Cargando…

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

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 i...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Muench, Lukas N., Otto, Alexander, Kia, Cameron, Obopilwe, Elifho, Cote, Mark P., Imhoff, Andreas B., Beitzel, Knut, Mazzocca, Augustus D., Mehl, Julian
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8732933/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32865631
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03587-0
_version_ 1784627707518124032
author Muench, Lukas N.
Otto, Alexander
Kia, Cameron
Obopilwe, Elifho
Cote, Mark P.
Imhoff, Andreas B.
Beitzel, Knut
Mazzocca, Augustus D.
Mehl, Julian
author_facet Muench, Lukas N.
Otto, Alexander
Kia, Cameron
Obopilwe, Elifho
Cote, Mark P.
Imhoff, Andreas B.
Beitzel, Knut
Mazzocca, Augustus D.
Mehl, Julian
author_sort Muench, Lukas N.
collection PubMed
description 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 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00402-020-03587-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8732933
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-87329332022-01-18 Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation Muench, Lukas N. Otto, Alexander Kia, Cameron Obopilwe, Elifho Cote, Mark P. Imhoff, Andreas B. Beitzel, Knut Mazzocca, Augustus D. Mehl, Julian Arch Orthop Trauma Surg Orthopaedic Surgery 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 ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00402-020-03587-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-08-31 2022 /pmc/articles/PMC8732933/ /pubmed/32865631 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03587-0 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) .
spellingShingle Orthopaedic Surgery
Muench, Lukas N.
Otto, Alexander
Kia, Cameron
Obopilwe, Elifho
Cote, Mark P.
Imhoff, Andreas B.
Beitzel, Knut
Mazzocca, Augustus D.
Mehl, Julian
Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation
title Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation
title_full Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation
title_fullStr Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation
title_full_unstemmed Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation
title_short Rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation
title_sort rotational range of motion of elliptical and spherical heads in shoulder arthroplasty: a dynamic biomechanical evaluation
topic Orthopaedic Surgery
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8732933/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32865631
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00402-020-03587-0
work_keys_str_mv AT muenchlukasn rotationalrangeofmotionofellipticalandsphericalheadsinshoulderarthroplastyadynamicbiomechanicalevaluation
AT ottoalexander rotationalrangeofmotionofellipticalandsphericalheadsinshoulderarthroplastyadynamicbiomechanicalevaluation
AT kiacameron rotationalrangeofmotionofellipticalandsphericalheadsinshoulderarthroplastyadynamicbiomechanicalevaluation
AT obopilweelifho rotationalrangeofmotionofellipticalandsphericalheadsinshoulderarthroplastyadynamicbiomechanicalevaluation
AT cotemarkp rotationalrangeofmotionofellipticalandsphericalheadsinshoulderarthroplastyadynamicbiomechanicalevaluation
AT imhoffandreasb rotationalrangeofmotionofellipticalandsphericalheadsinshoulderarthroplastyadynamicbiomechanicalevaluation
AT beitzelknut rotationalrangeofmotionofellipticalandsphericalheadsinshoulderarthroplastyadynamicbiomechanicalevaluation
AT mazzoccaaugustusd rotationalrangeofmotionofellipticalandsphericalheadsinshoulderarthroplastyadynamicbiomechanicalevaluation
AT mehljulian rotationalrangeofmotionofellipticalandsphericalheadsinshoulderarthroplastyadynamicbiomechanicalevaluation