Maggini Emanuele, Warnhoff Mara, Freislederer Florian, Scheibel Markus
Department of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Schulthess Clinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Departments of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences, and Public Health, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2024 Jul 5;14(3). doi: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.23.00067. eCollection 2024 Jul-Sep.
Metallic lateralized-offset glenoid reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) for cuff tear arthropathy combines the use of a metallic augmented baseplate with a metaphyseally oriented short stem design that can be applied at a 135° or 145° neck-shaft angle, leading to additional lateralization on the humeral side. Lateralization of the center of rotation decreases the risk of inferior scapular notching and improves external rotation, deltoid wrapping, residual rotator cuff tensioning, and prosthetic stability. Metallic increased-offset RSA (MIO-RSA) achieves lateralization and corrects inclination and retroversion while avoiding graft resorption and other complications of bony increased-offset RSA (BIO-RSA). Reducing the neck-shaft angle from the classical Grammont design, in combination with glenoid lateralization, improves range of motion by reducing inferior impingement during adduction at the expense of earlier superior impingement during abduction. Lädermann et al. investigated how different combinations of humeral stem and glenosphere designs influence range of motion and muscle elongation. They assessed 30 combinations of humeral components, as compared with the native shoulder, and found that the combination that allows for restoration of >50% of the native range of motion in all directions was a 145° onlay stem with a concentric or lateralized tray in conjunction with a lateralized or inferior eccentric glenosphere. In addition, the use of a flush-lay or a slight-onlay stem design (like the one utilized in the presently described technique) may decrease the risk of secondary scapular spine fracture. The goal of this prosthetic design is to achieve an excellent combination of motion and stability while reducing complications.
This procedure is performed via a deltopectoral approach with the patient in the beach-chair position under general anesthesia combined with a regional interscalene nerve block. Subscapularis tenotomy and capsular release are performed, the humeral head is dislocated, and any osteophytes are removed. An intramedullary cutting guide is placed for correct humeral resection. The osteotomy of the humeral head is performed in the anatomical neck with an inclination of 135° and a retroversion of 20° to 40°, depending on the anatomical retroversion. The glenoid is prepared as usual. The lateralized, augmented baseplate is assembled with the central screw and the baseplate-wedge-screw complex is placed by inserting the screw into the central screw hole. Four peripheral screws are utilized for definitive fixation. An eccentric glenosphere with inferior overhang is implanted. The humerus is dislocated, and the metaphysis is prepared. Long compactors are utilized for proper stem alignment, and an asymmetric trial insert is positioned before the humerus is reduced. Stability and range of motion are assessed. The definitive short stem is inserted and the asymmetric polyethylene is impacted, resulting in a neck-shaft angle of 145°. Following reduction, subscapularis repair and wound closure are performed.
BIO-RSA is the main alternative to MIO-RSA. Boileau et al. demonstrated satisfactory early and long-term outcomes of BIO-RSA for shoulder osteoarthritis. A larger lateral offset may also be achieved with a thicker glenosphere. Mark A. Frankle developed an implant that addressed the drawbacks of the Grammont design: a lateralized glenosphere combined with a 135° humeral neck-shaft angle. The 135° neck-shaft angle provides lateral humeral offset, preserving the normal length-tension relationship of the residual rotator cuff musculature, which optimizes its strength and function. The lateralized glenosphere displaces the humeral shaft laterally, minimizing the potential for impingement during adduction. The advantage of BIO-RSA and MIO-RSA over lateralized glenospheres is that the former options provide correction of angular deformities without excessive reaming, which can lead to impingement.
BIO-RSA has been proven to achieve excellent functional outcomes; however, the bone graft can undergo resorption, which may result in early baseplate loosening. Bipolar metallic lateralized RSA is an effective strategy for achieving lateralization and correction of multiplanar defects while avoiding the potential complications of BIO-RSA. MIO-RSA also overcomes another limitation of BIO-RSA, namely that BIO-RSA is not applicable when the humeral head is not available for use (e.g., humeral head osteonecrosis, revision surgery, fracture sequelae).
A recent study evaluated the clinical and radiographic outcomes of metallic humeral and glenoid lateralized implants. A total of 42 patients underwent primary RSA. Patients were documented prospectively and underwent follow-up visits at 1 and 2 years postoperatively. That study demonstrated that bipolar metallic lateralized RSA achieves excellent clinical results in terms of shoulder function, pain relief, muscle strength, and patient-reported subjective assessment, without instability or radiographic signs of scapular notching. Kirsch et al. reported the results of primary RSA with an augmented baseplate in 44 patients with a minimum of 1 year of clinical and radiographic follow-up. The use of an augmented baseplate resulted in excellent short-term clinical outcomes and substantial deformity correction in patients with advanced glenoid deformity. No short-term complications and no failure or loosening of the augmented baseplate were observed. Merolla et al. compared the results of 44 patients who underwent BIO-RSA and 39 patients who underwent MIO-RSA, with a minimum follow-up of 2 years. Both techniques provided good clinical outcomes; however, BIO-RSA yielded union between the cancellous bone graft and the surface of the native glenoid in <70% of patients. On the other hand, complete baseplate seating was observed in 90% of MIO-RSA patients.
When performing subscapularis tenotomy, leave an adequate stump to allow end-to-end repair.Tenotomize the superior part of the subscapularis tendon in an L-shape, sparing the portion below the circumflex vessels.As glenoid exposure is critical, perform a 270° capsulotomy.Continuously check the orientation of the baseplate relative to the prepared hole and reamed surface to ensure accurate implantation of the full wedge baseplate to achieve a proper fit.Aim for 70% to 80% seating of the baseplate onto the prepared glenoid surface. Avoid overtightening or excessive advancement of the baseplate into the subchondral bone. Gaps between the baseplate and glenoid surface should also be avoided.In order to avoid varus or valgus malpositioning of the final implant, obtain proper diaphyseal alignment by following "the three big Ls": large, lateral, and long. Use a large metaphyseal component to fill the metaphysis. Place the guide pin for the reaming of the metaphysis slightly laterally into the resected surface of the humerus. Use long compactors for diaphyseal alignment to avoid varus or valgus malpositioning of the final implant.Use an intramedullary cutting guide for correct humeral resection.Utilize the correct liner in order to obtain proper tensioning and avoid instability.
K wire = Kirschner wireROM = range of motion.
用于肩袖撕裂关节病的金属侧方偏移盂肱关节反置式肩关节置换术(RSA)结合了使用金属增强型基板和干骺端定向短柄设计,该短柄设计可应用于135°或145°的颈干角,从而在肱骨侧实现额外的侧方偏移。旋转中心的侧方偏移降低了肩胛下切迹的风险,并改善了外旋、三角肌包裹、残留肩袖张力和假体稳定性。金属增加偏移量RSA(MIO - RSA)实现了侧方偏移并纠正了倾斜和后倾,同时避免了植骨吸收和骨增加偏移量RSA(BIO - RSA)的其他并发症。与经典的Grammont设计相比,减小颈干角并结合盂侧方偏移,通过减少内收时的下方撞击来改善活动范围,但以牺牲外展时较早出现的上方撞击为代价。Lädermann等人研究了肱骨干和关节盂球窝设计的不同组合如何影响活动范围和肌肉伸长。他们评估了30种肱骨头组件组合,并与正常肩关节进行比较,发现能够在各个方向恢复>50%正常活动范围的组合是一个145°的镶嵌柄,搭配同心或侧方托盘以及侧方或下方偏心的关节盂球窝。此外,使用平齐镶嵌或轻微镶嵌柄设计(如本技术中所采用的)可能会降低继发肩胛冈骨折的风险。这种假体设计的目标是在减少并发症的同时实现活动和稳定性的完美结合。
该手术通过胸大肌三角肌入路进行,患者在全身麻醉联合区域肌间沟神经阻滞下处于沙滩椅位。进行肩胛下肌肌腱切断术和关节囊松解,使肱骨头脱位,并切除任何骨赘。放置髓内切割导板以进行正确的肱骨截骨。在解剖颈处进行肱骨头截骨,倾斜度为135°,后倾角度为20°至40°,具体取决于解剖后倾情况。按常规准备关节盂。将侧方增强型基板与中心螺钉组装在一起,通过将螺钉插入中心螺孔来放置基板 - 楔形 - 螺钉复合体。使用四个周边螺钉进行最终固定。植入带有下方悬垂的偏心关节盂球窝。使肱骨脱位并准备干骺端。使用长压实器进行适当的柄部对齐,并在肱骨复位前放置不对称试验插入物。评估稳定性和活动范围。插入最终的短柄并冲击不对称聚乙烯,使颈干角达到145°。复位后,进行肩胛下肌修复和伤口闭合。
BIO - RSA是MIO - RSA的主要替代方案。Boileau等人证明了BIO - RSA用于肩关节骨关节炎的早期和长期效果令人满意。使用更厚的关节盂球窝也可以实现更大的外侧偏移。Mark A. Frankle开发了一种植入物,解决了Grammont设计的缺点:一个侧方关节盂球窝与135°的肱骨干颈干角相结合。13°的颈干角提供了肱骨外侧偏移,保留了残留肩袖肌肉组织的正常长度 - 张力关系,从而优化了其强度和功能。侧方关节盂球窝将肱骨干向外移位,使内收时撞击的可能性最小化。BIO - RSA和MIO - RSA相对于侧方关节盂球窝的优势在于,前一种选择无需过度扩孔即可纠正角度畸形,过度扩孔可能导致撞击。
BIO - RSA已被证明能取得出色的功能结果;然而,骨移植可能会发生吸收,这可能导致早期基板松动。双极金属侧方RSA是实现侧方偏移和纠正多平面缺陷的有效策略,同时避免了BIO - RSA的潜在并发症。MIO - RSA还克服了BIO - RSA的另一个局限性,即当肱骨头不可用时(例如肱骨头缺血性坏死、翻修手术、骨折后遗症),BIO - RSA不适用。
最近一项研究评估了金属肱骨和关节盂侧方植入物的临床和影像学结果。共有42例患者接受了初次RSA。对患者进行前瞻性记录,并在术后1年和2年进行随访。该研究表明,双极金属侧方RSA在肩部功能、疼痛缓解、肌肉力量和患者报告的主观评估方面取得了出色的临床结果,没有不稳定或肩胛切迹的影像学表现。Kirsch等人报告了44例使用增强型基板进行初次RSA的结果,至少进行了1年的临床和影像学随访。使用增强型基板在晚期关节盂畸形患者中产生了出色的短期临床结果和显著的畸形矫正。未观察到短期并发症,增强型基板也没有失败或松动。Merolla等人比较了44例接受BIO - RSA和39例接受MIO - RSA患者的结果,最短随访2年。两种技术都提供了良好的临床结果;然而,BIO - RSA在<70%的患者中实现了松质骨移植与天然关节盂表面的愈合。另一方面,在90%的MIO - RSA患者中观察到基板完全就位。
进行肩胛下肌肌腱切断术时,保留足够的残端以进行端端修复。以L形切断肩胛下肌肌腱的上部,保留旋肱血管下方的部分。由于关节盂暴露至关重要,进行270°的关节囊切开术。持续检查基板相对于准备好的孔和扩孔表面的方向,以确保全楔形基板准确植入以实现合适的贴合。目标是使基板在准备好的关节盂表面上就位70%至80%。避免过度拧紧或使基板过度推进到软骨下骨中。也应避免基板与关节盂表面之间出现间隙。为了避免最终植入物的内翻或外翻错位,通过遵循“三个大L”来获得适当的骨干对线:大、外侧和长。使用大的干骺端组件填充干骺端。将用于干骺端扩孔的导针稍微向外侧插入肱骨的切除表面。使用长压实器进行骨干对线,以避免最终植入物的内翻或外翻错位。使用髓内切割导板进行正确的肱骨截骨。使用正确的衬垫以获得适当的张力并避免不稳定。
K线 = 克氏针;ROM = 活动范围