Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a biomechanical evaluation of humeral and glenosphere hardware configuration.

Various reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) implant options are available for the humeral and glenosphere components. This study used a cadaveric biomechanical shoulder simulator to evaluate how hardware configurations in 2 common rTSA systems affect (1) abduction/adduction range of motion (ROM), (2) rotational ROM, and (3) forces to elevate the arm. Seven pairs of shoulders were tested on a biomechanical shoulder simulator before and after rTSA implantation. The Aequalis Reverse Shoulder (Tornier, Edina, MN, USA) and the Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis (RSP; DJO Surgical, Austin, TX, USA) were implanted in opposing shoulders. Aequalis implant options included humeral polymer insert thickness and eccentricity and glenosphere tilt. RSP implant options included glenosphere diameter and lateralization, humeral shell offset, and polymer insert depth. Both the RSP and Aequalis shifted the center of rotation inferior and medially compared with native shoulders (P < .001). Increased Aequalis insert thickness reduced adduction (P < .003) and internal/external (P < .028) passive ROM. The 10° inferiorly tilted glenosphere increased deltoid abduction forces (P < .032). In the RSP, smaller glenosphere diameter (P < .012), a semiconstrained humeral insert (P < .023), and a neutral humeral shell offset (P < .002) all decreased adduction deficit, whereas lateral glenosphere offset increased passive abduction ROM (P < .028). Increased humeral shell offset decreased passive internal/external rotation ROM (P < .050). Hardware configurations in rTSA have different effects on passive ROM and deltoid forces required for abduction. Identifying these changes may guide surgical decision making during rTSA placement.

Tashjian RZ ，Burks RT ，Zhang Y ，Henninger HB ... -  《-》

Implant Design Variations in Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Influence the Required Deltoid Force and Resultant Joint Load.

Giles JW ，Langohr GD ，Johnson JA ，Athwal GS ... -  《-》

The effect of glenosphere diameter in reverse shoulder arthroplasty on muscle force, joint load, and range of motion.

Little is known about the effects of glenosphere diameter on shoulder joint loads. The purpose of this biomechanical study was to investigate the effects of glenosphere diameter on joint load, load angle, and total deltoid force required for active abduction and range of motion in internal/external rotation and abduction. A custom, instrumented reverse shoulder arthroplasty implant system capable of measuring joint load and varying glenosphere diameter (38 and 42 mm) and glenoid offset (neutral and lateral) was implanted in 6 cadaveric shoulders to provide at least 80% power for all variables. A shoulder motion simulator was used to produce active glenohumeral and scapulothoracic motion. All implant configurations were tested with active and passive motion with joint kinematics, loads, and moments recorded. At neutral and lateralized glenosphere positions, increasing diameter significantly increased joint load (+12 ± 21 N and +6 ± 9 N; P < .01) and deltoid load required for active abduction (+9 ± 22 N and +11 ± 15 N; P < .02), whereas joint load angle was unaffected (P > .8). Passive internal rotation was reduced with increased diameter at both neutral and lateralized glenosphere positions (-6° ± 6° and -12° ± 6°; P < .002); however, external rotation was not affected (P > .05). At neutral glenosphere position, increasing diameter increased the maximum angles of both adduction (+1° ± 1°; P = .03) and abduction (+8° ± 9°; P < .05). Lateralization also increased abduction range of motion compared with neutral (P < .01). Although increasing glenosphere diameter significantly increased joint load and deltoid force, the clinical impact of these changes is presently unclear. Internal rotation, however, was reduced, which contradicts previous bone modeling studies, which we postulate is due to increased posterior capsular tension as it is forced to wrap around a larger 42 mm implant assembly.

Langohr GD ，Giles JW ，Athwal GS ，Johnson JA ... -  《-》

Biomechanical comparison of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty systems in soft tissue-constrained shoulders.

Numerous studies have examined the biomechanics of isolated variables in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. This study directly compared the composite performance of two reverse total shoulder arthroplasty systems; each system was designed around either a medialized or a lateralized glenohumeral center of rotation. Seven pairs of shoulders were tested on a biomechanical simulator. Center of rotation, position of the humerus, passive and active range of motion, and force to abduct the arm were quantified. Native arms were tested, implanted with a Tornier Aequalis or DJO Surgical Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis (RSP), and then retested. Differences from the native state were then documented. Both systems shifted the center of rotation medially and inferiorly relative to native. Medial shifts were greater in the Aequalis implant (P < .037). All humeri shifted inferior compared with native but moved medially with the Aequalis (P < .001). Peak passive abduction, internal rotation, and external rotation did not differ between systems (P > .05). Both reverse total shoulder arthroplasty systems exhibited adduction deficits, but the RSP implant deficit was smaller (P = .046 between implants). Both systems reduced forces to abduct the arm compared with native, although the Aequalis required more force to initiate motion from the resting position (P = .022). Given the differences in system designs and configurations, outcome variables were generally comparable. The RSP implant allowed slightly more adduction, had a more lateralized humeral position, and required less force to initiate elevation. These factors may play roles in limiting scapular notching, improving active external rotation by normalizing the residual rotator cuff length, and limiting excessive stress on the deltoid.

Henninger HB ，King FK ，Tashjian RZ ，Burks RT ... -  《-》

Influence of glenoid component design and humeral component retroversion on internal and external rotation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a cadaver study.

A common disadvantage of reverse shoulder arthroplasty is limitation of the range of arm rotation. Several changes to the prosthesis design and implantation technique have been suggested to improve rotation range of motion (ROM). Glenoid component design and degree of humeral component retroversion influence rotation ROM after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The Aequalis Reversed™ shoulder prosthesis (Tornier Inc., Edina, MN, USA) was implanted into 40 cadaver shoulders. Eight glenoid component combinations were tested, five with the 36-mm sphere (centred seating, eccentric seating, inferior tilt, centred with a 5-mm thick lateralised spacer, and centred with a 7-mm thick lateralised spacer) and three with the 42-mm sphere (centred with no spacer or with a 7-mm or 10-mm spacer). Humeral component position was evaluated with 0°, 10°, 20°, 30°, and 40° of retroversion. External and internal rotation ROMs to posterior and anterior impingement on the scapular neck were measured with the arm in 20° of abduction. The large glenosphere (42 mm) was associated with significantly (P<0.05) greater rotation ROMs, particularly when combined with a lateralised spacer (46° internal and 66° external rotation). Rotation ROMs were smallest with the 36-mm sphere. Greater humeral component retroversion was associated with a decrease in internal rotation and a significant increase (P<0.05) in external rotation. The best balance between rotation ROMs was obtained with the native retroversion, which was estimated at 17.5° on average in this study. Our anatomic study in a large number of cadavers involved a detailed and reproducible experimental protocol. However, we did not evaluate the variability in scapular anatomy. Earlier studies of the influence of technical parameters did not take humeral component retroversion into account. In addition, no previous studies assessed rotation ROMs. Rotation ROM should be improved by the use of a large-diameter glenosphere with a spacer to lateralise the centre of rotation of the gleno-humeral joint, as well as by positioning the humeral component at the patient's native retroversion value.

Berhouet J ，Garaud P ，Favard L 《Orthopaedics & Traumatology-Surgery & Research》