Top

Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology

Published in:

Open Access 01-03-2013 | Original Article

Stemless shoulder prosthesis versus conventional anatomic shoulder prosthesis in patients with osteoarthritis

A comparison of the functional outcome after a minimum of two years follow-up

Authors: Alexander Berth, Géza Pap

Published in: Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology | Issue 1/2013

Abstract

Background

The stemless shoulder prosthesis is a new concept in shoulder arthroplasty. To date, only a few studies have investigated the results of this prosthesis. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical and radiological midterm results of this implant in comparison with a standard anatomic stemmed shoulder prosthesis.

Materials and methods

The Constant score, the DASH score, the active range of motion (abduction, anteversion, external rotation), and the radiological results were examined in 82 patients with primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder treated with either the Total Evolutive Shoulder System^® (Biomed, France) stemless shoulder prosthesis or the Affinis^® (Mathys, Switzerland) stemmed shoulder prosthesis to detect possible differences in the functional outcome and to evaluate radiological properties of the implants. Patients were examined before and 32 ± 4 months after surgery.

Results

There was no significant difference in the Constant scores of the groups treated with the stemless shoulder prosthesis (65.0 ± 11.0 points) and the stemmed shoulder prosthesis (73.2 ± 11.3 points; P = 0.162). The estimated blood loss (P = 0.026) and the mean operative time (P = 0.002) were significantly lower in the group with the stemless shoulder prosthesis.

Conclusions

The use of the stemless shoulder prosthesis yielded good results which, in a mid-term follow-up, were comparable with those provided by a standard anatomic shoulder prosthesis. Further investigations are needed regarding the long-term performance of this prosthesis.

Lo IK, Litchfield RB, Griffin S et al (2005) Quality-of-life outcome following hemiarthroplasty or total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis. A prospective, randomized trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:2178–2185PubMedCrossRef

Bryant D, Litchfield R, Sandow M et al (2005) A comparison of pain, strength, range of motion, and functional outcomes after hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:1947–1956PubMedCrossRef

Hettrich CM, Weldon E III, Boorman RS et al (2004) Preoperative factors associated with improvements in shoulder function after humeral hemiarthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86:1446–1451PubMed

Heers G, Grifka J, An KN (2001) Biomechanical considerations on shoulder joint prosthesis implantation. Orthopade 30:346–353PubMedCrossRef

Berth A, Pap G (2007) Konzept und frühfunktionelle ergebnisse eines neuen doppelexzenter-schulter-prothesensystems. Obere Extremität 2:73–80CrossRef

Boileau P, Walch G (1997) The three-dimensional geometry of the proximal humerus. Implications for surgical technique and prosthetic design. J Bone Joint Surg Br 79:857–865PubMedCrossRef

Habermeyer P (1995) Alloarthroplastik des Schultergelenkes. In: Habermeyer P, Schweiberer L (eds) Schulterchirurgie. Urban & Schwarzenber, München

Iannotti JP, Spencer EE, Winter U et al (2005) Prosthetic positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elbow Surg 14:111S–121SCrossRef

Irlenbusch U, Blatter G, Gebhardt K et al (2011) Prospective study of double-eccentric hemi shoulder arthroplasty in different aetiologies: midterm results. Int Orthop 35:1015–1023

10.

Irlenbusch U, End S, Kilic M (2011) Differences in reconstruction of the anatomy with modern adjustable compared to second-generation shoulder prosthesis. Int Orthop 35:705–711

11.

Irlenbusch U, Rott O, Gebhardt K, Werner A (2008) Reconstruction of the rotational centre of the humeral head depending on the prosthetic design. Z Orthop Unfall 146:211–217PubMed

12.

Norris TR, Iannotti JP (2002) Functional outcome after shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis: a multicenter study. J Should Elbow Surg 11:130–135CrossRef

13.

Pearl ML, Kurutz S (1999) Geometric analysis of commonly used prosthetic systems for proximal humeral replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 81:660–671PubMedCrossRef

14.

Skirving AP (1999) Total shoulder arthroplasty—current problems and possible solutions. J Orthop Sci 4:42–53PubMedCrossRef

15.

Deshmukh AV, Koris M, Zurakowski D, Thornhill TS (2005) Total shoulder arthroplasty: long-term survivorship, functional outcome, and quality of life. J Should Elbow Surg 14:471–479CrossRef

16.

Bohsali KI, Wirth MA, Rockwood CA Jr (2006) Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:2279–2292PubMedCrossRef

17.

Chin PY, Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Schleck C (2006) Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty: are they fewer or different? J Should Elbow Surg 15:19–22CrossRef

18.

Farng E, Zingmond D, Krenek L, Soohoo NF (2011) Factors predicting complication rates after primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elbow Surg 20:557–563CrossRef

19.

Geurts GF, van Riet RP, Jansen N, Declercq G (2010) Placement of the stemless humeral component in the Total Evolutive Shoulder System (TESS). Tech Hand Up Extrem Surg 14:214–217PubMedCrossRef

20.

Huguet D, Declercq G, Rio B et al (2010) Results of a new stemless shoulder prosthesis: radiologic proof of maintained fixation and stability after a minimum of three years’ follow-up. J Should Elbow Surg 19:847–852

21.

Kadum B, Mafi N, Norberg S, Sayed-Noor AS (2011) Results of the Total Evolutive Shoulder System (TESS((R))): a single-centre study of 56 consecutive patients. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 131:1623–1629

22.

Kellgren JH, Lawrence JS (1957) Radiological assessment of osteo-arthrosis. Ann Rheum Dis 16:494–501PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

23.

Constant CR, Murley AH (1987) A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 214:160–164PubMed

24.

Hudak PL, Amadio PC, Bombardier C (1996) Development of an upper extremity outcome measure: the DASH (disabilities of the arm, shoulder and hand) [corrected]. The upper extremity collaborative group (UECG). Am J Ind Med 29:602–608PubMedCrossRef

25.

Boileau P, Sinnerton RJ, Chuinard C, Walch G (2006) Arthroplasty of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Br 88:562–575PubMedCrossRef

26.

Miller BS, Joseph TA, Noonan TJ et al (2005) Rupture of the subscapularis tendon after shoulder arthroplasty: diagnosis, treatment, and outcome. J Should Elbow Surg 14:492–496CrossRef

27.

Tammachote N, Sperling JW, Vathana T et al (2009) Long-term results of cemented metal-backed glenoid components for osteoarthritis of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am 91:160–166PubMedCrossRef

28.

Antuna SA, Sperling JW, Cofield RH (2008) Shoulder hemiarthroplasty for acute fractures of the proximal humerus: a minimum five-year follow-up. J Should Elbow Surg 17:202–209CrossRef

29.

Walch G, Boileau P, Noel E (2010) Shoulder arthroplasty: evolving techniques and indications. Joint Bone Spine 77:501–505PubMedCrossRef

30.

Boileau P, Trojani C, Walch G et al (2001) Shoulder arthroplasty for the treatment of the sequelae of fractures of the proximal humerus. J Should Elbow Surg 10:299–308CrossRef

31.

Brunner U, Kohler S (2007) Shoulder arthroplasty for treatment of the sequelae of proximal humerus fractures. Orthopade 36:1037–1049PubMedCrossRef

32.

Kontakis G, Tosounidis T, Galanakis I, Megas P (2008) Prosthetic replacement for proximal humeral fractures. Injury 39:1345–1358PubMedCrossRef

33.

Pape G, Raiss P, Aldinger PR, Loew M (2010) Comparison of short-term results after CUP prosthesis with cemented glenoid components and total shoulder arthroplasty: a matched-pair analysis. Z Orthop Unfall 148:674–679PubMed

34.

Edwards TB, Kadakia NR, Boulahia A et al (2003) A comparison of hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: results of a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 12:207–213PubMedCrossRef

35.

Berth A, Pap G, Lohmann CH (2012) Midterm results of a stemless shoulder prosthesis for different indications. Obere Extremität 7:83–90. doi:10.1007/s11678-012-0162-4

Title: Stemless shoulder prosthesis versus conventional anatomic shoulder prosthesis in patients with osteoarthritis
A comparison of the functional outcome after a minimum of two years follow-up
Authors: Alexander Berth
Géza Pap
Publication date: 01-03-2013
Publisher: Springer International Publishing
Published in: Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology / Issue 1/2013
Print ISSN: 1590-9921
Electronic ISSN: 1590-9999
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10195-012-0216-9

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Stemless shoulder prosthesis versus conventional anatomic shoulder prosthesis in patients with osteoarthritis

A comparison of the functional outcome after a minimum of two years follow-up

Abstract

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Materials and methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2013

2012 Scientific Referees

Lumbar spine MRI in upright position for diagnosing acute and chronic low back pain: statistical analysis of morphological changes

Volar dislocation of second, third, and fourth carpometacarpal joints: a rare and easily missed diagnosis

A novel modification of Bosworth's technique to repair zone I Achilles tendon ruptures

Failure of intertrochanteric nailing due to distal nail jamming

Arthroscopic treatment of early glenohumeral arthritis