Press-fit humeral implants in revision shoulder arthroplasty are as effective as cemented arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort study

Q4 Medicine Seminars in Arthroplasty Pub Date : 2024-01-06 DOI:10.1053/j.sart.2023.11.002
Joseph W. Kocan MD , Amrit V. Vinod MD , Sonja Pavlesen MD, MS , Mathew J. DiPaola MD , Thomas R. Duquin MD
{"title":"Press-fit humeral implants in revision shoulder arthroplasty are as effective as cemented arthroplasty: a retrospective cohort study","authors":"Joseph W. Kocan MD ,&nbsp;Amrit V. Vinod MD ,&nbsp;Sonja Pavlesen MD, MS ,&nbsp;Mathew J. DiPaola MD ,&nbsp;Thomas R. Duquin MD","doi":"10.1053/j.sart.2023.11.002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Revision shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is an increasingly common procedure that can involve cemented or uncemented humeral implants. Although cement fixation is often advocated, it is not clear if the outcome is comparable to that of press-fit fixation. This study evaluated the survivorship and outcomes of cemented and press-fit humeral components in patients undergoing RSA at our institution.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>Medical records from adult patients who underwent RSA were reviewed retrospectively. Demographics and surgical data as well as subjective and objective outcome measures were collected. Patients were stratified into 3 groups according to their humeral revision type: cemented, uncemented, and retained stems.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 70 RSA patients with an average follow-up of 51.8 ± 43.9 months were included in the analysis: stems were cemented in 18.6% of the patients, uncemented in 61.4%, and retained in 20.0%. There were no significant group differences in patient characteristics. Follow-up data were available for 54 (77.1%) patients 2 or more years after RSA. There were no differences in patient-reported outcome measures among the groups. Active abduction at 1 year was greater for uncemented revisions than for cemented and retained stem components (128.9° ± 49.7° vs. 98.1° ± 55.7° and 100.8° ± 49.9°, respectively; <em>P</em> &lt; .05). Patients in the uncemented and retained stem cohorts had greater strength in forward flexion, abduction, and external rotation than those in the cemented cohort, whereas patients in the cemented stem group had lower internal rotation strength at 1 and 2+ years of follow-up (<em>P</em> &lt; .05). Postoperative radiographs indicated that none of the stems were at risk for failure. However, humeral bone loss was more common among those with uncemented stems (<em>P</em> = .02); in most of the cases, the loss was attributable to stress shielding. Survivorship of the implants did not differ among the groups, ranging from 91.1% to 92.3%.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><p>Press-fit humeral components may be a viable option for RSA in patients with adequate humeral bone stock.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":39885,"journal":{"name":"Seminars in Arthroplasty","volume":"34 2","pages":"Pages 304-312"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1045452723001736/pdfft?md5=dfd28cca3ba1586bbd05dc2234c22e42&pid=1-s2.0-S1045452723001736-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Seminars in Arthroplasty","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1045452723001736","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Revision shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) is an increasingly common procedure that can involve cemented or uncemented humeral implants. Although cement fixation is often advocated, it is not clear if the outcome is comparable to that of press-fit fixation. This study evaluated the survivorship and outcomes of cemented and press-fit humeral components in patients undergoing RSA at our institution.

Methods

Medical records from adult patients who underwent RSA were reviewed retrospectively. Demographics and surgical data as well as subjective and objective outcome measures were collected. Patients were stratified into 3 groups according to their humeral revision type: cemented, uncemented, and retained stems.

Results

A total of 70 RSA patients with an average follow-up of 51.8 ± 43.9 months were included in the analysis: stems were cemented in 18.6% of the patients, uncemented in 61.4%, and retained in 20.0%. There were no significant group differences in patient characteristics. Follow-up data were available for 54 (77.1%) patients 2 or more years after RSA. There were no differences in patient-reported outcome measures among the groups. Active abduction at 1 year was greater for uncemented revisions than for cemented and retained stem components (128.9° ± 49.7° vs. 98.1° ± 55.7° and 100.8° ± 49.9°, respectively; P < .05). Patients in the uncemented and retained stem cohorts had greater strength in forward flexion, abduction, and external rotation than those in the cemented cohort, whereas patients in the cemented stem group had lower internal rotation strength at 1 and 2+ years of follow-up (P < .05). Postoperative radiographs indicated that none of the stems were at risk for failure. However, humeral bone loss was more common among those with uncemented stems (P = .02); in most of the cases, the loss was attributable to stress shielding. Survivorship of the implants did not differ among the groups, ranging from 91.1% to 92.3%.

Conclusion

Press-fit humeral components may be a viable option for RSA in patients with adequate humeral bone stock.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在翻修肩关节置换术中使用压入式肱骨假体与骨水泥关节置换术同样有效:一项回顾性队列研究
背景翻修肩关节置换术(RSA)是一种越来越常见的手术,可以使用骨水泥或非骨水泥肱骨假体。虽然骨水泥固定经常被提倡,但其结果是否与压入式固定相当尚不清楚。本研究评估了在我院接受RSA手术的患者中,骨水泥固定和压入式固定肱骨组件的存活率和疗效。收集了患者的人口统计学、手术数据以及主观和客观结果指标。根据肱骨翻修类型将患者分为三组:骨水泥柄、非骨水泥柄和保留柄。结果共有70例RSA患者纳入分析,平均随访时间为(51.8 ± 43.9)个月:18.6%的患者采用骨水泥柄,61.4%的患者采用非骨水泥柄,20.0%的患者采用保留柄。各组患者特征无明显差异。54例(77.1%)患者在RSA术后2年或2年以上获得了随访数据。患者报告的结果指标在各组间无差异。与骨水泥和保留骨干组件相比,非骨水泥翻修组件1年后的主动外展更大(分别为128.9° ± 49.7° vs. 98.1° ± 55.7°和100.8° ± 49.9°;P < .05)。与骨水泥组相比,非骨水泥组和保留骨干组患者的前屈、外展和外旋力量更大,而骨水泥组患者在随访1年和2年以上时的内旋力量较小(P <.05)。术后X光片显示,所有骨干都没有失效的风险。然而,肱骨骨质流失在使用非骨水泥柄的患者中更为常见(P = .02);在大多数病例中,骨质流失可归因于应力屏蔽。各组种植体的存活率没有差异,从91.1%到92.3%不等。结论对于肱骨骨量充足的患者来说,压接式肱骨组件可能是RSA的一个可行选择。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Seminars in Arthroplasty
Seminars in Arthroplasty Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
104
期刊介绍: Each issue of Seminars in Arthroplasty provides a comprehensive, current overview of a single topic in arthroplasty. The journal addresses orthopedic surgeons, providing authoritative reviews with emphasis on new developments relevant to their practice.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Table of Contents Comparing comorbidity burden between patients undergoing ambulatory rotator cuff repair vs. inpatient anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty Reaching MCID, SCB, and PASS for ASES, SANE, SST, and VAS following shoulder arthroplasty does not correlate with patient satisfaction Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty using hybrid glenoid fixation with a porous-coated titanium post. Two- to ten-year follow-up of 256 cases with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1