Patient-specific instrumentation reduces deviations between planned and postosteotomy humeral retrotorsion and height in shoulder arthroplasty

Use of computed tomography for shoulder arthroplasty: A systematic review

Introduction

The prevalence of total shoulder arthroplasties is on the rise annually. Improvements in implant quality, construct stability, and surgical techniques have notably enhanced post-operative results, prompting an expansion of indications for shoulder arthroplasty. Despite its high success rate, opportunities for enhancement remain, especially in preoperative planning and intraoperative execution. Advanced imaging technologies offer significant potential in optimizing implant placement, thus improving the longevity of the procedure. To our knowledge, a comprehensive review examining the impact of advanced imaging on shoulder arthroplasty has yet to be conducted. This systematic review aims to investigate the benefits of advanced imaging technologies in this context, focusing on their application in preoperative planning, osteoarthritis assessment, intraoperative adjustments, patient-specific instrumentation, and navigational aids.

Methods

This review utilized a comprehensive search of PubMed to identify relevant studies published from 2000 to 2024, focusing on the application of various imaging techniques in shoulder arthroplasty. The search was conducted by two authors and centered on plain radiography, CT scans, and MRI. The selection criteria included availability of full-text articles, English language, direct comparison of imaging techniques, and a focus on patient outcomes, including discussions on broader applications such as intraoperative navigation and patient-specific instrumentation development.

Results

Enhanced imaging techniques, particularly CT scans and MRIs, have been shown to significantly improve outcomes in shoulder arthroplasty. While plain radiographs remain standard, CT scans provide superior bony detail, crucial for evaluating glenoid wear and determining augmentation needs. Preoperative CT imaging has been demonstrated to enhance implant placement accuracy. Moreover, intraoperative technologies based on CT imaging, such as patient-specific instrumentation and navigation systems, contribute to better surgical results.

Conclusion

The benefits of CT imaging in shoulder arthroplasty significantly outweigh the associated costs. Current literature strongly supports the adoption of CT imaging in these procedures, particularly when used alongside modern operative technologies.

Evolution of Stemless Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty: Current Indications, Outcomes, and Future Prospects

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) is increasingly being used as a reliable option for various shoulder disorders with deteriorated rotator cuff and glenohumeral joints. The stemless humerus component for shoulder arthroplasties is evolving with theoretical advantages, such as preservation of the humeral bone stock and decreased risk of periprosthetic fractures, as well as clinical research demonstrating less intraoperative blood loss, reduced surgical time, a lower rate of intraoperative fractures, and improved center of rotation restoration. In particular, for anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA), the utilization of stemless humeral implants is gaining consensus in younger patients. The current systematic review of 14 clinical studies (637 shoulders) demonstrated the clinical outcomes of stemless rTSA. Regarding shoulder function, the mean Constant-Murley Score (CS) improved from 28.3 preoperatively to 62.8 postoperatively. The pooled overall complication and revision rates were 14.3% and 6.3%, respectively. In addition, recent studies have shown satisfactory outcomes with stemless rTSA relative to stemmed rTSA. Therefore, shoulder surgeons may consider adopting stemless rTSA, especially in patients with sufficient bone quality. However, further long-term studies comparing survivorship between stemless and stemmed rTSA are required to determine the gold standard for selecting stemless rTSA.

Radial head replacement with the 3D-printed patient-specific titanium prosthesis: Preliminary results of a multi-centric prospective study

PURPOSE

To report preliminary clinical results and safety of 3D-printed patient-specific titanium radial head (RH) prosthesis in treatment of the irreparable RH fractures.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This multi-centric prospective study included 10 patients (6 men and four women, mean age 41 years (range, 25-64 years)). Three cases were classified as Mason type III and 7 cases as type IV. Patients were assessed preoperatively, intraoperatively, and at 1, 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 weeks postoperatively. Range of motion (ROM), visual analog scale (VAS) score, Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) score, Mayo Elbow Performance Score (MEPS), radiology imaging, and laboratory blood and urine testing were evaluated.

RESULTS

The prostheses were implanted utilizing cemented stems in 5 patients and cementless stems in 5 patients. Intraoperatively, well congruency of a prosthesis with capitellum and radial notch of ulna was observed in all cases. All patients had improvement of ROM, VAS score, DASH score, and MEPS during the postoperative follow-ups. At the final follow-up, mean elbow extension was 6.5° (range, 0°-30°), flexion 145° (range, 125°-150°), supination 79° (range, 70°-80°), and pronation 73.5° (range, 45°-80°). Mean VAS score was 0.3 (range, 0-3), DASH score was 12.35 (range, 1.7-23.3), and MEPS was 99.5 (range, 95-100). Postoperative radiographs demonstrated heterotopic ossification in 2 cases, periprosthetic radiolucency in 2 cases, and proximal radial neck resorption in 2 cases. No one had the evidence of capitellar erosion, implant failure, malpositioning, overstuffing, or symptomatic stem loosening. There was no significant alteration of laboratory results or adverse events related to the 3D-printed prosthesis implantation.

CONCLUSION

The preliminary results demonstrated that implantation of the 3D-printed patient-specific titanium RH prosthesis is safe and may be a potential treatment option for irreparable RH fracture.