Total shoulder arthroplasty using an inlay glenoid component for glenoid deficiency: mid- to long-term follow-up of a previously published cohort

The Role of Inlay and Inset Glenoid Implants in Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty is an established treatment for degenerative conditions involving the shoulder. One well-described complication of total shoulder arthroplasty is glenoid loosening, especially in younger and more active patients. As a result, several surgeons recommend against activities that may put patients at risk of implant failure after shoulder arthroplasty. Newer inlay and inset glenoid implants may have a role in treating arthritis in younger patients and may allow them to return to sports and high-impact activities, including weightlifting. These glenoid implants may also play a role in treating patients with notable glenoid deformity. However, more information is needed regarding their long-term outcomes.

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty with inlay glenoid component: A systematic review

Background

A total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) system utilizing an inlay glenoid component has been proposed as a means of reducing glenoid component loosening while still providing patients with desirable functional and clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to systematically review current outcomes literature on TSA using an inlay glenoid component.

Methods

A literature search was conducted using PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Web of Science databases. Studies comparing pre- and postoperative functional and clinical outcomes were included.

Results

Five studies with 148 shoulders (133 patients) were included. Patient-reported outcomes improved, including the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score (mean change 34.1 to 80.6), Penn Shoulder Score (mean change 43.3 to 85.5), Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation score (mean change 34.1 to 80.6), and visual analog scale-pain (mean change 6.9 to 1.6). Range of motion improved for forward elevation (mean change 109.6 to 156.2) and external rotation (mean change 21.5 to 50.8). Glenoid component loosening occurred in one shoulder (0.68%). Two revision surgeries (1.35%) were performed.

Discussion

The use of an inlay glenoid component is associated with improvements in postoperative pain, function, and satisfaction while minimizing rates of glenoid component loosening and the need for revision surgery over short-term follow-up.

Level of evidence

systematic review, level IV.

Clinical and radiographic outcomes following anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty utilizing an inset glenoid component at 2-year minimum follow-up: a dual center study

BACKGROUND

Anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) is a successful and reproducible treatment for patients with painful glenohumeral arthritis. However, long-term outcomes using traditional onlay glenoid components have been tempered by glenoid loosening. Inset components have been proposed to minimize glenoid loosening by reducing edge-loading and opposite-edge lift-off forces with humeral translation. Successful short- and long-term outcomes have been reported while using inset glenoid implants. The current study is the largest study presenting a minimum of 2-year follow-up data following aTSA with an all-polyethylene inset glenoid component (Shoulder Innovations, Holland, MI, USA).

METHODS

A dual center, retrospective review of patients undergoing aTSA using an Inset glenoid component by 2 fellowship-trained shoulder surgeons at 2 separate institutions from August, 2016, to August, 2019, was performed. Minimum follow-up was 2 years. Range of motion (ROM), visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation (SANE), and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) scores were obtained. Radiographic outcomes, including central peg lucency and glenoid loosening, were assessed by 3 independent reviewers on the postoperative Grashey and axillary radiographs obtained at the final follow-up.

RESULTS

Seventy-five shoulders were included for the final analysis. The mean age of the entire cohort was 64 (±11.4) years. Twenty-one (28%) glenoids were type A1, 10 (13.3%) were type A2, 13 (17.3%) were type B1, 22 (29.3%) were type B2, 6 (8%) were type B3, and 3 (4%) were type D. At a minimum follow-up of 24 months (mean: 28.7 months), a significant improvement in ROM in all planes was observed. Significant improvements in VAS (5.1-0.9, P < .001), SANE (39.5-91.2, P < .001), and ASES (43.7-86.6, P < .001) scores were observed. There were 4 (5.3%) cases of central peg lucency about the inset glenoid component and one (1.3%) case of glenoid loosening. No revisions were performed for glenoid loosening.

CONCLUSION

At a minimum of 2 years postoperatively, there were significant improvements in ROM, VAS, SANE, and ASES scores with very low rates of central peg lucency and glenoid loosening in patients undergoing aTSA with an inset glenoid component. Further work is needed to determine the long-term benefit of this novel implant.

Glenoid Prosthesis Design Considerations in Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Total shoulder arthroplasty is an increasingly popular option for the treatment of glenohumeral arthritis. Historically, the effectiveness of the procedure has largely been determined by the long-term stability of the glenoid component. Glenoid component loosening can lead to clinically concerning complications including pain with movement, loss of function, and accumulation of debris which may require surgery to revise. In response, there has been a push to optimize the design of the glenoid prosthesis. Traditional contemporary glenoid components use pegs for fixation and are made entirely of polyethylene. Variations on the standard implant include keeled, metal-backed, hybrid, augmented, and inlay designs. There is a wealth of biomechanical and clinical studies that report on the effectiveness of these different designs. The purpose of this review is to summarize existing literature regarding glenoid component design and identify key areas for future research. Knowledge of the rationale underlying glenoid design will help surgeons select the best component for their patients and optimize outcomes following TSA.