Comparative and predictive modelling of modern anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty revision rates in osteoarthritis with different polyethylene glenoid designs.

IF 2.9 2区 医学 Q1 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Pub Date : 2025-02-22 DOI:10.1016/j.jse.2025.01.030
David R J Gill, Sophia Corfield, Peiyao Du, Dylan Harries, Richard S Page
{"title":"Comparative and predictive modelling of modern anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty revision rates in osteoarthritis with different polyethylene glenoid designs.","authors":"David R J Gill, Sophia Corfield, Peiyao Du, Dylan Harries, Richard S Page","doi":"10.1016/j.jse.2025.01.030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The revision rates of four modern (currently used) polyethylene glenoid designs in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (stemmed and stemless) for osteoarthritis (OA) are compared from a national arthroplasty registry to model predictive variables.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>The study period was 1<sup>st</sup> January 2008 to 31<sup>st</sup> December 2023. The study population included all primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) procedures undertaken for OA. We classified the designs of modern polyethylene glenoids (glenoid component types) into four cohort groups: cemented all polyethylene glenoids (CPG), polyethylene glenoids with modified central pegs (MCPG), non-modular metal backed glenoids (NMBG) and hybrid glenoids (HG). The cumulative percent revision (CPR) was defined using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HR) from Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age, sex, humeral head size, humeral fixation, primary type (stemmed or stemless), and mean surgeon volume. Only prostheses with all known variables were analyzed. Possible interactions were examined. A sub-analysis was undertaken capturing additional patient demographics from 1 January 2017.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There were 9,332 primary aTSA procedures. The CPR at 8 years for CPG (n=5,048) was 5.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.6, 6.4), 3.8% (95% CI 2.9, 5.1) for MCPG (n=2,217), and 9.4%(95% CI 7.4, 11.9) for HG (n=1,658). The NMBG (n=409) had a 2year CPR of 4.7% (95% CI 2.1, 10.1). The glenoid component type (CPG, MCPG, NMBG, HG) influenced the rate of revision of aTSA (p<0.001). There is evidence for interaction term between age and glenoid type (p=0.009), with a better model (Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) 6205.9) than main effects only (AIC 6211.5) There was no difference at sub-analysis, while the patient sex, type of primary, polyethylene type, ASA, BMI, glenoid fixation, glenoid morphology and mean surgeon volume were less predictive than glenoid component type alone.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Modern aTSA outcome for OA is affected by the polyethylene glenoid design implanted, with the result only modified further by patient's age. Informed decision making about aTSA current prostheses survival is more accurate if age of the patient is included.</p>","PeriodicalId":50051,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2025.01.030","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The revision rates of four modern (currently used) polyethylene glenoid designs in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (stemmed and stemless) for osteoarthritis (OA) are compared from a national arthroplasty registry to model predictive variables.

Materials and methods: The study period was 1st January 2008 to 31st December 2023. The study population included all primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) procedures undertaken for OA. We classified the designs of modern polyethylene glenoids (glenoid component types) into four cohort groups: cemented all polyethylene glenoids (CPG), polyethylene glenoids with modified central pegs (MCPG), non-modular metal backed glenoids (NMBG) and hybrid glenoids (HG). The cumulative percent revision (CPR) was defined using Kaplan-Meier estimates of survivorship and hazard ratios (HR) from Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for age, sex, humeral head size, humeral fixation, primary type (stemmed or stemless), and mean surgeon volume. Only prostheses with all known variables were analyzed. Possible interactions were examined. A sub-analysis was undertaken capturing additional patient demographics from 1 January 2017.

Results: There were 9,332 primary aTSA procedures. The CPR at 8 years for CPG (n=5,048) was 5.5% (95% confidence interval (CI) 4.6, 6.4), 3.8% (95% CI 2.9, 5.1) for MCPG (n=2,217), and 9.4%(95% CI 7.4, 11.9) for HG (n=1,658). The NMBG (n=409) had a 2year CPR of 4.7% (95% CI 2.1, 10.1). The glenoid component type (CPG, MCPG, NMBG, HG) influenced the rate of revision of aTSA (p<0.001). There is evidence for interaction term between age and glenoid type (p=0.009), with a better model (Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) 6205.9) than main effects only (AIC 6211.5) There was no difference at sub-analysis, while the patient sex, type of primary, polyethylene type, ASA, BMI, glenoid fixation, glenoid morphology and mean surgeon volume were less predictive than glenoid component type alone.

Conclusion: Modern aTSA outcome for OA is affected by the polyethylene glenoid design implanted, with the result only modified further by patient's age. Informed decision making about aTSA current prostheses survival is more accurate if age of the patient is included.

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
背景:通过一项全国关节成形术登记,对解剖型全肩关节成形术(有柄和无柄)中四种现代(目前使用的)聚乙烯盂设计的骨关节炎(OA)翻修率进行比较,以建立预测变量模型:研究时间为2008年1月1日至2023年12月31日。研究对象包括所有因OA而进行的初级解剖型全肩关节置换术(aTSA)。我们将现代聚乙烯盂成形术(盂部件类型)的设计分为四组:全粘结聚乙烯盂成形术(CPG)、带改良中心钉的聚乙烯盂成形术(MCPG)、非模块化金属背衬盂成形术(NMBG)和混合盂成形术(HG)。使用Kaplan-Meier估计存活率和Cox比例危险模型中的危险比(HR)来定义累积翻修百分比(CPR),并对年龄、性别、肱骨头大小、肱骨固定、主要类型(有柄或无柄)和外科医生平均手术量进行调整。仅对所有已知变量的假体进行了分析。对可能存在的相互作用进行了研究。从2017年1月1日起,还进行了一项子分析,以获取更多的患者人口统计数据:共进行了 9332 例初级 aTSA 手术。CPG(n=5,048)8年的CPR为5.5%(95%置信区间(CI)4.6,6.4),MCPG(n=2,217)为3.8%(95% CI 2.9,5.1),HG(n=1,658)为9.4%(95% CI 7.4,11.9)。NMBG(人数=409)的2年CPR为4.7%(95% CI为2.1,10.1)。髋臼组件类型(CPG、MCPG、NMBG、HG)影响了aTSA的翻修率(p结论:现代人工全髋关节置换术治疗 OA 的结果受植入的聚乙烯髋关节盂设计的影响,只有患者的年龄会进一步改变结果。如果将患者的年龄也包括在内,那么有关当前 aTSA 假体存活率的知情决策就会更加准确。
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
CiteScore
6.50
自引率
23.30%
发文量
604
审稿时长
11.2 weeks
期刊介绍: The official publication for eight leading specialty organizations, this authoritative journal is the only publication to focus exclusively on medical, surgical, and physical techniques for treating injury/disease of the upper extremity, including the shoulder girdle, arm, and elbow. Clinically oriented and peer-reviewed, the Journal provides an international forum for the exchange of information on new techniques, instruments, and materials. Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery features vivid photos, professional illustrations, and explicit diagrams that demonstrate surgical approaches and depict implant devices. Topics covered include fractures, dislocations, diseases and injuries of the rotator cuff, imaging techniques, arthritis, arthroscopy, arthroplasty, and rehabilitation.
期刊最新文献
Suture debris from high-tensile sutures contributes significantly to particle-induced tissue response in shoulder arthroplasty. The Effect of the Central Post and Screw Constructs on the Univers Revers Total Shoulder System. Does dynamically tensioning suture alter outcomes after rotator cuff repair? Comparative and predictive modelling of modern anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty revision rates in osteoarthritis with different polyethylene glenoid designs. Glenohumeral Arthrodesis in Brachial Plexus Palsies: Open Surgery or Arthroscopy? A Retrospective Comparative Study.
×
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