Moroder Philipp, Herbst Eva, Pawelke Jonas, Lappen Sebastian, Schulz Eva
Department of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery, Schulthess Clinic, Zurich, Switzerland.
Department of Health Sciences and Technology, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Bone Jt Open. 2024 Oct 2;5(10):818-824. doi: 10.1302/2633-1462.510.BJO-2024-0100.R1.
The liner design is a key determinant of the constraint of a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). The aim of this study was to compare the degree of constraint of rTSA liners between different implant systems.
An implant company's independent 3D shoulder arthroplasty planning software (mediCAD 3D shoulder v. 7.0, module v. 2.1.84.173.43) was used to determine the jump height of standard and constrained liners of different sizes (radius of curvature) of all available companies. The obtained parameters were used to calculate the stability ratio (degree of constraint) and angle of coverage (degree of glenosphere coverage by liner) of the different systems. Measurements were independently performed by two raters, and intraclass correlation coefficients were calculated to perform a reliability analysis. Additionally, measurements were compared with parameters provided by the companies themselves, when available, to ensure validity of the software-derived measurements.
There were variations in jump height between rTSA systems at a given size, resulting in large differences in stability ratio between systems. Standard liners exhibited a stability ratio range from 126% to 214% (mean 158% (SD 23%)) and constrained liners a range from 151% to 479% (mean 245% (SD 76%)). The angle of coverage showed a range from 103° to 130° (mean 115° (SD 7°)) for standard and a range from 113° to 156° (mean 133° (SD 11°)) for constrained liners. Four arthroplasty systems kept the stability ratio of standard liners constant (within 5%) across different sizes, while one system showed slight inconsistencies (within 10%), and ten arthroplasty systems showed large inconsistencies (range 11% to 28%). The stability ratio of constrained liners was consistent across different sizes in two arthroplasty systems and inconsistent in seven systems (range 18% to 106%).
Large differences in jump height and resulting degree of constraint of rTSA liners were observed between different implant systems, and in many cases even within the same implant systems. While the immediate clinical effect remains unclear, in theory the degree of constraint of the liner plays an important role for the dislocation and notching risk of a rTSA system.
衬垫设计是反向全肩关节置换术(rTSA)约束性的关键决定因素。本研究的目的是比较不同植入系统之间rTSA衬垫的约束程度。
使用一家植入物公司独立的3D肩关节置换术规划软件(mediCAD 3D Shoulder v. 7.0,模块v. 2.1.84.173.43)来确定所有可用公司不同尺寸(曲率半径)的标准衬垫和约束性衬垫的跳跃高度。所获得的参数用于计算不同系统的稳定性比率(约束程度)和覆盖角度(衬垫对球窝的覆盖程度)。测量由两名评估者独立进行,并计算组内相关系数以进行可靠性分析。此外,如有可能,将测量结果与公司自身提供的参数进行比较,以确保软件得出的测量结果的有效性。
在给定尺寸下,不同rTSA系统的跳跃高度存在差异,导致系统间稳定性比率有很大差异。标准衬垫的稳定性比率范围为126%至214%(平均158%(标准差23%)),约束性衬垫的范围为151%至479%(平均245%(标准差76%))。标准衬垫的覆盖角度范围为103°至130°(平均115°(标准差7°)),约束性衬垫的范围为113°至156°(平均133°(标准差11°))。四个关节置换系统在不同尺寸下标准衬垫的稳定性比率保持恒定(在5%以内),而一个系统表现出轻微不一致(在10%以内),十个关节置换系统表现出较大不一致(范围为11%至28%)。在两个关节置换系统中,约束性衬垫的稳定性比率在不同尺寸下是一致的,在七个系统中是不一致的(范围为18%至106%)。
不同植入系统之间,甚至在许多情况下同一植入系统内,都观察到rTSA衬垫的跳跃高度和由此产生的约束程度存在很大差异。虽然直接的临床效果尚不清楚,但理论上衬垫的约束程度对rTSA系统的脱位和开槽风险起着重要作用。