RESUMEN

Background: Glenoid position and inclination are important factors in protecting against scapular notching, which is the most common complication that directly affects the longevity of reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). This study aimed to investigate the biomechanical characteristics of glenosphere orientation, comparing neutral tilt, inferior overhang with an eccentric glenosphere at the same placement of baseplate, and inferior tilt after 10° inferior reaming in the lower part of the glenoid in RSA. Methods: Nine cadaveric shoulders were tested with 5 combinations of customized glenoid components: a centric glenosphere was combined with a standard baseplate (group A); an eccentric glenosphere to provide 4-mm inferior overhang than the centric glenosphere was combined with a standard baseplate (group B); a centric glenosphere was combined with a wedge-shaped baseplate tilted inferiorly by 10° with the same center of rotation (group C); an eccentric glenosphere was attached to a wedge-shaped baseplate (group D); and 10° inferior reaming was performed on the lower part of the glenoid to apply 10° inferior tilt, with a centric glenosphere secured to the standard baseplate for simulation of clinical tilt (group E). Impingement-free angles for adduction, abduction, forward flexion, external rotation, and internal rotation were measured. The capability of the deltoid moment arm for abduction and forward flexion, deltoid length, and geometric analysis for adduction engagement were evaluated. Results: Compared with neutral tilt, inferior tilt at the same position showed no significant difference in impingement-free angle, moment arm capability, and deltoid length. However, group D resulted in better biomechanical properties than a central position, regardless of inferior tilt. Group E demonstrated a greater range of adduction, internal and external rotation, and higher abduction and forward flexion capability with distalization, compared to corresponding parameters for inferior tilt with a customized wedge-shaped baseplate. Conclusions: A 10° inferior tilt of the glenosphere, without changing the position of the baseplate, had no benefit in terms of the impingement-free angle and deltoid moment arm. However, an eccentric glenosphere had a significant advantage, regardless of inferior tilt. Inferior tilt through 10° inferior reaming showed better biomechanical results than neutral tilt due to the distalization effect.

Asunto(s)

Artroplastía de Reemplazo de Hombro , Articulación del Hombro , Prótesis de Hombro , Humanos , Artroplastía de Reemplazo de Hombro/métodos , Articulación del Hombro/cirugía , Hombro/cirugía , Escápula , Rango del Movimiento Articular , Fenómenos Biomecánicos

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The biomechanical changes and treatment guidelines on acromial fracture after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) are still not well understood. The purpose of our study was to analyze the biomechanical changes with respect to acromial fracture angulation in RSA. METHODS: RSA was performed on 9 fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders. An acromial osteotomy was performed on the plane extending from the glenoid surface to simulate an acromion fracture. Four conditions of acromial fracture inferior angulation were evaluated (0°, 10°, 20°, and 30° angulation). The middle deltoid muscle loading origin position was adjusted based on the position of each acromial fracture. The impingement-free angle and capability of the deltoid to produce movement in the abduction and forward flexion planes were measured. The length of the anterior, middle, and posterior deltoid was also analyzed for each acromial fracture angulation. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the abduction impingement angle between 0° (61.8° ± 2.9°) and 10° angulation (55.9° ± 2.8°); however, the abduction impingement angle of 20° (49.3° ± 2.9°) significantly decreased from 0° and 30° angulation (44.2° ± 4.6°), and 30° angulation significantly differed from 0° and 10° (P < .01). On forward flexion, 10° (75.6° ± 2.7°), 20° (67.9° ± 3.2°), and 30° angulation (59.8° ± 4.0°) had a significantly decreased impingement-free angle than 0° (84.2° ± 4.3°; P < .01), and 30° angulation had a significantly decreased impingement-free angle than 10°. On analysis of glenohumeral abduction capability, 0° significantly differed (at 12.5, 15.0, 17.5, and 20.0N) from 20° and 30°. For forward flexion capability, 30° angulation showed a significantly smaller value than 0° (15N vs. 20N). As acromial fracture angulation increased, the middle and posterior deltoid muscles of 10°, 20°, and 30° became shorter than those of 0°; however, no significant change was found in the anterior deltoid length. CONCLUSIONS: In acromial fractures at the plane of glenoid surface, 10° inferior angulation of the acromion did not interfere with abduction and abduction capability. However, 20° and 30° of inferior angulation caused prominent impingement in abduction and forward flexion and reduced abduction capability. In addition, there was a significant difference between 20° and 30°, suggesting that not only the location of the acromion fracture after RSA but also the degree of angulation are important factors for shoulder biomechanics.