• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.113-119
• /
• 2018

Background: This study was undertaken to evaluate the positional relationship between planes of the glenoid component (the scapular plane and the perpendicular plane to the glenoid) and its surrounding structures. Methods: Computed tomography (CT) images of both shoulders of 100 patients were evaluated using the 3-dimensional CT reconstruction program ($Aquarius^{(R)}$; TeraRecon). We determined the most lateral scapular bony structure of the scapular plane and measured the shortest distance between the anterolateral corner of the acromion and the scapular plane. The distance between the scapular plane and the midpoint of the line connecting the posterolateral corner of acromion and the anterior tip of the coracoid process (fulcrum axis) was also evaluated. The perpendicular plane was then adjusted to the glenoid and the same values were re-assessed. Results: The acromion was the most lateral scapular structure of scapular plane and perpendicular plane to the glenoid. The average distance from the anterolateral corner of the acromion to the scapular plane was $10.44{\pm}5.11mm$, and to the plane perpendicular to the glenoid was $9.55{\pm}5.13mm$. The midpoint of fulcrum axis was positioned towards the acromion and was measured at $3.90{\pm}3.21mm$ from the scapular plane and at $3.84{\pm}3.17mm$ from the perpendicular plane to the glenoid. Conclusions: Our data indicates that the relationship between the perpendicular plane to the glenoid plane and its surrounding structures is reliable and can be used as guidelines during glenoid component insertion (level of evidence: Level IV, case series, treatment study).

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.21 no.4
• /
• pp.179-185
• /
• 2018

Background: We analyzed the angle between the glenoid anterior surface and glenoid axis, the range of the glenoid apex and the location of the glenoid apex for assistance during shoulder surgery. Methods: Sixty-two patients underwent a computed tomography of the shoulder with a proximal humerus fracture. In the range of the glenoid apex, the ratios of the distribution of triangles with a Constant anterior and posterior area of the glenoid were measured. The location of glenoid apex was confirmed as the percentage of the position with respect to the upper part of the glenoid with the center of the part, analyzed the angle between the glenoid anterior surface and glenoid axis was measured. Results: The angle between the glenoid anterior surface and glenoid axis was $19.80^{\circ}{\pm}3.88^{\circ}$. The location of the glenoid apex is $60.36%{\pm}9.31%$, with the upper end of the glenoid as the reference. The range of the glenoid apex was $21.16%{\pm}4.98%$. When the height of the glenoid becomes smaller, the range of the glenoid apex tends to become larger (p=0.001) and the range of the glenoid apex becomes wider (p=0.001) as the glenoid width narrows. Conclusions: We believe the anatomical measurements of the glenoid will be helpful for a more accurate insertion in glenoid component. It is thought that more accurate insertion is possible if we can set other anatomical measurements using computed tomography imaging of the glenoid which can develop into the study of other anatomical measurements.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.22 no.1
• /
• pp.16-23
• /
• 2019

Background: We aimed to evaluate whether the use of our novel patient-specific guide (PSG) with 3-dimensional reconstruction in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) would allow accurate and reliable implantation of the glenoid and humeral components. Methods: 20 fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were used. The PSG group (n=10) and conventional group (n=10) was evaluated the accuracy and reproducibility of implant positioning between before and after surgery on the computed tomography image. Results: The superoinferior and anteroposterior offset in the glenoid component were $0.42{\pm}0.07$, $0.50{\pm}0.08$ in the conventional group and $0.45{\pm}0.03$, $0.46{\pm}0.02$ in the PSG group. The inclination and version angles were $-1.93^{\circ}{\pm}4.31^{\circ}$, $2.27^{\circ}{\pm}5.91^{\circ}$ and $0.46^{\circ}{\pm}0.02^{\circ}$, $3.38^{\circ}{\pm}2.79^{\circ}$. The standard deviation showed a smaller difference in the PSG group. The anteroposterior and lateromedial humeral canal center offset in the humeral component were $0.45{\pm}0.12$, $0.48{\pm}0.15$ in the conventional group and $0.46{\pm}0.59$ (p=0.794), $0.46{\pm}0.06$ (p=0.702) in the PSG group. The PSG showed significantly better humeral stem alignment. Conclusions: The use of PSGs with 3-dimensional reconstruction reduces variabilities in glenoid and humerus component positions and prevents extreme positioning errors in RTSA.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.190-193
• /
• 2020

In general, reverse shoulder arthroplasty revision is performed using the same implant for both the humerus and glenoid components. However, the authors of the present case used different implants from what was used previously for treating instability with scapular notching and glenoid aseptic loosening and report the case.

• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 2004.11a
• /
• pp.129-135
• /
• 2004

만약 Glenoid side를 해부학적으로 정확하게 치환하고, 상완골측의 prosthesis를 삽입할 때 실제 골두의 크기와 같은 prosthetic head를 쓰고, humeral stem의 위치 및 높이를 정확하게 맞추어 삽입하여, humeral head component의 center와 glenoid component의 center가 일치되고 lateral glenohumeral offset이 정상에 가깝게 수술을 시행하면 인공 치환물로 대치된 glenohumeral joint가 정상에 가장 가까운 kinematics를 가질 수 있다 (당연한 얘기지만 이렇게 수술하려면 많은 경험이 필요). 따라서 Glenohumeral joint의 인공 관절 치환술은 항상 technique-dependant 수술이며, 아무리 좋은 치환물도 훌륭한 수술 기법보다 더 중요할 수는 없다.

• The Academic Congress of Korean Shoulder and Elbow Society
• /
• 2002.10a
• /
• pp.7-7
• /
• 2002

Historically, the decision to perform a hemiarthroplasty (HHR) versus a total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is based on the status of the glenoid and the status of the soft tissues (rotator cuff). In disease processes where the glenoid articular cartilage is relatively well preserved such as avascular necrosis and complex proximal humerus fractures, most orthopaedists recommend performing a HHR while preserving the native glenoid articular surface. At the other end of the spectrum, if the glenoid has excessive bone loss or is unreconstructible, a HHR is the preferred procedure. In patients who have deficient so(t-tissues (rotator cuff) such as rotator cuff tear arthropathy and, occasionally, rheumatoid arthritis, a HHR is the procedure of choice. The indications for HHR in osteoarthritis remain somewhat controversial. There is mounting evidence that performing a HHR for osteoarthritis is inferior to TSA. Recent developments, or 'third generation techniques and materials', in shoulder arthroplasty are expected to improve the longevity of TSA, particularly the glenoid component. In addition, newer designs of reverse-ball prostheses are entering the market with promising early results in patients with deficient rotator cuff mechanisms.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.242-247
• /
• 2015

Background: The size of the baseplate used in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) tends to be larger than the average size of the glenoid in the Korean population. The mismatch between the sizes of the baseplate and the patient's glenoid may result in improper fixation of the glenoid baseplate. This in turn may lead to the premature loosening of the glenoid component. Thus, we evaluated the short-term results of using a 25-mm baseplate in RTSA. Methods: Seventeen patients with cuff tear arthropathy underwent RTSA with a 25-mm baseplate. The mean age of the patients was 70.1 years, and the mean follow-up period was 14.0 months. We evaluated clinical outcomes preoperatively and postoperatively: the range of shoulder motion, the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) score, and the Korean Shoulder Society (KSS) score. Results: We found that the mean ASES score and KSS improved from 35.0 to 74.4 (p<0.001) and from 46.9 to 71.8 (p<0.001) with RTSA. The mean forward elevation and abduction, external rotation also improved from $78.6^{\circ}$ to $134.3^{\circ}$ (p<0.05) and from $66.6^{\circ}$ to $125.0^{\circ}$ (p<0.05), from $20.2^{\circ}$ to $28.4^{\circ}$ (p=0.43). Postoperative complications were seen in 12% of patients, but neither the loosening of the glenoid baseplate nor inferior scapular notching were observed. Conclusions: In sum, the results of using a 25-mm baseplate in RTSA were similar to those of previous reports. Even though the outcomes are those of a short-term follow-up, neither the loosening of the glenoid baseplate nor the scapular notching were observed.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.380-389
• /
• 2023

Background: Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with a nonspherical humeral head component and inlay glenoid is a successful bone-preserving treatment for glenohumeral arthritis. This study aimed to describe the 90-day complication profile of TSA with this prosthesis and compare major and minor complication and readmission rates between inpatient- and outpatient-procedure patients. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of a consecutive cohort of patients undergoing TSA with a nonspherical humeral head and inlay glenoid in the inpatient and outpatient settings by a single surgeon between 2017 and 2022. Age, sex, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and 90-day complication and readmission rates were compared between inpatient and outpatient groups. Results: One hundred eighteen TSAs in 111 patients were identified. Mean age was 64.9 years (range, 39-90) and 65% of patients were male. Ninety-four (80%) and 24 (20%) patients underwent outpatient and inpatient procedures, respectively. Four complications (3.4%) were recorded: axillary nerve stretch injury, isolated ipsilateral arm deep venous thrombosis (DVT), ipsilateral arm DVT with pulmonary embolism requiring readmission, and gastrointestinal bleed requiring readmission. There were no reoperations or other complications. Outpatients were younger with lower ASA and CCI scores than inpatients; however, there was no difference in complications (1/24 vs. 3/94, P=1.00) or readmissions (1/24 vs. 1/94, P=0.37) between these two groups. Conclusions: TSA with a nonspherical humeral head and inlay glenoid can be performed safely in both inpatient and outpatient settings. Rates of early complications and readmissions were low with no difference according to surgical setting. Level of evidence: IV.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.343-350
• /
• 2023

Background: Our purpose was to evaluate a custom reverse total shoulder arthroplasty glenoid baseplate for severe glenoid deficiency, emphasizing the challenges with this approach, including short-term clinical and radiographic outcomes and complications. Methods: This was a single-institution, retrospective series of 29 patients between January 2017 and December 2022 for whom a custom glenoid component was created for extensive glenoid bone loss. Patients were evaluated preoperatively and at intervals for up to 5 years. All received preoperative physical examinations, plain radiographs, and computed tomography (CT). Intra- and postoperative complications are reported. Results: Of 29 patients, delays resulted in only undergoing surgery, and in three of those, the implant did not match the glenoid. For those three, the time from CT scan to implantation averaged 7.6 months (range, 6.1-10.7 months), compared with 5.5 months (range, 2-8.6 months) for those whose implants fit. In patients with at least 2-year follow-up (n=9), no failures occurred. Significant improvements were observed in all patient-reported outcome measures in those nine patients (American Shoulder and Elbow Score, P<0.01; Simple Shoulder Test, P=0.02; Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, P<0.01; Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index, P<0.01). Range of motion improved for forward flexion and abduction (P=0.03 for both) and internal rotation up the back (P=0.02). Pain and satisfaction also improved (P<0.01 for both). Conclusions: Prolonged time (>6 months) from CT scan to device implantation resulted in bone loss that rendered the implants unusable. Satisfactory short-term radiographic and clinical follow-up can be achieved with a well-fitting device. Level of evidence: III.

• Clinics in Shoulder and Elbow
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.105-110
• /
• 2018

Since the introduction of shoulder arthroplasty by Neer in 1974, the design of not only the glenoid component but also the humeral component used in shoulder arthroplasty has continually evolved. Changes to the design of the humeral component include a gradually disappearing proximal fin; diversified surface finishes (such as smooth, grit-blasted, and porous coating); a more contoured stem from the originally straight and cylindrical shape; and the use of press-fit uncemented fixation as opposed to cemented fixation. Despite the evolution of the humeral component for shoulder arthroplasty, however, stem-related complications are not uncommon. Examples of stem-related complications include intraoperative humeral fractures, stem loosening, periprosthetic fractures, and stress shielding. These become much more common in revision arthroplasty, where patients are associated with further complications such as surgical difficulty in extracting the humeral component, proximal metaphyseal bone loss due to stress shielding, intraoperative humeral shaft fractures, and incomplete cement removal. Physicians have made many attempts to reduce these complications by shortening the stem of the humeral component. In this review, we will discuss some of the limitations of long-stem humeral components, the feasibility of replacing them with short-stem humeral components, and the clinical outcomes associated with short-stemmed humeral components in shoulder arthroplasty.