Cargando…
The influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty
BACKGROUND: Controversy exists in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in regard to variability in the center of rotation (COR), which modifies the superior-inferior position of the humerus to affect the acromiohumeral interval (AHI), and its effect on the deltoid lever arm (DLA), acromial index (AI)...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6444123/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30984894 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jses.2018.11.003 |
_version_ | 1783407966669504512 |
---|---|
author | Roberson, Troy A. Shanley, Ellen Abildgaard, Jeffrey T. Granade, Charles M. Adams, Kyle J. Griscom, James T. Hunt, Quinn Nix, Quinn Kissenberth, Michael J. Tolan, Stefan J. Hawkins, Richard J. Tokish, John M. |
author_facet | Roberson, Troy A. Shanley, Ellen Abildgaard, Jeffrey T. Granade, Charles M. Adams, Kyle J. Griscom, James T. Hunt, Quinn Nix, Quinn Kissenberth, Michael J. Tolan, Stefan J. Hawkins, Richard J. Tokish, John M. |
author_sort | Roberson, Troy A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Controversy exists in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in regard to variability in the center of rotation (COR), which modifies the superior-inferior position of the humerus to affect the acromiohumeral interval (AHI), and its effect on the deltoid lever arm (DLA), acromial index (AI), and critical shoulder angle (CSA). The purpose of this study was to investigate the variation in biomechanics and the association with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and range of motion (ROM) measurements. METHODS: Radiographs, ROM, and 2-year PRO scores were retrospectively reviewed for 108 patients. RESULTS: There was large variability in preoperative and postoperative biomechanics. The COR was medialized 12.01 ± 4.8 mm. The CSA increased 2.64° ± 12.45°. The AHI increased 20.6 ± 9.80 mm. The DLA lengthened 21.21 ± 10.15 mm. The AI increased 0.009 ± 0.3. Postoperative AI positively correlated with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and Penn Shoulder Score (P = .03). Specifically, a postoperative AI of 0.62 corresponded to American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (72.5 ± 18.3 vs. 62.3 ± 24.7; P = .02) and Penn Shoulder Score (71.2 ± 21.4 vs. 61.8 ± 25.6; P = .05), an average 10 points higher than AI of <0.6. Also, a smaller postoperative CSA (<25°) correlated with improved forward elevation (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that evaluates the variability of biomechanical factors and their impact on postoperative ROM and PROs. An increased AI and decreased CSA are associated with improved PROs in this study, and a smaller CSA is associated with better forward elevation. Change in the COR, AHI, or DLA, however, did not affect patient outcomes or ROM. Further study is warranted to determine the optimal position. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6444123 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-64441232019-04-12 The influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty Roberson, Troy A. Shanley, Ellen Abildgaard, Jeffrey T. Granade, Charles M. Adams, Kyle J. Griscom, James T. Hunt, Quinn Nix, Quinn Kissenberth, Michael J. Tolan, Stefan J. Hawkins, Richard J. Tokish, John M. JSES Open Access Article BACKGROUND: Controversy exists in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in regard to variability in the center of rotation (COR), which modifies the superior-inferior position of the humerus to affect the acromiohumeral interval (AHI), and its effect on the deltoid lever arm (DLA), acromial index (AI), and critical shoulder angle (CSA). The purpose of this study was to investigate the variation in biomechanics and the association with patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and range of motion (ROM) measurements. METHODS: Radiographs, ROM, and 2-year PRO scores were retrospectively reviewed for 108 patients. RESULTS: There was large variability in preoperative and postoperative biomechanics. The COR was medialized 12.01 ± 4.8 mm. The CSA increased 2.64° ± 12.45°. The AHI increased 20.6 ± 9.80 mm. The DLA lengthened 21.21 ± 10.15 mm. The AI increased 0.009 ± 0.3. Postoperative AI positively correlated with American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score and Penn Shoulder Score (P = .03). Specifically, a postoperative AI of 0.62 corresponded to American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (72.5 ± 18.3 vs. 62.3 ± 24.7; P = .02) and Penn Shoulder Score (71.2 ± 21.4 vs. 61.8 ± 25.6; P = .05), an average 10 points higher than AI of <0.6. Also, a smaller postoperative CSA (<25°) correlated with improved forward elevation (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study that evaluates the variability of biomechanical factors and their impact on postoperative ROM and PROs. An increased AI and decreased CSA are associated with improved PROs in this study, and a smaller CSA is associated with better forward elevation. Change in the COR, AHI, or DLA, however, did not affect patient outcomes or ROM. Further study is warranted to determine the optimal position. Elsevier 2019-03-11 /pmc/articles/PMC6444123/ /pubmed/30984894 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jses.2018.11.003 Text en © 2019 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Roberson, Troy A. Shanley, Ellen Abildgaard, Jeffrey T. Granade, Charles M. Adams, Kyle J. Griscom, James T. Hunt, Quinn Nix, Quinn Kissenberth, Michael J. Tolan, Stefan J. Hawkins, Richard J. Tokish, John M. The influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty |
title | The influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty |
title_full | The influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty |
title_fullStr | The influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty |
title_full_unstemmed | The influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty |
title_short | The influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty |
title_sort | influence of radiographic markers of biomechanical variables on outcomes in reverse shoulder arthroplasty |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6444123/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30984894 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jses.2018.11.003 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT robersontroya theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT shanleyellen theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT abildgaardjeffreyt theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT granadecharlesm theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT adamskylej theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT griscomjamest theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT huntquinn theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT nixquinn theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT kissenberthmichaelj theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT tolanstefanj theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT hawkinsrichardj theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT tokishjohnm theinfluenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT robersontroya influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT shanleyellen influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT abildgaardjeffreyt influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT granadecharlesm influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT adamskylej influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT griscomjamest influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT huntquinn influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT nixquinn influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT kissenberthmichaelj influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT tolanstefanj influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT hawkinsrichardj influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty AT tokishjohnm influenceofradiographicmarkersofbiomechanicalvariablesonoutcomesinreverseshoulderarthroplasty |