Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow

Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society (대한견·주관절의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Where we are? "Principles"

견관절 역행성 인공관절 치환술의 원칙

  • Noh, Kyu-Cheol (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine) ;
  • Suh, Il-Woo (Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Kangnam Sacred Heart Hospital, Hallym University College of Medicine)
  • 노규철 (한림대학교 강남성심병원 정형외과학교실) ;
  • 서일우 (한림대학교 강남성심병원 정형외과학교실)
  • Received : 2011.05.06
  • Accepted : 2011.06.27
  • Published : 2011.06.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this article is to identify and understand the complications of RTSA and to review the current methods of preventing and treating this malady. Materials and Methods: Previous constrained prostheses (ball-and-socket or reverse ball-and-socket designs) have failed because their center of rotation remained lateral to the scapula, which has limited of the motion of the prostheses and produced excessive torque on the glenoid component, and this leads to early loosening. The Grammont reverse prosthesis imposes a new biomechanical environment for the deltoid muscle to act, thus allowing it to compensate for the deficient rotator cuff muscles. Results: The clinical experience does live up to the lofty biomechanical concept and expectations: the reverse prosthesis restores active elevation above $90^{\circ}$ in patients with a cuff-deficient shoulder. However, external rotation often remains limited and particularly in patients with an absent or fat-infiltrated teres minor. Internal rotation is also rarely restored after a reverse prosthesis. Failure to restore sufficient tension in the deltoid may result in prosthetic instability. Conclusion: Finally, surgeons must be aware that the results are less predictable and the complication/revision rates are higher in revision surgery than that in the first surgery. A standardized monitoring tool that has clear definitions and assessment instructions is surely needed to document and then prevent complications after revision surgery.

목적: 견관절 역행성 인공관절 치환술의 합병증을 이해하고 이에 대한 최신의 예방 및 치료 방법을 고찰하는 것이 본 논문의 목적이다. 대상 및 방법: 기존의 구속형 인공관절 기구 (구-소켓 관절 혹은 역행성 구형 관절 디자인)는 견갑골의 외측에 회전 중심이 유지되어 제한된 관절 운동과 관절와 기구에 발생한 과도한 회전력으로 인해 조기 해리를 유발하여 실패해왔다. Grammont 역행성 인공관절 기구는 삼각근이 작용하는 새로운 생역학적 환경을 도입하여 회전근개 결손을 보상할 수 있도록 해준다. 결과: 임상적 경험이 생역학 개념에 부응하면 역행성 인공관절은 회전근 개 결손 견관절 환자에서 $90^{\circ}$이상의 능동적 거상을 회복하게 한다. 그러나 외회전은 특히 소원근 지방침윤 내지 결손이 있는 환자들에서는 종종 제한이 남는다. 내회전 역시 역행성 인공관절 후에는 거의 회복되지 않는다. 삼각근에 충분한 긴장을 회복하지 못하면 인공관절 불안성이 초래된다. 결론: 인공관절 치환술 후 재수술에서 그 결과는 예측가능성이 떨어지고, 합병증 및 재치환술 비율이 더 높음을 인지해야만 한다. 합병증을 인지하고 예방하기 위해서는 명확한 정의와 평가 지침을 포함한 표준화된 감시 장치가 필요할 것으로 사료된다.

Keywords

References

  1. Basamania CJ. Hemiarthroplasty for cuff tear arthropathy. In: Zuckerman JD, editor. Advanced reconstruction shoulder. Rosemont: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons; 2007. 567-78.
  2. Rockwood CA Jr. The reverse total shoulder prosthesis. The new kid on the block. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:233-5. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.01394
  3. Boileau P, Watkinson D, Hatzidakis AM, Hovorka I. Neer Award 2005: the Grammont reverse shoulder prosthesis: results in cuff tear arthritis, fracture sequelae, and revision arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006;15:527-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2006.01.003
  4. Gerber C, Pennington SD, Nyffeler RW. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009;17:284-95.
  5. Middernacht B, De Wilde L, Mole′D, Favard L, Debeer P. Glenosphere disengagement: a potentially serious default in reverse shoulder surgery. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466:892-8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-007-0090-6
  6. Schmalzried TP, Jasty M, Rosenberg A, Harris WH. Polyethylene wear debris and tissue reactions in knee as compared to hip replacement prostheses. J Appl Biomater. 1994;5:185-90. https://doi.org/10.1002/jab.770050302
  7. Sanchez-Sotelo J, Cofield RH, Rowland CM. Shoulder hemi-arthroplasty for glenohumeral arthritis associated with severe rotator cuff deficiency. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001;83:1814-22.
  8. Franklin JL, Barrett WP, Jackins SE, Matsen FA. Glenoid loosening in total shoulder arthroplasty. Association with rotator cuff deficiency. J Arthroplasty. 1988;3:39-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-5403(88)80051-2
  9. Reeves RB, Jobbins B, Flowers M. Biomechanical problems in the development of a total shoulder endoprosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1972;54:193.
  10. Coughlin MJ, Morris JM, West WF. The semiconstrained total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1979;61:574-81.
  11. Neer CS, 2nd, Craig EV, Fukuda H. Cuff-tear arthropathy. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1983;65:1232-44.
  12. Neer CS. Shoulder Reconstruction. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co; 1990. 146-50.
  13. Burkhead W. History and development of shoulder arthroplasty. In: Friedman R (ed): Arthroplasty of the Shoulder. Thieme: New York; 1994. 838-53.
  14. Fenlin JM Jr. Total glenohumeral joint replacement. Orthop Clin North Am. 1975;6:565-83.
  15. Bodey W, Yeoman P. Arthroplasty of the shoulder. Acta Orthop Scand. 1983;54:900-3. https://doi.org/10.3109/17453678308992930
  16. Grammont P, Trouilloud P, Laffay JP, Deries X. Concept study and realization of a new total shoulder prosthesis [French]. Rhumatologie. 1987;39:407-18.
  17. Boileau P, Watkinson D, Hatzidakis AM, Hovorka I. Neer Award 2005: The Grammont reverse shoulder prosthesis: results in cuff tear arthritis, fracture sequelae, and revision arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006;15:527-40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2006.01.003
  18. Mole D, Favard L. Excentered scapulohumeral osteoarthritis. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 2007;93 Suppl:37-94.
  19. Werner CM, Steinmann PA, Gilbart M, Gerber C. Treatment of painful pseudoparesis due to irreparable rotator cuff dysfunction with the Delta III reverse-balland- socket total shoulder prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1476-86. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.D.02342
  20. Wall B, Nove-Josserand L, O'Connor DP, et al. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty: a review of results according to etiology. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89: 1476-85. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00666
  21. Guery J, Favard L, Sirveaux F, et al. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Survivorship analysis of eighty replacements followed for five to ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:1742-7. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.E.00851
  22. Frankle M, Siegal S, Pupello D, et al. A reverse shoulder prosthesis for glenohumeral arthritis associated with severe rotator cuff deficiency: a minimum two year follow up study of sixty patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1697-705. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.D.02813
  23. Levigne C, Boileau P, Favard L, et al. Scapular notching in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17:925-35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2008.02.010
  24. Simovitch RW, Zumstein MA, Lohri E, et al. Predictors of scapular notching in patients managed with the Delta III reverse total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:588-600. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.F.00226
  25. Rittmeister M, Kerschbaumer F. Grammont reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and nonreconstructible rotator cuff lesions. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2001;10:17-22. https://doi.org/10.1067/mse.2001.110515
  26. Nyffeler RW, Werner CM, Gerber C. Biomechanical relevance of glenoid component positioning in the reverse Delta III total shoulder prosthesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005;14:524-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2004.09.010
  27. Humphrey CS, Kelly JD II, Norris TR. Optimizing glenosphere position and fixation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty, Part Two: The three- column concept. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17:595-601. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2008.05.038
  28. Harman M, Frankle M, Vasey M, Banks S. Initial glenoid component fixation in "Reverse" total shoulder arthroplasty: a biomechanical evaluation. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005;14:162-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2004.09.030
  29. Gutierrez S, Greiwe RM, Frankle MA, et al. Biomechanical comparison of component position and hardware failure in the reverse shoulder prosthesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16 Suppl:S9-12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2005.11.008