Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Otto von Guericke University Magdeburg, Magdeburg, Germany.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Asklepios Harzkliniken Fritz-König-Stift Bad Harzburg, Bad Harzburg, Germany.
Bone Joint J. 2021 Jul;103-B(7):1292-1300. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.103B7.BJJ-2020-0915.R3.
The purpose of this study was to compare clinical results, long-term survival, and complication rates of stemless shoulder prosthesis with stemmed anatomical shoulder prostheses for treatment of osteoarthritis and to analyze radiological bone changes around the implants during follow-up.
A total of 161 patients treated with either a stemmed or a stemless shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder were evaluated with a mean follow-up of 118 months (102 to 158). The Constant score (CS), the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, and active range of motion (ROM) were recorded. Radiological analysis for bone adaptations was performed by plain radiographs. A Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was calculated and complications were noted.
The ROM (p < 0.001), CS (p < 0.001), and DASH score (p < 0.001) showed significant improvements after shoulder arthroplasty for both implants. There were no differences between the groups treated with stemmed or stemless shoulder prosthesis with respect to the mean CS (79.2 (35 to 118) vs 74.4 (31 to 99); p = 0.519) and DASH scores (11.4 (8 to 29) vs 13.2 (7 to 23); p = 0.210). The ten-year unadjusted cumulative survival rate was 95.3% for the stemmed anatomical shoulder prosthesis and 91.5% for the stemless shoulder prosthesis and did not differ between the treatment groups (p = 0.251). The radiological evaluation of the humeral components in both groups did not show loosening of the humeral implant. The main reason for revision for each type of arthroplasties were complications related to the glenoid.
The use of anatomical stemless shoulder prosthesis yielded good and reliable results and did not differ from anatomical stemmed shoulder prosthesis over a mean period of ten years. The differences in periprosthetic humeral bone adaptations between both implants have no clinical impact during the follow-up. Cite this article: 2021;103-B(7):1292-1300.
本研究旨在比较无柄肩关节假体与柄式解剖型肩关节假体治疗骨关节炎的临床效果、长期生存率和并发症发生率,并分析随访过程中假体周围的影像学骨变化。
对 161 例因原发性肩关节骨关节炎接受柄式或无柄肩关节置换术治疗的患者进行评估,平均随访 118 个月(102-158 个月)。记录肩关节Constant 评分(CS)、上肢残疾评分(DASH)和主动活动度(ROM)。通过普通 X 线片进行影像学骨适应性分析。计算 Kaplan-Meier 生存率分析并记录并发症。
两种假体的 ROM(p < 0.001)、CS(p < 0.001)和 DASH 评分(p < 0.001)在肩关节置换术后均有显著改善。在 CS(79.2(35-118)vs 74.4(31-99);p = 0.519)和 DASH 评分(11.4(8-29)vs 13.2(7-23);p = 0.210)方面,接受柄式或无柄肩关节假体治疗的两组间无差异。柄式解剖型肩关节假体的 10 年未调整累积生存率为 95.3%,无柄肩关节假体为 91.5%,两组间无差异(p = 0.251)。两组的肱骨组件影像学评估均未显示肱骨假体松动。每种关节置换术的主要翻修原因是与肩胛盂相关的并发症。
使用解剖型无柄肩关节假体可获得良好且可靠的效果,在 10 年的平均时间内与解剖型柄式肩关节假体无差异。两种假体周围肱骨骨适应性的差异在随访过程中无临床影响。