Teeter Matthew G, Dawson Matthew T, Athwal George S
Department of Surgery, Robarts Research Institute, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada; Department of Medical Biophysics, Robarts Research Institute, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada; Department of Lawson Health Research Institute, Robarts Research Institute, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Imaging Research Laboratories, Robarts Research Institute, Western University, London, Ontario, Canada.
Int J Shoulder Surg. 2016 Jan-Mar;10(1):10-4. doi: 10.4103/0973-6042.174512.
As the incidence of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) increases, so will the revision burden. At times, the revision surgeon may be faced with a well-fixed component on one side of the joint and revision implants from a different manufacturer. The ability to use glenoid and humeral implants from different manufacturers could simplify the revision procedure. This study hypothesized that across a range of RSA systems, some implants would demonstrate high size compatibility and others would demonstrate low compatibility.
Six polyethylene inserts each from eight reverse total shoulder arthroplasty systems were examined (48 total inserts). All inserts were scanned using a laboratory micro-computed tomography scanner at 50 μm isotropic voxel spacing, and their surface geometries were reconstructed. The different implant geometries were co-registered, and the three-dimensional (3D) variability between the articular surfaces of the different implant systems was measured. Intrasystem manufacturing variability was also determined by measuring the 3D variability of inserts from the same system.
The intersystem polyethylene articular surface deviations between same-size systems were not significantly different (P = 0.61) and were a mean maximum of 60 ± 16 μm (range: 30-80 μm). Intrasystem manufacturing variability was equivalent between all but two models, averaging 49 ± 17 μm (range: 23-99 μm).
Differences in articular geometry between same-size inserts from different systems were on the same scale as intrasystem manufacturing variability, suggesting that different implant systems of the same nominal diameter could potentially be used interchangeably in revision or extenuating circumstances.
The results of this study suggest that surgeons can theoretically interchange same-sized implant components from the different RSA systems tested when conducting revisions.
随着反肩关节置换术(RSA)发病率的增加,翻修负担也会随之增加。有时,翻修外科医生可能会面临关节一侧固定良好的假体以及来自不同制造商的翻修植入物。使用来自不同制造商的关节盂和肱骨植入物的能力可以简化翻修手术。本研究假设,在一系列RSA系统中,一些植入物将表现出高尺寸兼容性,而另一些则表现出低兼容性。
检查了来自八个反式全肩关节置换系统的六个聚乙烯衬垫(共48个衬垫)。使用实验室微型计算机断层扫描仪以50μm各向同性体素间距扫描所有衬垫,并重建其表面几何形状。对不同的植入物几何形状进行配准,并测量不同植入系统关节表面之间的三维(3D)变异性。还通过测量来自同一系统的衬垫的3D变异性来确定系统内制造变异性。
相同尺寸系统之间的系统间聚乙烯关节表面偏差无显著差异(P = 0.61),平均最大值为60±16μm(范围:30 - 80μm)。除两个模型外,所有模型的系统内制造变异性相当,平均为49±17μm(范围:23 - 99μm)。
不同系统相同尺寸衬垫之间的关节几何形状差异与系统内制造变异性处于同一尺度,这表明相同标称直径的不同植入系统在翻修或特殊情况下可能可以互换使用。
本研究结果表明,理论上外科医生在进行翻修时可以互换测试的不同RSA系统中相同尺寸的植入物组件。