0
Articles   |    
Long-Term Results of Total Shoulder Arthroplasty Following Bone-Grafting of the Glenoid
James M. Hill, MD; Tom R. Norris, MD
View Disclosures and Other Information
Investigation performed at California Pacific Medical Center, San Francisco, California
James M. Hill, MD
Orthopaedic Associates, 1300 East Central Road, Arlington Heights, IL 60005

Tom R. Norris, MD
California Pacific Medical Center, 2351 Clay Street, Suite 510, San Francisco, CA 94115

No benefits in any form have been received or will be received from a commercial party related directly or indirectly to the subject of this article. No funds were received in support of this study.

J Bone Joint Surg Am, 2001 Jun 01;83(6):877-883
5 Recommendations (Recommend) | 3 Comments | Saved by 3 Users Save Case

Abstract

Background: The marked loss of glenoid bone volume or alteration of glenoid version can affect glenoid component fixation in patients undergoing total shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term results associated with the use of bone-grafting for restoration of glenoid volume and version at the time of total shoulder arthroplasty.

Methods: Twenty-one shoulders received an internally fixed, corticocancellous bone graft for the restoration of peripheral glenoid bone stock at the time of total shoulder arthroplasty between 1980 and 1989. Grafting was indicated when glenoid bone stock was insufficient to maintain adequate version or fixation of the prosthesis. Seventeen shoulders were available for follow-up; the average duration of follow-up for the thirteen shoulders that did not have prosthetic failure within the first two years was seventy months. Total shoulder arthroplasty was performed because of osteoarthritis in five shoulders, chronic anterior fracture-dislocation in five, capsulorrhaphy arthropathy in three, inflammatory arthritis in two, recurrent dislocation in one, and failure of a previous arthroplasty in one. All patients had some form of anterior or posterior instability preoperatively. There were five anterior and twelve posterior glenoid defects. Bone from the resected humeral head was used for grafting in fifteen shoulders, and bicortical iliac-crest bone was used in two.

Results: The average glenoid version after grafting was 4° of retroversion, with an average correction of 33°. The graft failed to maintain the original correction in three shoulders due to nonunion, dissolution, or shift. Five total shoulder replacements failed, necessitating glenoid revision at two to ninety-one months postoperatively. The failures were associated with recurrent massive cuff tears (one shoulder), persistent instability (two shoulders), improper component placement (one shoulder), and loss of graft fixation (one shoulder). There were no humeral component failures. According to the criteria of Neer et al., the functional result was rated as excellent in three shoulders, satisfactory in six, and unsatisfactory in eight.

Conclusions: Despite the finding that eight shoulders had an unsatisfactory functional result at the time of long-term follow-up, corticocancellous grafting of the glenoid successfully restored glenoid version and volume in fourteen of the seventeen shoulders in the present study. Patients with glenoid deficiency often have associated glenohumeral instability, which may affect the results of total shoulder arthroplasty. Bone-grafting of the glenoid is a technically demanding procedure that can restore bone stock in patients with structural defects.

Figures in this Article
    Sign In to Your Personal ProfileSign In To Access Full Content
    Not a Subscriber?
    Get online access for 30 days for $35
    New to JBJS?
    Sign up for a full subscription to both the print and online editions
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities, to comment on public articles, or to sign up for alerts.
    Register for a FREE limited account to get full access to all CME activities
    Have a subscription to the print edition?
    Current subscribers to The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery in either the print or quarterly DVD formats receive free online access to JBJS.org.
    Forgot your password?
    Enter your username and email address. We'll send you a reminder to the email address on record.

     
    Forgot your username or need assistance? Please contact customer service at subs@jbjs.org. If your access is provided
    by your institution, please contact you librarian or administrator for username and password information. Institutional
    administrators, to reset your institution's master username or password, please contact subs@jbjs.org

    References

    Accreditation Statement
    These activities have been planned and implemented in accordance with the Essential Areas and policies of the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education (ACCME) through the joint sponsorship of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons and The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc. The American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons is accredited by the ACCME to provide continuing medical education for physicians.
    CME Activities Associated with This Article
    Submit a Comment
    Please read the other comments before you post yours. Contributors must reveal any conflict of interest.
    Comments are moderated and will appear on the site at the discretion of JBJS editorial staff.

    * = Required Field
    (if multiple authors, separate names by comma)
    Example: John Doe





    Related Content
    The Journal of Bone & Joint Surgery
    JBJS Case Connector
    Topic Collections
    Related Audio and Videos
    PubMed Articles
    Clinical Trials
    Readers of This Also Read...
    JBJS Jobs
    11/15/2013
    Louisiana - Ochsner Health System
    04/16/2014
    Georgia - Choice Care Occupational Medicine & Orthopaedics
    04/02/2014
    LA - Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-Shreveport
    04/22/2014
    NY - Columbia University Medical Ctr/Dept of Ortho.Surg