Grammont reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and nonreconstructible rotator cuff lesions

Rittmeister, M.; Kerschbaumer, F.

doi:10.1067/mse.2001.110515

Cited by 408 publications

(277 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

254

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Radiographic analysis of a third case of loosening, which occurred at two years from the index procedure, showed that primary fixation had never been achieved. Therefore, it seems that-as opposed to some literature reports [1,3,36]-glenoid loosenings in our series were not due to scapular notching and subsequent progressive glenoid destabilisation. Special attention must be paid to primary fixation of the glenoid baseplate, eventually adding a bone graft and/or using a long-peg glenoid implant.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 77%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Does lateralisation of the centre of rotation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty avoid scapular notching? Clinical and radiological review of one hundred and forty cases with forty five months of follow-up

Katz¹,

Valenti²,

Kany³

et al. 2015

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Our purpose was to evaluate the influence of metallic lateralisation of the centre of rotation (COR) in reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) on the incidence of scapular notching and its eventual clinical and radiological consequences. Methods We analysed 140 RSAs with a lateralised design (Arrow, FH Orthopedics, Mulhouse, France) implanted for massive rotator cuff tear with/without arthritis. Mean followup was 45 months (range 24-120, standard deviation 20). Patients were evaluated clinically using the Constant and Murley (Clin Orthop Relat Res 214:160-164, 1987) score and active range of motion (ROM) and radiologically using standard anteroposterior and axillary view. Scapular notching was assessed according to Sirveaux classification Simovitch et al. (J Bone Joint Surg Am, 89:588-600, 2007), and patients were separated into two groups (scapular notch/no scapular notch) and compared. Results Forty-one notches (29 %) were found: 20 grade 1, 18 grade 2, and three grade 3. The latter three patients had a follow-up of 44, 70 and 84 months, respectively, and the scapular notch did not evolve in the final two years. Better preoperative function was significantly associated with scapular notching (p<0,05 for flexion and abduction), but no final clinical differences in ROM and Constant score were found between groups. A body mass index (BMI) <30 increased the risk of scapular notching, which was observed in 43 % of patients with a BMI<30 and 30 % of patients with a BMI> 30 p=0,048). Pre-operative narrowing of the subacromial space increased the risk of scapular notching, but age or gender showed no influence. However, there was a significantly greater number of scapular notches in patients operated on the dominant side (p=0,04). No significant difference in lateral offset was found between groups (p=0,99). Glenoid implantation in an excessively high position (p=0,033) and absence of inferior tilt (p=0,0029) were significantly associated with scapular notching. Conclusions In this series, metallic lateralisation of the COR in RSA did not impair clinical results, with patients achieving good flexion recovery ROM increase in rotations. Metallic lateralisation of the COR in RSA leads to a lower incidence of scapular notching (29 %) compared with previously reported results using other arthroplastic systems with a more medialised COR. However, although scapular notching was not totally eliminated, those that were found did not evolve over time. Several factors increased the incidence of scapular notching: BMI <30, better preoperative ROM, an excessively high glenoid implant and absence of inferior tilt.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 77%

“…This implant has a more medialised design, with a COR at the bone-implant interface. Rates of scapular notching varied between 40 % and 74 % [2,12,13,15,36,40,43,44], with a maximum of 96 % [48]. In most publications, the rate of scapular notching continued to increase over time.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Does lateralisation of the centre of rotation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty avoid scapular notching? Clinical and radiological review of one hundred and forty cases with forty five months of follow-up

Katz¹,

Valenti²,

Kany³

et al. 2015

International Orthopaedics (SICOT)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The indications for RTSA have expanded over the last few years and include CTA [15,18,26,50,57,61], inflammatory arthropathy with massive rotator cuff tear [26,45], proximal humeral nonunion or malunion [6,34,57], acute fractures [34,57,58], fixed glenohumeral dislocation [57], posttraumatic arthritis [26,57], tumor [4,13,35,57], revision arthroplasty [6,27,33,57], and chronic pseudoparalysis without arthritis [41,57,60,61]. We will limit our discussion to problems dealing with the rotator cuff.…”

Section: Indications For Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplastymentioning

confidence: 99%

Indications for Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in Rotator Cuff Disease

Drake¹,

O’Connor

Edwards

2010

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

222

129

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) was introduced to treat rotator cuff tear arthropathy but is now used to treat a variety of problems. Although its use has expanded substantially since the FDA's approval in 2004, the appropriateness in patients with rotator cuff disease is unclear. Questions/purposes We review the use of RTSA in patients with rotator cuff disease to (1) describe classification of rotator cuff tear reparability and the concept of a balanced shoulder; (2) explore the theory behind RTSA design relative to rotator cuff arthropathy; (3) discuss the indications and contraindications for RTSA; and (4) review published outcomes of RTSA for rotator cuff arthropathy.Methods We performed a selective review of the literature on the use of RTSA in the treatment of rotator cuff disease.Results Modern RTSA designs restore deltoid tension and a functional fulcrum to the rotator cuff deficient shoulder, which allows recovery of active shoulder elevation and effectively restores function in short-and mediumterm followup studies. Conclusions In short-term followup the RTSA relieves symptoms and restores function for patients with cuff tear arthropathy and irreparable rotator cuff tears with pseudoparalysis (preserved deltoid contraction but loss of active elevation). Severely impaired deltoid function, an isolated supraspinatus tear, and the presence of full active shoulder elevation with a massive rotator cuff tear and arthritis are contraindications to RTSA. Clinical Relevance For properly selected patients who have symptomatic and disabling rotator cuff deficiency, RTSA can result in life-changing improvements in pain, motion, function, and patient satisfaction. Level of Evidence Level V therapeutic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

show abstract

“…The uniqueness of RSA is its conversion of the humerus into a socket (humerosocket) and the glenoid into a ball (glenosphere) with more stable congruent articulation for compensation of the dysfunctional rotator cuff. Clinical studies have provided evidence of pain relief and functional improvements after RSA [3,5,9,12,13,28,32,36].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hierarchy of Stability Factors in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

Gutiérrez

Keller

Levy

et al. 2008

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

154

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty is being used more frequently to treat irreparable rotator cuff tears in the presence of glenohumeral arthritis and instability. To date, however, design features and functions of reverse shoulder arthroplasty, which may be associated with subluxation and dislocation of these implants, have been poorly understood. We asked: (1) what is the hierarchy of importance of joint compressive force, prosthetic socket depth, and glenosphere size in relation to stability, and (2) is this hierarchy defined by underlying and theoretically predictable joint contact characteristics? We examined the intrinsic stability in terms of the force required to dislocate the humerosocket from the glenosphere of eight commercially available reverse shoulder arthroplasty devices. The hierarchy of factors was led by compressive force followed by socket depth; glenosphere size played a much lesser role in stability of the reverse shoulder arthroplasty device. Similar results were predicted by a mathematical model, suggesting the stability was determined primarily by compressive forces generated by muscles.

show abstract

Grammont reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with rheumatoid arthritis and nonreconstructible rotator cuff lesions

Cited by 408 publications

References 16 publications

Does lateralisation of the centre of rotation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty avoid scapular notching? Clinical and radiological review of one hundred and forty cases with forty five months of follow-up

Does lateralisation of the centre of rotation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty avoid scapular notching? Clinical and radiological review of one hundred and forty cases with forty five months of follow-up

Indications for Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty in Rotator Cuff Disease

Hierarchy of Stability Factors in Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About