Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Does computerized CT-based 3D planning of the humeral head cut help to restore the anatomy of the proximal humerus after stemless total shoulder arthroplasty?


Grubhofer, Florian; Muniz Martinez, Andres R; Haberli, Jillian; Selig, Megan E; Ernstbrunner, Lukas; Price, Mark D; Warner, Jon J P (2020). Does computerized CT-based 3D planning of the humeral head cut help to restore the anatomy of the proximal humerus after stemless total shoulder arthroplasty? Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery:Epub ahead of print.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Restoration of proximal humeral anatomy (RPHA) after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has been shown to result in better clinical outcomes than is the case in nonanatomic humeral reconstruction. Preoperative virtual planning has mainly focused on glenoid component placement. Such planning also has the potential to improve anatomic positioning of the humeral head by more accurately guiding the humeral head cut and aid in the selection of anatomic humeral component sizing. It was hypothesized that the use of preoperative 3-dimensional (3D) planning helps to reliably achieve RPHA after stemless TSA.

METHODS

One hundred consecutive stemless TSA (67 males, 51 right shoulder, mean age of 62 ±9.4 years) were radiographically assessed using pre- and postoperative standardized anteroposterior radiographs. The RPHA was measured with the so-called circle method described by Youderian et al. We measured deviation from the premorbid center of rotation (COR), and more than 3 mm was considered as minimal clinically important difference. Additionally, pre- and postoperative humeral head diameter (HHD), head-neck angle (HNA), and humeral head height (HHH) were measured to assess additional geometrical risk factors for poor RPHA.

RESULTS

The mean distance from of the premorbid to the implanted head COR was 4.3 ± 3.1 mm. Thirty-five shoulders (35%) showed a deviation of less than 3 mm (mean 1.9 ±1.1) and 65 shoulders (65%) a deviation of ≥3 mm (mean 8.0 ± 3.7). Overstuffing was the main reason for poor RPHA (88%). The level of the humeral head cut was responsible for overstuffing in 46 of the 57 overstuffed cases. The preoperative HHD, HHH, and HNA were significantly larger, higher, and more in valgus angulation in the group with accurate RPHA compared with the group with poor RPHA (HHD of 61.1 mm ± 4.4 vs. 55.9 ± 6.6, P < .001; HHH 8.6±2.2 vs. 7.6±2.6, P = .026; and varus angulation of 134.7° ±6.4° vs. 131.0° ±7.91, P = .010).

CONCLUSION

Restoration of proximal humeral anatomy after stemless TSA using computed tomography (CT)-based 3D planning was not precise. A poorly performed humeral head cut was the main reason for overstuffing, which was seen in 88% of the cases with inaccurate RPHA. Preoperative small HHD, low HHH, and varus-angulated HNA are risk factors for poor RPHA after stemless TSA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Restoration of proximal humeral anatomy (RPHA) after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) has been shown to result in better clinical outcomes than is the case in nonanatomic humeral reconstruction. Preoperative virtual planning has mainly focused on glenoid component placement. Such planning also has the potential to improve anatomic positioning of the humeral head by more accurately guiding the humeral head cut and aid in the selection of anatomic humeral component sizing. It was hypothesized that the use of preoperative 3-dimensional (3D) planning helps to reliably achieve RPHA after stemless TSA.

METHODS

One hundred consecutive stemless TSA (67 males, 51 right shoulder, mean age of 62 ±9.4 years) were radiographically assessed using pre- and postoperative standardized anteroposterior radiographs. The RPHA was measured with the so-called circle method described by Youderian et al. We measured deviation from the premorbid center of rotation (COR), and more than 3 mm was considered as minimal clinically important difference. Additionally, pre- and postoperative humeral head diameter (HHD), head-neck angle (HNA), and humeral head height (HHH) were measured to assess additional geometrical risk factors for poor RPHA.

RESULTS

The mean distance from of the premorbid to the implanted head COR was 4.3 ± 3.1 mm. Thirty-five shoulders (35%) showed a deviation of less than 3 mm (mean 1.9 ±1.1) and 65 shoulders (65%) a deviation of ≥3 mm (mean 8.0 ± 3.7). Overstuffing was the main reason for poor RPHA (88%). The level of the humeral head cut was responsible for overstuffing in 46 of the 57 overstuffed cases. The preoperative HHD, HHH, and HNA were significantly larger, higher, and more in valgus angulation in the group with accurate RPHA compared with the group with poor RPHA (HHD of 61.1 mm ± 4.4 vs. 55.9 ± 6.6, P < .001; HHH 8.6±2.2 vs. 7.6±2.6, P = .026; and varus angulation of 134.7° ±6.4° vs. 131.0° ±7.91, P = .010).

CONCLUSION

Restoration of proximal humeral anatomy after stemless TSA using computed tomography (CT)-based 3D planning was not precise. A poorly performed humeral head cut was the main reason for overstuffing, which was seen in 88% of the cases with inaccurate RPHA. Preoperative small HHD, low HHH, and varus-angulated HNA are risk factors for poor RPHA after stemless TSA.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics

Altmetrics

Downloads

1 download since deposited on 08 Feb 2021
1 download since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:04 Faculty of Medicine > Balgrist University Hospital, Swiss Spinal Cord Injury Center
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Scopus Subject Areas:Health Sciences > Surgery
Health Sciences > Orthopedics and Sports Medicine
Language:English
Date:17 September 2020
Deposited On:08 Feb 2021 17:15
Last Modified:09 Feb 2021 21:04
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:1058-2746
OA Status:Closed
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2020.08.045
PubMed ID:32950671

Download

Closed Access: Download allowed only for UZH members