Lo Eddie Y, Ouseph Alvin, Sodl Jeffrey, Garofalo Raffaele, Krishnan Sumant G
The Shoulder Center, Baylor Scott & White Research Institute, Dallas, Texas.
Baylor University Medical Center, Baylor Scott & White Health, Dallas, Texas.
JBJS Essent Surg Tech. 2024 Aug 6;14(3). doi: 10.2106/JBJS.ST.23.00051. eCollection 2024 Jul-Sep.
With the increased utilization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA), there has been a corresponding increase in the incidence of and demand for revision RTSA. In cases in which the patient has undergone multiple previous surgeries and presents with well-fixed shoulder implants, even the most experienced shoulder surgeon can be overwhelmed and frustrated. Having a simple and reproducible treatment algorithm to plan and execute a successful revision surgery will ease the anxiety of a revision operation and avoid future additional revisions. The extraction techniques described here strive to preserve the humeral and glenoid anatomy, hopefully facilitating the reimplantation steps to follow.
The main principles of implant removal include several consistent, simple steps. In order to revise a well-fixed humeral implant, (1) identify the old implants; (2) create a preoperative plan that systematically evaluates the glenoid and humeral deficiencies; (3) prepare consistent surgical tools, such as an oscillating saw, osteotomes, and/or a tamp; (4) follow the deltoid; (5) dissect the soft tissue with a sponge; (6) dissect the bone with use of an osteotome; and (7) remove the humeral stem in rotation. In cases in which there is also a well-fixed glenoid implant, the surgical procedure will require additional steps, including (8) exposure of the anteroinferior glenoid, (9) disengagement of the glenosphere, and (10) removal of the glenoid baseplate in rotation.
Alternatives to revision RTSA include nonoperative treatment, implant retention with conversion of modular components, extensile revision surgical techniques, and/or mechanical implant removal. With the advent of modular humeral and glenoid components, surgeons may choose to change the implant components instead of removing the entire humeral and glenoid implants; however, repeat complications may occur if the previous implant or implant position was not completely revised. When confronted with a tough humeral explantation, an extensile surgical approach involves creating a cortical window or humeral osteotomy to expose the humeral implant. This approach can compromise the humeral shaft integrity, leading to alternative and less ideal reconstruction implant choices, the use of cerclage wires, and/or the use of a strut graft, all of which may complicate postoperative mobilization. If glenoid implant removal is necessary, the glenosphere is removed first, followed by the underlying baseplate component(s). If the glenosphere is stuck or if screws are cold-welded, the use of a conventional mechanical extraction technique with a burr or diamond saw may be required; however, this may lead to additional metal debris and intraoperative sparks.
Revision RTSA can lead to high complication rates, ranging from 12% to 70%, which will often require additional revision surgeries. The first steps to all revision RTSA procedures include careful surgical exposure and component explantation. A simplified approach to expose the humerus and glenoid, coupled with a systematic and atraumatic approach to remove the implants without inadvertent injuries, will prevent surgical complications and the need for re-revision. The proposed comprehensive technique hopefully will allow precise removal of the humeral and glenoid implants while also preserving the remnant humerus or glenoid for future reconstruction.
Few studies have evaluated postoperative patient outcomes in revision RTSA. Chalmers et al. performed a meta-analysis and found that patients were able to achieve a mean elevation of 106°, a mean American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score of 63, and a mean Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score of 52. Boileau showed very similar outcomes, with a mean elevation of 107° and a mean adjusted Constant score of 62. These outcomes are slightly inferior to those of primary RTSA, but patients remain satisfied with their improvement from their preoperative function.
Preoperative preparation will reduce intraoperative reparation. Know the existing implant and the unique features of its design, understand the patient anatomy including bone defects, and anticipate all of the potential tools that may be needed.Know your anatomy. The anteromedial deltoid edge will help you identify the scarred-in humeral shaft.Da Vinci said that simplicity is the ultimate sophistication. Some of the most common surgical tools and instruments can be more effective than custom-designed ones.The implant should be removed in rotation.There are some company-specific explantation instruments that can be very helpful. Give the appropriate ones a try, but be prepared to consider alternative solutions.
RTSA = reverse total shoulder arthroplastyCT = computed tomographyFE = forward elevation.
随着反式全肩关节置换术(RTSA)应用的增加,翻修RTSA的发生率和需求也相应增加。在患者既往接受过多次手术且肩部植入物固定良好的情况下,即使是最有经验的肩部外科医生也可能感到不知所措和沮丧。拥有一个简单且可重复的治疗方案来规划和实施成功的翻修手术,将减轻翻修手术的焦虑,并避免未来的额外翻修。这里描述的取出技术力求保留肱骨和肩胛盂的解剖结构,有望便于后续的重新植入步骤。
植入物取出的主要原则包括几个一致的简单步骤。为了翻修固定良好的肱骨植入物,(1)识别旧植入物;(2)制定术前计划,系统评估肩胛盂和肱骨的缺损情况;(3)准备一致的手术工具,如摆动锯、骨凿和/或压塞器;(4)沿着三角肌走行;(5)用海绵分离软组织;(6)使用骨凿分离骨组织;(7)旋转取出肱骨干。在存在固定良好的肩胛盂植入物的情况下,手术过程需要额外的步骤,包括(8)暴露肩胛盂前下方,(9)分离球窝,(10)旋转取出肩胛盂基板。
RTSA翻修的替代方案包括非手术治疗、保留植入物并更换模块化部件、扩大翻修手术技术和/或机械取出植入物。随着模块化肱骨和肩胛盂部件的出现,外科医生可以选择更换植入物部件而不是取出整个肱骨和肩胛盂植入物;然而,如果先前的植入物或植入位置没有完全修正,可能会再次出现并发症。当面临困难的肱骨取出时,扩大手术入路包括创建皮质骨窗口或肱骨截骨以暴露肱骨植入物。这种方法可能会损害肱骨干的完整性,导致替代的、不太理想的重建植入物选择、使用环扎钢丝和/或使用支撑植骨,所有这些都可能使术后活动复杂化。如果需要取出肩胛盂植入物,先取出球窝,然后取出下面的基板部件。如果球窝卡住或螺钉冷焊,可能需要使用带毛刺或金刚石锯的传统机械取出技术;然而,这可能会导致额外的金属碎屑和术中火花。
RTSA翻修可能导致较高的并发症发生率,范围从12%到70%,这通常需要额外的翻修手术。所有RTSA翻修手术的第一步包括仔细的手术暴露和部件取出。一种简化的暴露肱骨和肩胛盂的方法,加上一种系统的、无创的取出植入物而不造成意外损伤的方法,将预防手术并发症和再次翻修的需要。所提出的综合技术有望精确取出肱骨和肩胛盂植入物,同时保留残余的肱骨或肩胛盂以供未来重建。
很少有研究评估RTSA翻修术后患者的结果。查尔默斯等人进行了一项荟萃分析,发现患者能够实现平均抬高106°,平均美国肩肘外科医生评分63分,平均单项评估数值评分为52分。布瓦洛显示了非常相似的结果,平均抬高107°,平均调整后的常数评分为62分。这些结果略逊于初次RTSA,但患者对其术前功能的改善仍感到满意。
术前准备将减少术中补救。了解现有的植入物及其独特的设计特点,了解患者的解剖结构,包括骨缺损,并预期所有可能需要的潜在工具。了解你的解剖结构。三角肌前内侧边缘将帮助你识别瘢痕化的肱骨干。达·芬奇说过,简单是终极的复杂。一些最常见的手术工具可能比定制设计的工具更有效。植入物应旋转取出。有一些特定公司的取出器械可能非常有帮助。尝试使用合适的器械,但也要准备好考虑替代解决方案。
RTSA = 反式全肩关节置换术;CT = 计算机断层扫描;FE = 前屈抬高