Wilcox Ben, Campbell Ryan J, Low Adrian K, Yeoh Timothy
Department of Orthopaedics, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia.
Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma Surgery, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Bone Joint J. 2022 Dec;104-B(12):1334-1342. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.104B12.BJJ-2022-0819.R1.
Rates of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) continue to grow. Glenoid bone loss and deformity remains a technical challenge to the surgeon and may reduce improvements in patients' outcomes. However, there is no consensus as to the optimal surgical technique to best reconstruct these patients' anatomy. This review aims to compare the outcomes of glenoid bone grafting versus augmented glenoid prostheses in the management of glenoid bone loss in primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.
This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated study-level data in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement. We performed searches of Medline (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and PubMed from their dates of inception to January 2022. From included studies, we analyzed data for preoperative and postoperative range of motion (ROM), patient-reported functional outcomes, and complication rates.
A total of 13 studies (919 shoulders) were included in the analysis. The mean age of patients at initial evaluation was 72.2 years (42 to 87), with a mean follow-up time of 40.7 months (24 to 120). Nine studies with 292 rTSAs evaluated the use of bone graft and five studies with 627 rTSAs evaluated the use of augmented glenoid baseplates. One study was analyzed in both groups. Both techniques demonstrated improvement in patient-reported outcome measures and ROM assessment, with augmented prostheses outperforming bone grafting on improvements in the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score. There was a higher complication rate (8.9% vs 3.5%; p < 0.001) and revision rate among the bone grafting group compared with the patients who were treated with augmented prostheses (2.4% vs 0.6%; p = 0.022).
This review provides strong evidence that both bone graft and augmented glenoid baseplate techniques to address glenoid bone loss give excellent ROM and functional outcomes in primary rTSA. The use of augmented base plates may confer fewer complications and revisions.Cite this article: 2022;104-B(12):1334-1342.
反式全肩关节置换术(rTSA)的手术率持续上升。肩胛盂骨丢失和畸形仍然是外科医生面临的技术挑战,可能会降低患者治疗效果的改善程度。然而,对于最佳重建这些患者解剖结构的最佳手术技术尚无共识。本综述旨在比较在初次反式全肩关节置换术中,肩胛盂植骨与增强型肩胛盂假体在处理肩胛盂骨丢失方面的效果。
本系统评价和荟萃分析根据系统评价和荟萃分析的首选报告项目声明评估研究水平的数据。我们对Medline(Ovid)、Embase(Ovid)和PubMed从其创刊日期至2022年1月进行了检索。从纳入的研究中,我们分析了术前和术后活动范围(ROM)、患者报告的功能结果和并发症发生率的数据。
共有13项研究(919例肩关节)纳入分析。初次评估时患者的平均年龄为72.2岁(42至87岁),平均随访时间为40.7个月(24至120个月)。9项研究(292例rTSA)评估了植骨的使用,5项研究(627例rTSA)评估了增强型肩胛盂基板的使用。1项研究在两组中均进行了分析。两种技术在患者报告的结果测量和ROM评估方面均显示出改善,增强型假体在美国肩肘外科医生评分的改善方面优于植骨。与接受增强型假体治疗的患者相比,植骨组的并发症发生率更高(8.9%对3.5%;p<0.001),翻修率也更高(2.4%对0.6%;p=0.022)。
本综述提供了有力证据,表明在初次rTSA中,用于处理肩胛盂骨丢失的植骨和增强型肩胛盂基板技术均能带来出色的ROM和功能结果。使用增强型基板可能会减少并发症和翻修。引用本文:2022;104-B(