Top

Published in:

01-12-2018 | Original Paper

Proper benefit of a three dimensional pre-operative planning software for glenoid component positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty

Authors: Adrien Jacquot, Marc-Olivier Gauci, Jean Chaoui, Mohammed Baba, Pierric Deransart, Pascal Boileau, Daniel Mole, Gilles Walch

Published in: International Orthopaedics | Issue 12/2018

Abstract

Purpose

Glenoid loosening after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is influenced by the position of the glenoid component. 3D planning software and patient-specific guides seem to improve positioning accuracy, but their respective individual application and role are yet to be defined. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of freehand implantation after 3D pre-operative planning and to compare its accuracy to that of a targeting guide.

Method

Seventeen patients scheduled for TSA for primary glenohumeral arthritis were enrolled in this prospective study. Every patient had pre-operative planning, based on a CT scan. Glenoid component implantation was performed freehand, guided by 3D views displayed in the operating room. The position of the glenoid component was determined by manual segmentation of post-operative CT scans and compared to the planned position. The results were compared to those obtained in a previous work with the use of a patient-specific guide.

Results

The mean error for the central point was 2.89 mm (SD ± 1.36) with the freehand method versus 2.1 mm (SD ± 0.86) with use of a targeting guide (p = 0.05). The observed difference was more significant (p = 0.03) for more severely retroverted glenoids (> 10°). The mean errors for version and inclination were respectively 4.82° (SD ± 3.12) and 4.2° (SD ± 2.14) with freehand method, compared to 4.87° (SD ± 3.61) and 4.39° (SD ± 3.36) with a targeting guide (p = 0.97 and 0.85, respectively).

Conclusion

3D pre-operative planning allowed accurate glenoid component positioning with a freehand method. Compared to the freehand method, patient-specific guides slightly improved the position of the central point, especially for severely retroverted glenoids, but not the orientation of the component.

Available only for authorised users

Carter MJ, Mikuls TR, Nayak S et al (2012) Impact of total shoulder arthroplasty on generic and shoulder-specific health-related quality-of-life measures: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94:e127. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.K.00204 CrossRefPubMed

Walch G, Young AA, Melis B et al (2011) Results of a convex-back cemented keeled glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis: multicenter study with a follow-up greater than 5 years. J Shoulder Elb Surg 20:385–394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.07.011 CrossRef

Torchia ME, Cofield RH, Settergren CR (1997) Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis: long-term results. J Shoulder Elb Surg 6:495–505. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1058-2746(97)90081-1 CrossRef

Walch G, Young AA, Boileau P et al (2012) Patterns of loosening of polyethylene keeled glenoid components after shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis: results of a multicenter study with more than five years of follow-up. J Bone Jt Surg Am 94. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.J.00699

Farron A, Terrier A, Büchler P (2006) Risks of loosening of a prosthetic glenoid implanted in retroversion. J Shoulder Elb Surg 15:521–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2005.10.003 CrossRef

Hopkins AR, Hansen UN, Amis AA, Emery R (2004) The effects of glenoid component alignment variations on cement mantle stresses in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 13:668–675. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2004.04.008 CrossRef

Iannotti JP, Spencer EE, Winter U et al (2005) Prosthetic positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg Am Shoulder Elb Surg Al 14:111S–121S. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2004.09.026 CrossRef

Nyffeler RW, Sheikh R, Atkinson TS et al (2006) Effects of glenoid component version on humeral head displacement and joint reaction forces: an experimental study. J Shoulder Elb Surg Am Shoulder Elb Surg Al 15:625–629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2005.09.016 CrossRef

Shapiro TA, McGarry MH, Gupta R et al (2007) Biomechanical effects of glenoid retroversion in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 16:S90–S95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2006.07.010 CrossRef

10.

Hendel MD, Bryan JA, Barsoum WK et al (2012) Comparison of patient-specific instruments with standard surgical instruments in determining glenoid component position: a randomized prospective clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94:2167–2175. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.K.01209 CrossRefPubMed

11.

Iannotti J, Baker J, Rodriguez E et al (2014) Three-dimensional preoperative planning software and a novel information transfer technology improve glenoid component positioning. J Bone Joint Surg Am 96:e71. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.L.01346 CrossRefPubMed

12.

Iannotti JP, Greeson C, Downing D et al (2012) Effect of glenoid deformity on glenoid component placement in primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg Am Shoulder Elb Surg Al 21:48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.02.011 CrossRef

13.

Lewis GS, Stevens NM, Armstrong AD (2015) Testing of a novel pin array guide for accurate three-dimensional glenoid component positioning. J Shoulder Elb Surg Am Shoulder Elb Surg Al 24:1939–1947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2015.06.022 CrossRef

14.

Nguyen D, Ferreira LM, Brownhill JR et al (2009) Improved accuracy of computer assisted glenoid implantation in total shoulder arthroplasty: an in-vitro randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elb Surg Am Shoulder Elb Surg Al 18:907–914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2009.02.022 CrossRef

15.

Throckmorton TW, Gulotta LV, Bonnarens FO et al (2015) Patient-specific targeting guides compared with traditional instrumentation for glenoid component placement in shoulder arthroplasty: a multi-surgeon study in 70 arthritic cadaver specimens. J Shoulder Elb Surg Am Shoulder Elb Surg Al 24:965–971. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.10.013 CrossRef

16.

Walch G, Vezeridis PS, Boileau P et al (2015) Three-dimensional planning and use of patient-specific guides improve glenoid component position: an in vitro study. J Shoulder Elb Surg Am Shoulder Elb Surg Al 24:302–309. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.05.029 CrossRef

17.

Gauci MO, Boileau P, Baba M et al (2016) Patient-specific glenoid guides provide accuracy and reproducibility in total shoulder arthroplasty. Bone Jt J 98-B:1080–1085. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.98B8.37257 CrossRef

18.

Iannotti JP, Weiner S, Rodriguez E et al (2015) Three-dimensional imaging and templating improve glenoid implant positioning. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:651–658. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00493 CrossRefPubMed

19.

Suero EM, Citak M, Lo D et al (2013) Use of a custom alignment guide to improve glenoid component position in total shoulder arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Off J ESSKA 21:2860–2866. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-012-2177-1 CrossRef

20.

Chaoui J, Hamitouche C, Stindel E, Roux C (2011) Recognition-based segmentation and registration method for image guided shoulder surgery. Conf Proc Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc Annu Conf 2011:6212–6215. https://doi.org/10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6091534 CrossRef

21.

Moineau G, Levigne C, Boileau P et al (2012) Three-dimensional measurement method of arthritic glenoid cavity morphology: feasibility and reproducibility. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res OTSR 98:S139–S145. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2012.06.007 CrossRefPubMed

22.

Walch G, Badet R, Boulahia A, Khoury A (1999) Morphologic study of the glenoid in primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Arthroplast 14:756–760CrossRef

23.

Molé D, Roche O, Riand N, et al (1999) Cemented glenoid component: results in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. In: Walch G, Boileau P (eds) Shoulder arthroplasty. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp 163–171

24.

Jain N, Pietrobon R, Hocker S et al (2004) The relationship between surgeon and hospital volume and outcomes for shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86-A:496–505CrossRef

25.

Singh A, Yian EH, Dillon MT et al (2014) The effect of surgeon and hospital volume on shoulder arthroplasty perioperative quality metrics. J Shoulder Elb Surg Am Shoulder Elb Surg Al 23:1187–1194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2013.11.017 CrossRef

Title: Proper benefit of a three dimensional pre-operative planning software for glenoid component positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty
Authors: Adrien Jacquot
Marc-Olivier Gauci
Jean Chaoui
Mohammed Baba
Pierric Deransart
Pascal Boileau
Daniel Mole
Gilles Walch
Publication date: 01-12-2018
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: International Orthopaedics / Issue 12/2018
Print ISSN: 0341-2695
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5195
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-018-4037-1

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Proper benefit of a three dimensional pre-operative planning software for glenoid component positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty

Abstract

Purpose

Method

Results

Conclusion

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Method

Results

Conclusion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 12/2018

Lateral locked plating for distal femur fractures by low-energy trauma: what makes a difference in healing?

Fixation augmentation using calcium-phosphate bone substitute improves outcomes of complex tibial plateau fractures. A matched, cohort study

Specific spinal pathologies in adult patients with an acute or subacute atraumatic low back pain in the emergency department

Knee motion symmetry was not restored in patients with unilateral bi-cruciate retaining total knee arthroplasty—in vivo three-dimensional kinematic analysis

A comparison of corrective osteotomies using dorsal and volar fixation for malunited distal radius fractures

Epinephrine in irrigation fluid for visual clarity in arthroscopic shoulder surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis