Skip to main content
Top
Published in: International Orthopaedics 4/2011

01-04-2011 | Original Paper

Effect of posterior offset humeral components on range of motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty

Authors: Nicolas J. Dedy, Martin Stangenberg, Dennis Liem, Christof Hurschler, Beat Simmen, Marc Riner, Bjoern Marquardt, Joern Steinbeck

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 4/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of eccentric humeral components with different degrees of posterior offset on range of glenohumeral motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Uncemented PROMOS® reverse shoulder prostheses were implanted in eight human cadaveric shoulder specimens. Passive range of motion was evaluated with a robot-assisted shoulder simulator. Three movements were tested: abduction, anterior elevation and external rotation. Each specimen was tested with a customary reverse humeral component and two eccentric components with 3 and 6 mm of posterior offset respectively. Mean abduction was 81° (standard deviation [SD] 12) for the customary reverse components, 81° (SD 13) for the 3 mm eccentric and 82° (SD 15) for 6-mm eccentric implants. Mean anterior elevation was 68° (SD 13) in the regular group and 66° (SD 14) and 63° (SD 14) for 3- and 6-mm eccentric groups. With all configurations, 90° of external rotation were achieved without requiring more than 2 N·m of applied rotational moment. Although there was no statistically significant difference between the conventional and the eccentric implants, anterior elevation was decreased by almost 20° in three of eight shoulders with the posterior offset configurations. This was due to a conflict between the proximal humerus and the anterior aspect of the acromion or the coracoid. Although eccentric humeral components can be useful in reverse shoulder arthroplasty to avoid anterior cortical defects in individuals with pronounced humeral head posterior offset, a potential conflict between proximal humerus and scapula may have an unfavourable effect on range of anterior elevation. However, this observation is only true for the uncemented PROMOS® reverse prosthesis. Other reverse shoulder designs with posterior offset components are yet to be tested.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Bergmann JHM, De Leeuw M, Janssen TWJ, Veeger DHEJ, Willems WJ (2008) Contribution of the reverse endoprosthesis to glenohumeral kinematics. Clin Orthop Rel Res 466:594–598CrossRef Bergmann JHM, De Leeuw M, Janssen TWJ, Veeger DHEJ, Willems WJ (2008) Contribution of the reverse endoprosthesis to glenohumeral kinematics. Clin Orthop Rel Res 466:594–598CrossRef
2.
go back to reference Boileau P, Walch G (1997) The three dimensional geometry of the proximal humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79-B:857–865CrossRef Boileau P, Walch G (1997) The three dimensional geometry of the proximal humerus. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79-B:857–865CrossRef
3.
go back to reference Edwards TB, Williams MD, Labriola JE, Elkousy HA, Gartsman GM, O’Connor DP (2009) Subscapularis insufficiency and the risk of shoulder dislocation after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18(6):892–896. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2008.12.013 Edwards TB, Williams MD, Labriola JE, Elkousy HA, Gartsman GM, O’Connor DP (2009) Subscapularis insufficiency and the risk of shoulder dislocation after reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18(6):892–896. doi:10.​1016/​j.​jse.​2008.​12.​013
4.
go back to reference Hertel R, Knothe U, Ballmer FT (2002) Geometry of the proximal humerus and implications for prosthetic design. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11(4):331–338PubMedCrossRef Hertel R, Knothe U, Ballmer FT (2002) Geometry of the proximal humerus and implications for prosthetic design. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 11(4):331–338PubMedCrossRef
5.
go back to reference Hurschler C, Wulker N, Mendila M (2000) The effect of negative intraarticular pressure and rotator cuff force on glenohumeral translation during simulated active elevation. Clin Biomech 15:306–314CrossRef Hurschler C, Wulker N, Mendila M (2000) The effect of negative intraarticular pressure and rotator cuff force on glenohumeral translation during simulated active elevation. Clin Biomech 15:306–314CrossRef
6.
go back to reference Hurschler C, Wulker N, Windhagen H, Plumhoff P, Hellmers N (2001) Medially based anterior capsular shift of the glenohumeral joint. Passive range of motion and posterior capsular strain. Am J Sports Med 29(3):346–353PubMed Hurschler C, Wulker N, Windhagen H, Plumhoff P, Hellmers N (2001) Medially based anterior capsular shift of the glenohumeral joint. Passive range of motion and posterior capsular strain. Am J Sports Med 29(3):346–353PubMed
7.
go back to reference Kasten P, Maier M, Rettig O, Raiss P, Wolf S, Loew M (2009) Proprioception in total, heim- and reverse shoulder arthroplasty in 3D motion analyses: a prospective study. Int Orthop (SICOT) 33:1641–1647. doi:10.1007/s00264-008-0666-0 CrossRef Kasten P, Maier M, Rettig O, Raiss P, Wolf S, Loew M (2009) Proprioception in total, heim- and reverse shoulder arthroplasty in 3D motion analyses: a prospective study. Int Orthop (SICOT) 33:1641–1647. doi:10.​1007/​s00264-008-0666-0 CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Marquardt B, Hurschler C, Schneppendahl J, Witt K, Potzl W, Steinbeck J (2006) Quantitative assessment of glenohumeral translation after anterior shoulder dislocation and subsequent arthroscopic Bankart repair. Am J Sports Med 34(11):1756–1762PubMedCrossRef Marquardt B, Hurschler C, Schneppendahl J, Witt K, Potzl W, Steinbeck J (2006) Quantitative assessment of glenohumeral translation after anterior shoulder dislocation and subsequent arthroscopic Bankart repair. Am J Sports Med 34(11):1756–1762PubMedCrossRef
9.
go back to reference Matsen FA, Boileau P, Walch G, Gerber C, Bicknell RT (2007) The reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:660–667PubMed Matsen FA, Boileau P, Walch G, Gerber C, Bicknell RT (2007) The reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 89:660–667PubMed
10.
go back to reference Miller BS, Joseph TA, Noonan TJ, Horan MP, Hawkins RJ (2005) Rupture of the subscapularis tendon after shoulder arthroplasty: diagnosis, treatment and outcome. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(5):492–496PubMedCrossRef Miller BS, Joseph TA, Noonan TJ, Horan MP, Hawkins RJ (2005) Rupture of the subscapularis tendon after shoulder arthroplasty: diagnosis, treatment and outcome. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(5):492–496PubMedCrossRef
11.
go back to reference Nyffeler RW, Werner CM, Gerber C (2005) Biomechanical relevance of glenoid component positioning in the reverse Delta III total shoulder prosthesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(5):524–528PubMedCrossRef Nyffeler RW, Werner CM, Gerber C (2005) Biomechanical relevance of glenoid component positioning in the reverse Delta III total shoulder prosthesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(5):524–528PubMedCrossRef
12.
go back to reference Roberts SN, Foley APJ, Swallow HM, Wallace WA, Coughlan DP (1991) The geometry of the humeral head and the design of prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73-B:647–650 Roberts SN, Foley APJ, Swallow HM, Wallace WA, Coughlan DP (1991) The geometry of the humeral head and the design of prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br 73-B:647–650
13.
go back to reference Thiel W (1992) The preservation of the whole corpse with natural color. Ann Anat 174(3):185–195PubMed Thiel W (1992) The preservation of the whole corpse with natural color. Ann Anat 174(3):185–195PubMed
14.
go back to reference Wulker N, Schmotzer H, Thren K, Korell M (1994) Translation of the glenohumeral joint with simulated active elevation. Clin Orthop Rel Res 309:193–200 Wulker N, Schmotzer H, Thren K, Korell M (1994) Translation of the glenohumeral joint with simulated active elevation. Clin Orthop Rel Res 309:193–200
Metadata
Title
Effect of posterior offset humeral components on range of motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty
Authors
Nicolas J. Dedy
Martin Stangenberg
Dennis Liem
Christof Hurschler
Beat Simmen
Marc Riner
Bjoern Marquardt
Joern Steinbeck
Publication date
01-04-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
International Orthopaedics / Issue 4/2011
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-010-1079-4

Other articles of this Issue 4/2011

International Orthopaedics 4/2011 Go to the issue