Factors affecting fixation of the glenoid component of a reverse total shoulder prothesis

Chebli, Caroline; Huber, Philippe; Watling, Jonathan P.; Bertelsen, Alexander; Bicknell, Ryan T.; Matsen, Frederick A.

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2007.07.015

Cited by 98 publications

(77 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Also, valuable information could be obtained by comparing if particular implant models fail more often than others, and under which particular conditions. Sawbones block density has been shown to directly affect the load to failure of glenoid component fixation (Chebli et al, 2008). The validation experiment indicated that Sawbones block density also had a notable effect on micromotion magnitude, with 15 and 20 pcf blocks more closely matching results from the tested human scapulae.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

“…Second, while there currently exists no standard for assessing reverse glenoid component stability, the ASTM recommends using polyurethane blocks of modulus and strength corresponding to a density 20 pcf (pounds per cubic foot) for experimental testing of conventional and cemented glenoid component (ASTM, 2008). This density has been used in a few studies for the uncemented reverse glenoid component (Codsi andIannotti, 2008, Poon et al, 2010), while a number of investigations implemented higher (Gutierrez et al, 2007, Harman et al, 2005, Virani et al, 2008 or lower density blocks (Chebli et al, 2008). Therefore, we hypothesized that the choice of the appropriate polyurethane bone test surrogates could be optimized to provide more relevant measurements of reverse glenoid micromotion.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

In vitro assessments of reverse glenoid stability using displacement gages are misleading — Recommendations for accurate measurements of interface micromotion

Favre

Perala

Vogel

et al. 2011

Clinical Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Baseplate micromotion of the reverse shoulder glenoid component can lead to implant loosening. We hypothesized that a remotely positioned displacement gage measures elastic deformation of the system rather than actual micromotion at the implant/bone interface. METHODS: Reverse glenoid components were implanted into polyurethane blocks of 3 different densities. A 700 N compressive load was maintained and a vertical 700 N shear load was applied for 1000 cycles. In addition to the typical gage measurement, a digital image analysis of micromotion at the implant/block interface using high resolution cameras was performed. The measurements were validated on human specimens. A finite element model was implemented to study the isolated effect of block deformation on baseplate displacements. FINDINGS: With the gage, typically reported micromotions were measured. Two orders of magnitude lower micromotions were detected using interface image-based analysis. The finite element simulation showed that elastic deformation alone can cause micromotion magnitudes as measured with displacement gages. Polyurethane blocks of 20 and 15 lbs per cubic foot density best reproduced micromotions as measured on human specimens. INTERPRETATION: We found considerably less relative micromotion at the implant/bone interface than previously assumed. Gage measurements quantify elastic deformation and not true interface micromotion. High resolution digital imaging at the implant/bone interface is strongly recommended for an accurate assessment of reverse glenoid component micromotion. Originally published at: Favre, P; Perala, S; Vogel, P; Fucentese, S F; Goff, J R; Gerber, C; Snedeker, J G (2011). In vitro assessments of reverse glenoid stability using displacement gages are misleading -recommendations for accurate measurements of interface micromotion. Clinical Biomechanics, 26 (9)

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

In vitro assessments of reverse glenoid stability using displacement gages are misleading — Recommendations for accurate measurements of interface micromotion

Favre

Perala

Vogel

et al. 2011

Clinical Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Failure at the glenoid baseplate has been attributed to the inability of the baseplate fixation to overcome the forces imparted to the interface before adequate bony ingrowth [23]. Chebli et al emphasized the importance of glenoid fixation and peripheral screw placement into the highest quality glenoid bone stock [10]. This bone stock can be found in the three major columns of scapular bone, as described by Humphrey et al They emphasize placing peripheral screws into the base of the coracoid, the spine of the scapula, or the scapular pillar [39].…”

Section: Glenoid Baseplate Fixationmentioning

confidence: 99%

How Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Works

Walker

Brooks

Willis

et al. 2011

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The reverse total shoulder arthroplasty was introduced to treat the rotator cuff-deficient shoulder. Since its introduction, an improved understanding of the biomechanics of rotator cuff deficiency and reverse shoulder arthroplasty has facilitated the development of modern reverse arthroplasty designs. Questions/purposes We review (1) the basic biomechanical challenges associated with the rotator cuffdeficient shoulder; (2) the biomechanical rationale for newer reverse shoulder arthroplasty designs; (3) the current scientific evidence related to the function and performance of reverse shoulder arthroplasty; and (4) specific technical aspects of reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Methods A PubMed search of the English language literature was conducted using the key words reverse shoulder arthroplasty, rotator cuff arthropathy, and biomechanics of reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Articles were excluded if the content fell outside of the biomechanics of these topics, leaving the 66 articles included in this review. Results Various implant design factors as well as various surgical implantation techniques affect stability of reverse shoulder arthroplasty and patient function. To understand the implications of individual design factors, one must understand the function of the normal and the cuff-deficient shoulder and coalesce this understanding with the pathology presented by each patient to choose the proper surgical technique for reconstruction. Conclusions Several basic science and clinical studies improve our understanding of various design factors in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. However, much work remains to further elucidate the performance of newer designs and to evaluate patient outcomes using validated instruments such as the American Society for Elbow Surgery, simple shoulder test, and the Constant-Murley scores.

show abstract

“…This problem has been significantly improved in recent designs (Boileau et al, 2006), despite some reported loosening cases (Sirveaux et al, 2004;Wierks et al, 2009). However, because of the constrained nature of the prosthesis and the limited bone volume available, the optimal fixation of the glenoid component remains an open question (Chebli et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tightening force and torque of nonlocking screws in a reverse shoulder prosthesis

Terrier

Kochbeck

Merlini

et al. 2010

Clinical Biomechanics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Factors affecting fixation of the glenoid component of a reverse total shoulder prothesis

Cited by 98 publications

References 31 publications

In vitro assessments of reverse glenoid stability using displacement gages are misleading — Recommendations for accurate measurements of interface micromotion

In vitro assessments of reverse glenoid stability using displacement gages are misleading — Recommendations for accurate measurements of interface micromotion

How Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty Works

Tightening force and torque of nonlocking screws in a reverse shoulder prosthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About