two-year multicenter study”. J Bone Jt Surg, Am 98(7):e28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Hawi N, Tauber M, Messina MJ et al. (2016) Anatomic stemless shoulder arthroplasty and related outcomes: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 17(1):376

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. UOC di Ortopedia e Traumatologia, Ospedale del Mare, ASL NA 1, Napoli, Italia

    A. Bove, A. Cozzolino, G. Matino & N. Del Regno

  2. UOC di Chirurgia della Mano, Ospedale dei Pellegrini, ASL NA 1, Napoli, Italia

    A. Soldati

Authors
  1. A. Bove
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. A. Cozzolino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. A. Soldati
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. G. Matino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. N. Del Regno
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to A. Bove.

Ethics declarations

Conflitto di interesse

Gli autori A. Bove, A. Cozzolino, A. Soldati, G. Matino e N. Del Regno dichiarano di non avere alcun conflitto di interesse.

Consenso informato e conformità agli standard etici

Tutte le procedure descritte nello studio e che hanno coinvolto esseri umani sono state attuate in conformità alle norme etiche stabilite dalla dichiarazione di Helsinki del 1975 e successive modifiche. Il consenso informato è stato ottenuto da tutti i pazienti inclusi nello studio.

Human and Animal Rights

L’articolo non contiene alcuno studio eseguito su esseri umani e su animali da parte degli autori.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Bove, A., Cozzolino, A., Soldati, A. et al. Protesi di rivestimento e stemless in chirurgia della spalla. Indicazioni, limiti e prospettive. LO SCALPELLO 33, 90–96 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11639-019-00316-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11639-019-00316-0

Search

Navigation