Department of Orthopedics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL, USA.
J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2018 Mar;27(3):455-462. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2017.10.013. Epub 2017 Dec 19.
The anterosuperior (AS) approach for reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) has been reported as a risk factor for baseplate malposition because of potential difficulty in glenoid exposure. The objective of this study was to compare glenoid baseplate position between the AS and deltopectoral (DP) approaches in relation to the surgeon's experience and to evaluate the effect of placement on clinical outcomes.
There were 109 shoulders that underwent RTSA for cuff tear arthropathy or osteoarthritis with cuff tearing by a single surgeon. The AS approach was used in 87 shoulders. Clinical, radiographic, and functional outcomes were assessed for all patients with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up. Initial postoperative radiographs of all 109 shoulders were assessed for baseplate positioning.
The mean change in glenoid inclination was 3.0° inferior with the AS approach and 2.5° inferior with the DP approach (P = .68). Pain scores (P = .14), range of motion, and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores (P = .16) improved in both groups, without a difference between approach. Scapular notching was noted in 68.5% of AS shoulders and 72.4% of DP shoulders (P = .78). Over time, there was a trend to place the glenoid baseplate more caudal with less inferior tilt.
Both approaches produce similar baseplate position, clinical outcomes, and rates of scapular notching when they are used for RTSA. Attempts to inferiorize the glenoid baseplate through the AS approach may increase the risk of superior inclination.
对于反式全肩关节置换术(RTSA),前上(AS)入路已被报道为肩胛盂假体位置不良的危险因素,因为可能难以充分显露肩胛盂。本研究的目的是比较 AS 与三角肌胸大肌间(DP)入路在术者经验方面对肩胛盂假体位置的影响,并评估其对临床结果的影响。
由同一位外科医生对 109 例肩袖撕裂性关节炎或伴肩袖撕裂的肩关节炎患者行 RTSA。其中 87 例采用 AS 入路。所有患者均获得至少 2 年的随访,评估其临床、影像学和功能结果。对所有 109 例患者的初始术后 X 线片评估肩胛盂假体位置。
AS 组肩胛盂倾斜角平均减少 3.0°,DP 组减少 2.5°(P = .68)。两组患者疼痛评分(P = .14)、活动范围和美国肩肘外科医生评分(P = .16)均改善,两组间无差异。AS 组有 68.5%、DP 组有 72.4%出现肩胛盂切迹(P = .78)。随时间推移,肩胛盂假体有向尾侧、下倾趋势,下倾角度减少。
AS 与 DP 入路均能获得相似的肩胛盂假体位置、临床结果和肩胛盂切迹发生率,通过 AS 入路使肩胛盂假体下倾可能增加上倾风险。