Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders
Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2017

Open Access 01-12-2017 | Research article

No correlation between radiolucency and biomechanical stability of keeled and pegged glenoid components

Authors: Andreas Voss, Knut Beitzel, Elifho Obopilwe, Stefan Buchmann, John Apostolakos, Jessica Di Venere, Michael Nowak, Mark P. Cote, Anthony A. Romeo, Augustus D. Mazzocca

Published in: BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders | Issue 1/2017

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study was to examine biomechanical properties and the degree of radiolucency of two cemented basic glenoid designs for total shoulder arthroplasty. Our hypothesis was that a component with increased micro-motion in the laboratory at time zero would also exhibit a greater amount of radiolucency in patients at a minimum of 2 years post total shoulder arthroplasty.

Methods

Thirty cadaveric shoulders were divided into 2 groups (keel vs. peg). The glenoid components were first loaded with a single axial eccentric force of 196 N in all orientations and then with a transversal load of 49 N to simulate in vivo loads with abduction. Displacement of the glenoid component was determined with four different linear variable-differential transducers. In the second phase, 56 antero-posterior x-rays of 52 patients with either the same keeled (n = 24) or pegged (n = 32) glenoid component with a minimum of 24 months follow-up were evaluated for radiolucency.

Results

Biomechanically the pegged glenoid showed a significant increase in micro-motion during eccentric axial loading as well as during combined loading in the anterior, posterior, and inferior position as compared to the keeled glenoid (p < 0.05). In contrast all results were significant with greater radiolucency for the keeled glenoid component (p = 0.001).

Conclusion

While the pegged component exhibited a greater amount of micro-motion during biomechanical testing, radiolucency was greater in patients with a keeled component. These findings provide support for both components from different perspectives and highlight the need for well-constructed studies to determine whether glenoid design has an effect on clinical outcome, because influences are multifactorial and biomechanical forces may not recreate forces seen in vivo.
Literature
1.
Papadonikolakis A, Neradilek MB, Matsen 3rd FA. Failure of the glenoid component in anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review of the English-language literature between 2006 and 2012. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013;95(24):2205–12.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Bohsali KI, Wirth MA, Rockwood Jr CA. Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(10):2279–92.PubMed
3.
Chin PY, Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Schleck C. Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty: are they fewer or different? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006;15(1):19–22.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Collins D, Tencer A, Sidles J, Matsen 3rd F. Edge displacement and deformation of glenoid components in response to eccentric loading. The effect of preparation of the glenoid bone. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74(4):501–7.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Edwards TB, Labriola JE, Stanley RJ, O’Connor DP, Elkousy HA, Gartsman GM. Radiographic comparison of pegged and keeled glenoid components using modern cementing techniques: a prospective randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(2):251–7.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Throckmorton TW, Zarkadas PC, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Pegged versus keeled glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19(5):726–33.CrossRefPubMed
7.
Anglin C, Wyss UP, Nyffeler RW, Gerber C. Loosening performance of cemented glenoid prosthesis design pairs. Clin Biomech. 2001;16(2):144–50.CrossRef
8.
Neer 2nd CS. Replacement arthroplasty for glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1974;56(1):1–13.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Lazarus MD, Jensen KL, Southworth C, Matsen 3rd FA. The radiographic evaluation of keeled and pegged glenoid component insertion. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2002;84-A(7):1174–82.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Altman D. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman and Hall; 1991.
11.
Anglin C, Tolhurst P, Wyss UP, Pichora DR. Glenoid cancellous bone strength and modulus. J Biomech. 1999;32(10):1091–7.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Checroun AJ, Hawkins C, Kummer FJ, Zuckerman JD. Fit of current glenoid component designs: an anatomic cadaver study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(6):614–7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Iannotti JP, Gabriel JP, Schneck SL, Evans BG, Misra S. The normal glenohumeral relationships. An anatomical study of one hundred and forty shoulders. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1992;74(4):491–500.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Yongpravat C, Lester JD, Saifi C, Trubelja A, Greiwe RM, Bigliani LU, et al. Glenoid morphology after reaming in computer-simulated total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013;22(1):122–8.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Matsen 3rd FA, Clinton J, Lynch J, Bertelsen A, Richardson ML. Glenoid component failure in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90(4):885–96.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Friedman RJ, Laberge M, Dooley RL, O’Hara AL. Finite element modeling of the glenoid component: Effect of design parameters on stress distribution. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1992;1(5):261–70.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Orr TE, Carter DR, Schurman DJ. Stress analyses of glenoid component designs. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1988;232:217–24.
18.
Lacroix D, Murphy LA, Prendergast PJ. Three-dimensional finite element analysis of glenoid replacement prostheses: a comparison of keeled and pegged anchorage systems. J Biomech Eng. 2000;122(4):430–6.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Gartsman GM, Elkousy HA, Warnock KM, Edwards TB, O’Connor DP. Radiographic comparison of pegged and keeled glenoid components. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005;14(3):252–7.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Torchia ME, Cofield RH, Settergren CR. Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis: long-term results. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1997;6(6):495–505.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Walch G, Young AA, Boileau P, Loew M, Gazielly D, Mole D. 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 Joint Surg Am. 2012;94(2):145–50.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Gazielly DF, Scarlat MM, Verborgt O. Long-term survival of the glenoid components in total shoulder replacement for arthritis. Int Orthop. 2015;39(2):285–9.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Papadonikolakis A, Matsen 3rd FA. Metal-backed glenoid components have a higher rate of failure and fail by different modes in comparison with All-polyethylene components: a systematic review. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2014;96(12):1041–7.CrossRefPubMed
24.
Boileau P, Avidor C, Krishnan SG, Walch G, Kempf JF, Mole D. Cemented polyethylene versus uncemented metal-backed glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective, double-blind, randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(4):351–9.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Fox TJ, Cil A, Sperling JW, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Schleck CD, Cofield RH. Survival of the glenoid component in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009;18(6):859–63.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Fox TJ, Foruria AM, Klika BJ, Sperling JW, Schleck CD, Cofield RH. Radiographic survival in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013;22(9):1221–7.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Norris TR, Iannotti JP. Functional outcome after shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis: a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2002;11(2):130–5.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
No correlation between radiolucency and biomechanical stability of keeled and pegged glenoid components
Authors
Andreas Voss
Knut Beitzel
Elifho Obopilwe
Stefan Buchmann
John Apostolakos
Jessica Di Venere
Michael Nowak
Mark P. Cote
Anthony A. Romeo
Augustus D. Mazzocca
Publication date
01-12-2017
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders / Issue 1/2017
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2474
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-017-1550-0

Other articles of this Issue 1/2017

BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders 1/2017 Go to the issue

Research article

Age related prevalence of hand osteoarthritis diagnosed by photography (HOASCORE)

Research article

Influence of screw density on thoracic kyphosis restoration in hypokyphotic adolescent idiopathic scoliosis

Study protocol

Prospective comparison of the anterior and lateral approach in hemiarthroplasty for hip fractures: a study protocol

Research article

Development and validation of a new tool to measure the facilitators, barriers and preferences to exercise in people with osteoporosis

Research article

Paradoxical tunnel enlargement after ACL reconstruction with hamstring autografts when using β-TCP containing interference screws for tibial aperture fixation- prospectively comparative study

Research article

Efficacy and safety of collagenase clostridium histolyticum for Dupuytren disease nodules: a randomized controlled trial