Medicine:Reverse shoulder replacement

From HandWiki
Revision as of 23:59, 4 February 2024 by Sherlock (talk | contribs) (update)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Reverse shoulder replacement
Right RSP Monoblock.jpg
Plain film radiograph in anteroposterior (AP) view of a right shoulder status post reverse shoulder arthroplasty using a prosthesis with a lateralized center of rotation.
ICD-9-CM81.80-81.81
MedlinePlus007387

Reverse shoulder replacement is a type of shoulder replacement in which the normal ball and socket relationship of glenohumeral joint is reversed, creating a more stable joint with a fixed fulcrum.[1] This form of shoulder replacement is utilized in situations in which conventional shoulder replacement surgery would lead to poor outcomes and high failure rates.[2]

Originally considered a salvage procedure, the combination of improved design features and excellent clinical outcome data has led to reverse shoulder replacement largely replacing shoulder hemiarthroplasty for most indications,[3] and even challenging conventional anatomic shoulder replacement in many countries as the most commonly performed shoulder replacement procedure.[4]

Medical uses

Historically, the primary indication to perform reverse shoulder replacement was cuff tear arthropathy, which consists of advanced glenohumeral arthritis in the presence of a massive rotator cuff tear.[5] As reverse shoulder replacement has become more popular, the indications have expanded to include shoulder “pseudoparalysis” due to massive rotator cuff tears, shoulder fractures, severe bone loss on the scapula or humerus precluding the use of standard implants and failed prior shoulder replacement procedures.[6]

Surgical techniques

Pectoralis major muscle

The procedure is performed through a deltopectoral approach, in which the space between the deltoid muscle and pectoralis major muscle is developed. The subscapularis muscle, one of the four muscles of the rotator cuff, is typically detached to perform the operation. The native humerus and scapula bones are prepared using precise machining to accommodate their respective implants. At the end of the procedure, the subscapularis muscle is typically repaired, although some surgeons advocate not repairing this muscle due to the excess tension placed on it by the altered mechanics of the reverse shoulder design.[7]

It is worth noting that this is an implant specific phenomenon, as certain reverse shoulder designs disrupt the normal anatomical relationships significantly while others attempt to restore these closer to what is considered normal anatomy.[8]

Implants

Modern reverse shoulder implants consist of multiple parts. On the scapula bone, there is a metallic baseplate that grows into the bone of the native glenoid, screws and/or pegs that hold this in place, and a round metallic “glenosphere” component that is mated to the baseplate via several different mechanisms. On the humerus bone, there is typically a concave polyethylene liner that articulates with the convex glenosphere and is attached to a humeral stem that grows into the native humerus or is cemented into place. Within this basic structure there are multiple different variations of implants, and to date there is no consensus on which design is superior, although several studies have demonstrated some benefits to certain combinations.[9][10][11] One such modern reverse shoulder implant system is the AltiVate Reverse.[citation needed]

Plain film radiographs in anteroposterior (AP) view of left shoulders that are status post reverse shoulder arthroplasty using three design iterations each with a 135-degree neck-shaft angle and lateralized center of rotation.

History

Traditional shoulder replacement (known as anatomic shoulder replacement) was developed to treat glenohumeral arthritis and consists of resurfacing the native humeral head and glenoid to create smooth articular surfaces to provide pain relief and improved range of motion. Variations of this procedure have been performed as early as 1883.[5] While most patients can achieve substantial clinical improvement using this approach, those with large rotator cuff tears have consistently demonstrated poor outcomes due to loss of the stability provided by these muscles.[2]

In 1972, U.S. orthopedic surgeon Charles S. Neer designed a fixed-fulcrum shoulder replacement in which he reversed the ball and socket geometry.[12] Unfortunately, his design resulted in several early failures, leading him to abandon this concept. Multiple other surgeons throughout the world subsequently developed reversed ball and socket implants, and while some achieved reasonably good results,[13] the concept never gained significant traction until French surgeon Paul Grammont developed his “Trompette” prosthesis in 1985. This was further modified into the Delta III prosthesis in 1991. As Grammont's reverse ball and socket prosthesis gained popularity and began demonstrating reliable outcomes,[14] he subsequently developed what would be known as the “Grammont Principles”,[15] which were a set of rules that explained why his prosthesis was effective and why other reverse ball and socket designs failed.[citation needed]

In 1998, U.S. orthopedic surgeon Mark Frankle began designing a reverse ball and socket prosthesis that did not adhere to the traditional Grammont Principles. He began patenting this device, the RSP (Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis), in 2002.[16] Many doubted the effectiveness of his design and suggested that it would lead to higher failure rates, creating significant controversy and debate within the orthopedic community.[17] After validating his theories with rigorous scientific studies[9] and making several key modifications to his design,[1] Frankle ultimately developed an implant that was able to address the shortcomings of the Grammont-style prostheses while also showing excellent survivorship.[18] Multiple studies have since gone on to demonstrate the advantages of his design principles,[19][10][11] and many of the modern generation reverse shoulder implants have mirrored them.[20]

With good outcome in Rotator cuff arthropathy, the indications for performing reverse shoulder arthroplasty has also expanded to all the situations where the rotator cuff function will be compromised such as unreconstructible fractures of proximal humerus, fracture sequelae, revision shoulder arthroplasty, shoulder instability along with arthritis and proximal humerus bone tumours.[citation needed]

References

  1. 1.0 1.1 "How reverse shoulder arthroplasty works". Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 469 (9): 2440–51. September 2011. doi:10.1007/s11999-011-1892-0. PMID 21484471. 
  2. 2.0 2.1 "Prosthetic replacement in rotator cuff-deficient shoulders". Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 1 (4): 173–86. July 1992. doi:10.1016/1058-2746(92)90011-Q. PMID 22971621. 
  3. "Reverse shoulder arthroplasty versus hemiarthroplasty for treatment of proximal humerus fractures". Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 24 (10): 1560–6. October 2015. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2015.03.018. PMID 25958208. 
  4. "Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in the United States: A Comparison of National Volume, Patient Demographics, Complications, and Surgical Indications". The Iowa Orthopaedic Journal 35: 1–7. 2015. PMID 26361437. 
  5. 5.0 5.1 "A history of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty". Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 469 (9): 2432–9. September 2011. doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1733-6. PMID 21213090. 
  6. "The use of the reverse shoulder arthroplasty for treatment of failed total shoulder arthroplasty". Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 21 (4): 514–22. April 2012. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2011.03.006. PMID 21641825. 
  7. "Clinical Outcomes After Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty With and Without Subscapularis Repair: The Importance of Considering Glenosphere Lateralization". The Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 26 (5): e114–e119. March 2018. doi:10.5435/JAAOS-D-16-00781. PMID 29419724. 
  8. "Influence of glenoid component design and humeral component retroversion on internal and external rotation in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: a cadaver study". Orthopaedics & Traumatology, Surgery & Research 99 (8): 887–94. December 2013. doi:10.1016/j.otsr.2013.08.008. PMID 24211248. 
  9. 9.0 9.1 "Range of impingement-free abduction and adduction deficit after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Hierarchy of surgical and implant-design-related factors". The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume 90 (12): 2606–15. December 2008. doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00012. PMID 19047705. 
  10. 10.0 10.1 "Optimizing reverse shoulder arthroplasty component position in the setting of advanced arthritis with posterior glenoid erosion: a computer-enhanced range of motion analysis". Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 27 (2): 339–349. February 2018. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2017.09.011. PMID 29332666. 
  11. 11.0 11.1 "The influence of humeral neck shaft angle and glenoid lateralization on range of motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty". Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 26 (10): 1726–1731. October 2017. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2017.03.032. PMID 28528016. 
  12. Pupello, Derek (2016). "Origins of Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty and Common Misconceptions". Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty. pp. 3–18. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-20840-4_1. ISBN 978-3-319-20839-8. https://books.google.com/books?id=deHHCgAAQBAJ&pg=PA3. 
  13. "Prosthetic replacement of shoulder joint: preliminary communication". Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine 72 (10): 748–52. October 1979. doi:10.1177/014107687907201010. PMID 552433. 
  14. "Delta shoulder prosthesis for rotator cuff rupture". Orthopedics 16 (1): 65–8. January 1993. doi:10.3928/0147-7447-19930101-11. PMID 8421661. 
  15. "Grammont's idea: The story of Paul Grammont's functional surgery concept and the development of the reverse principle". Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research 469 (9): 2425–31. September 2011. doi:10.1007/s11999-010-1757-y. PMID 21210311. 
  16. Frankle MA, Moad DC, "Reverse shoulder prosthesis system", US patent granted 6790234, published 4 January 2002, issued 14 September 2004, assigned to Encore Medical Asset Corp
  17. "Regarding "Observations on retrieved humeral polyethylene components from reverse total shoulder arthroplasty"". Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery 20 (8): e22–3. December 2011. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2011.01.026. PMID 21482152. 
  18. "Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty for the Treatment of Rotator Cuff Deficiency: A Concise Follow-up, at a Minimum of 10 Years, of Previous Reports". The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. American Volume 99 (22): 1895–1899. November 2017. doi:10.2106/JBJS.17.00175. PMID 29135662. 
  19. Gee, Edward C.A.; Hanson, Emma K.; Saithna, Adnan (2015-07-31). "Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty in Rheumatoid Arthritis: A Systematic Review". The Open Orthopaedics Journal 9 (1): 237–245. doi:10.2174/1874325001509010237. ISSN 1874-3250. PMID 26448802. 
  20. "A Critical Review on Prosthetic Features Available for Reversed Total Shoulder Arthroplasty". BioMed Research International 2016: 1–9. 2016. doi:10.1155/2016/3256931. PMID 28105417.