Glenoid component insertion in total shoulder arthroplasty: Comparison of three techniques for drying the glenoid before cementation

Results of a convex-back cemented keeled glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis: multicenter study with a follow-up greater than 5 years

“…Modern cementing techniques, including pulsatile lavage, gas jet lavage, cement pressurization, triple cement compaction, or use of thrombin-soaked gel foam, have been reported to result in improved radiologic outcomes. 7,8,16,21 Despite the reported improvements, Edwards et al 7 compared 3 different methods of glenoid preparation using modern cementing techniques and still found a 41% rate of radiolucencies evident immediately postoperatively. Mileti et al, 18 using modern cementing techniques, reported an identical rate of immediate postoperative radiolucencies of 41%, with 14% radiologic loosening at 4 years.…”

Radiographic comparison of pegged and keeled glenoid components using modern cementing techniques: A prospective randomized study

“…24 The prepared glenoid was cleansed of blood and bone fragments with saline solution lavage followed by sponge drying. 6 Cement was introduced under pressure using a catheter tip syringe. No cement was placed between the back of the glenoid component and the glenoid bone.…”

Pegged versus keeled glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty

“…The importance of proper cementation technique has been repeatedly emphasized, as has meticulous preparation of the glenoid vault. 3,13,18,27 Others have commented on the importance of optimal component design, size, and orientation. 26,28,33 Despite these studies into the mechanisms of glenoid failure, uncertainty still exists as to the optimal type of implant.…”