The effects of prosthetic humeral head shape on glenohumeral joint kinematics: a comparison of non-spherical and spherical prosthetic heads to the native humeral head

Jun, Bong Jae; Iannotti, Joseph P.; McGarry, Michelle H.; Yoo, Jae Chul; Quigley, Ryan; Lee, Thay Q.

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2013.01.002

Cited by 54 publications

(61 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the maximum averaged difference in total rotational ROM was only 11.7°, favouring the elliptical SHEMI = spherical hemiarthroplasty; ETSA = elliptical total shoulder arthroplasty; STSA = spherical total shoulder arthroplasty design at 60° of abduction in the hemiarthroplasty state. This was similar to the findings by Jun et al [17] who reported a mean difference of 7.1° when comparing non-spherical and spherical heads. While the previous authors found statistical significance, the clinical relevance of this change is unlikely to impair function [17].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…This was similar to the findings by Jun et al [17] who reported a mean difference of 7.1° when comparing non-spherical and spherical heads. While the previous authors found statistical significance, the clinical relevance of this change is unlikely to impair function [17]. However, the elliptical design may play a greater role in the longevity of the implant, rather than the immediate postoperative gains in motion.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation

Muench

Otto

Kia

et al. 2020

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Elliptical shape humeral head prostheses have been proposed to reflect a more anatomic shoulder replacement. Its effect on the rotational range of motion (ROM) compared to a standard spherical head is still not understood. The purpose was to investigate if there would be a difference in rotational ROM when comparing elliptical and spherical prosthetic heads in a dynamic shoulder model. The authors hypothesized that the use of elliptical heads would result in significantly more rotational ROM compared to the spherical head design. Materials and methods Six fresh-frozen, cadaveric shoulders were evaluated using a dynamic shoulder model. After being tested in the native condition, each specimen underwent 6 conditions in the hemiarthroplasty state: (1) matched-fit spherical head, (2) oversized spherical head, (3) undersized spherical head, (4) matched-fit elliptical head, (5) oversized elliptical head, and (6) undersized elliptical head. Following conversion to total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA), the 6 prior conditions were rerun. Each condition was tested at 0°, 30° and 60° of glenohumeral abduction. Rotational ROM was quantified using 3-dimensional tracking, while dynamically applying alternating forces for internal and external rotation via the rotator cuff tendons. Results Elliptical and spherical prosthetic heads showed no significant difference in the degree of the total, internal, and external rotational ROM for both the hemiarthroplasty and TSA state. Conversion from hemiarthroplasty to TSA resulted in less degree of total rotational ROM for both head designs in all abduction positions, without reaching statistical significance. There was a significant decrease in total, internal, and external rotational ROM for both elliptical and spherical heads in every replacement condition, when comparing 0° to 30° and 60° of abduction (P < 0.05, respectively). Conclusion In a dynamic shoulder model, elliptical and spherical prosthetic head designs showed no significant difference in the degree of the total, internal, and external rotational ROM in both the hemiarthroplasty and TSA state. Level of evidence Controlled laboratory study

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation

Muench

Otto

Kia

et al. 2020

Arch Orthop Trauma Surg

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, bilateral shoulder CT scans of 15 normal control cadaver shoulders (30 shoulders) with no evidence of glenohumeral osteoarthritis or other disorder in either shoulder were obtained. These controls were cadavers from a previous IRBapproved study [15] and included only males younger than 60 years, who were 69 inches or taller. The field of view of each CT scan included the entire scapula.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Is Premorbid Glenoid Anatomy Altered in Patients with Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis?

Ricchetti

Hendel

Collins

et al. 2013

Clinical Orthopaedics &Amp; Related Research

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, this condition would avoid the physiological translation of the humeral head that could only occur in this scenario after articular surface separation and a consequent eccentric loading over the glenoid rim. 20 A spherical head coupled with a non-conforming glenoid with small radial mismatch allows small glenohumeral translations and motion 19,21 with consequently increased translational forces and stress concentrations, which may cause glenoid wear and loosening. 22 A greater radial mismatch (less conformity) between bearings leads to increased glenohumeral translations.…”

Section: Biomechanical Rationalmentioning

confidence: 99%

Wear performance of inverted non-conforming bearings in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

Banci¹,

Meoli²,

Hintner³

et al. 2019

Shoulder & Elbow

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Glenoid component failures still represent the most common complication in total shoulder arthroplasty. These failures depend on several factors, including ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene (UHMWPE) wear. One reason for UHMWPE wear in total shoulder arthroplasty may be the current use of a spherical prosthetic humeral head against a radially mismatched UHMWPE glenoid component, which leads to reduced glenohumeral translations, glenoid edge loading and high translational forces during shoulder motions. The aim of this study was to assess the in vitro wear of an anatomic total shoulder prosthesis with non-spherical non-conforming bearings with inverted conventional materials. Methods: The wear of a vitamin E-blended UHMWPE non-spherical humeral head articulating against a non-conforming titanium-niobium nitride (TiNbN)-coated metallic glenoid was tested using a joint simulator. The wear test was performed by applying a constant load of 756 N with angular motions and translations. Results: After 2.5 million cycles, the mean wear rate of the humeral head was 0.28 AE standard deviation (SD) 0.45 mg/million cycles. Conclusion: The low wear rate of the vitamin E UHMWPE humeral head supports the use of non-spherical nonconforming bearings with inverted conventional materials in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Keywords ultra-high molecular weight polyethylene wear, total shoulder arthroplasty, non-spherical humeral head, inverted bearing materials, non-conforming bearings Date

show abstract

The effects of prosthetic humeral head shape on glenohumeral joint kinematics: a comparison of non-spherical and spherical prosthetic heads to the native humeral head

Cited by 54 publications

References 17 publications

Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation

Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation

Is Premorbid Glenoid Anatomy Altered in Patients with Glenohumeral Osteoarthritis?

Wear performance of inverted non-conforming bearings in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About