TY - JOUR
T1 - Lateralising reverse shoulder arthroplasty using bony increased offset (BIO-RSA) or increasing glenoid component diameter
T2 - comparison of clinical, radiographic and patient reported outcomes in a matched cohort
AU - Macken, Arno A.
AU - Buijze, Geert Alexander
AU - Kimmeyer, Michael
AU - Hees, Tilman
AU - Eygendaal, Denise
AU - van den Bekerom, Michel
AU - Lafosse, Laurent
AU - Lafosse, Thibault
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© The Author(s) 2024.
PY - 2024/4/18
Y1 - 2024/4/18
N2 - Background: This study aims to compare the range of motion (ROM) of reverse shoulder arthroplasty lateralised by bony increased offset (BIO-RSA) using a standard 38-mm (mm) component to regular reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) lateralised by using a 42-mm glenoid component. The secondary aims are to compare patient-reported and radiographic outcomes between the two groups. Materials and Methods: All patients with a BIO-RSA and size 38 glenosphere were retrospectively identified and matched to patients with a regular RSA and size 42 glenosphere. Matched patients were invited for a follow-up visit. ROM was assessed as well as radiographic outcomes (lateralisation, distalisation, inferior overhang, scapular notching, heterotopic bone formation, radiolucency, stress shielding, bone graft healing and viability and complications) and patient-reported outcomes (subjective shoulder value, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, activities of daily living which require internal rotation, activities of daily living which require external rotation and a visual analogue scale for pain). Outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: In total, 38 BIO-RSAs with a size 38 glenosphere were matched to 38 regular RSAs with a size 42 glenosphere. Of the 76 matched patients, 74 could be contacted and 70 (95%) were included. At the final follow-up, there were no differences between the two groups in ROM, patient-reported outcomes or radiographic outcomes (p > 0.485). Conclusions: Using a larger glenosphere is a feasible alternative to BIO-RSA for lateralising RSA, providing comparable ROM, patient-reported and radiographic results, while potentially decreasing costs, operative time and complication rates. Level of evidence III.
AB - Background: This study aims to compare the range of motion (ROM) of reverse shoulder arthroplasty lateralised by bony increased offset (BIO-RSA) using a standard 38-mm (mm) component to regular reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) lateralised by using a 42-mm glenoid component. The secondary aims are to compare patient-reported and radiographic outcomes between the two groups. Materials and Methods: All patients with a BIO-RSA and size 38 glenosphere were retrospectively identified and matched to patients with a regular RSA and size 42 glenosphere. Matched patients were invited for a follow-up visit. ROM was assessed as well as radiographic outcomes (lateralisation, distalisation, inferior overhang, scapular notching, heterotopic bone formation, radiolucency, stress shielding, bone graft healing and viability and complications) and patient-reported outcomes (subjective shoulder value, Constant score, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, activities of daily living which require internal rotation, activities of daily living which require external rotation and a visual analogue scale for pain). Outcomes were compared between the two groups. Results: In total, 38 BIO-RSAs with a size 38 glenosphere were matched to 38 regular RSAs with a size 42 glenosphere. Of the 76 matched patients, 74 could be contacted and 70 (95%) were included. At the final follow-up, there were no differences between the two groups in ROM, patient-reported outcomes or radiographic outcomes (p > 0.485). Conclusions: Using a larger glenosphere is a feasible alternative to BIO-RSA for lateralising RSA, providing comparable ROM, patient-reported and radiographic results, while potentially decreasing costs, operative time and complication rates. Level of evidence III.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85190659278&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1186/s10195-024-00764-4
DO - 10.1186/s10195-024-00764-4
M3 - Article
C2 - 38637350
AN - SCOPUS:85190659278
SN - 1590-9921
VL - 25
JO - Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
JF - Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
IS - 1
M1 - 20
ER -