RESUMO

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) has become a highly successful treatment option for various shoulder conditions, leading to a significant increase in its utilization since its approval in 2003. However, postoperative complications, including scapular notching, prosthetic instability, and component loosening, remain a concern. These complications can often be attributed to technical errors during component implantation, emphasizing the importance of proper preoperative planning and accurate positioning of prosthetic components. Improper baseplate and glenosphere positioning in RSA have been linked to impingement, reduced range of motion, and increased scapular notching. Additionally, the relationship between component positioning and intrinsic stability of RSA has been established, with glenoid component retroversion exceeding 10° posing a risk to implant stability. Adequate initial glenoid baseplate fixation, achieved through optimal seating and the use of appropriate screws, is crucial for long-term success and prevention of early failure. Factors such as lateralization and distalization also influence outcomes and complications in RSA, yet standardized guidelines for preoperative planning in these parameters are still lacking. Despite the impact of component position on outcomes, glenoid component implantation remains challenging, with position errors being common even among experienced surgeons. Challenges arise due to factors such as deformity, bone defects, limited exposure, and the absence of reliable bony landmarks intraoperatively. With the evolving understanding of RSA biomechanics and the significance of implant configuration and positioning, advancements in preoperative planning and surgical aids have emerged. This review article explores the current evidence on preoperative planning techniques in RSA, including plain radiographs, three-dimensional imaging, computer planning software, intraoperative navigation, and augmented reality (AR), highlighting their potential benefits and advancements in improving implant position accuracy.

RESUMO

Three-dimensional (3D) printing includes a group of technologies by means of which it is possible to generate three-dimensional objects from binary information. Orthopedics and traumatology are fields of medicine in which 3D planning has had the greatest impact, especially in trauma and oncological orthopedics. Applications of this technique include diagnosis, surgical planning, intraoperative guide creation, custom implants, surgical training, orthotic and prosthetic impression, and bioprinting. Advantages have been demonstrated in its use, such as greater technical precision, shorter surgical times, decreased blood loss and less exposure to X-rays. Although the process is increasingly optimized and accessible due to advances in software and automation, it is a technique that requires adequate training. The objective of this review is to offer an approach to this technology and its basic principles.

La impresión en tres dimensiones (3D) incluye un grupo de tecnologías por medio de las cuales es posible generar objetos tridimensionales a partir de información binaria. La ortopedia y traumatología es uno de los campos de la medicina en los que mayor impacto ha tenido la planificación 3D, en especial en trauma y ortopedia oncológica. Las aplicaciones de esta técnica incluyen el diagnóstico, planificación quirúrgica, creación de guías intraoperatorias, implantes personalizados, entrenamiento quirúrgico, impresión de ortesis y prótesis y la bioimpresión. Se han demostrado ventajas en su uso como la mayor precisión técnica, el acortamiento de tiempos quirúrgicos, disminución de pérdida sanguínea y menor exposición a rayos. Si bien el proceso está cada vez más optimizado y accesible por los avances en software y automatización, es una técnica que requiere un entrenamiento adecuado. El objetivo de esta revisión es ofrecer un acercamiento a esta tecnología y sus principios básicos.

Assuntos

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) may potentially improve humeral osteotomy in shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of this study was to compare the deviation between planned and postosteotomy humeral inclination, retrotorsion, and height in shoulder arthroplasty, using PSI vs. standard cutting guides (SCG). METHODS: Twenty fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens were allocated to undergo humeral osteotomy using either PSI or SCG, such that the 2 groups have similar age, gender, and side. Preosteotomy computed tomography (CT) scan was performed and used for the 3-dimensional (3D) planning. The osteotomy procedure was performed using a PSI designed for each specimen or an SCG depending on the group. A postosteotomy CT scan was performed. The preosteotomy and postosteotomy 3D CT scan reconstructions were superimposed to calculate the deviation between planned and postosteotomy inclination, retrotorsion, and height. Outliers were defined as cases with 1 or more of the following deviations: >5° inclination, >10° retrotorsion, and >3 mm height. The deviation and outliers in inclination, retrotorsion, and height were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: The deviations between planned and postosteotomy parameters were similar among the PSI and SCG groups for inclination (P = .260), whereas they were significantly greater in the SCG group for retrotorsion (P < .001) and height (P = .003). There were 8 outliers in the SCG group, compared with only 1 outlier in the PSI group (P = .005). Most outliers in the SCG group were due to deviation >10° in retrotorsion. CONCLUSION: After 3D planning, PSI had less deviation between planned and postosteotomy humeral retrotorsion and height, relative to SCG.

Assuntos

RESUMO

Resumen: La impresión en tres dimensiones (3D) incluye un grupo de tecnologías por medio de las cuales es posible generar objetos tridimensionales a partir de información binaria. La ortopedia y traumatología es uno de los campos de la medicina en los que mayor impacto ha tenido la planificación 3D, en especial en trauma y ortopedia oncológica. Las aplicaciones de esta técnica incluyen el diagnóstico, planificación quirúrgica, creación de guías intraoperatorias, implantes personalizados, entrenamiento quirúrgico, impresión de ortesis y prótesis y la bioimpresión. Se han demostrado ventajas en su uso como la mayor precisión técnica, el acortamiento de tiempos quirúrgicos, disminución de pérdida sanguínea y menor exposición a rayos. Si bien el proceso está cada vez más optimizado y accesible por los avances en software y automatización, es una técnica que requiere un entrenamiento adecuado. El objetivo de esta revisión es ofrecer un acercamiento a esta tecnología y sus principios básicos.

Abstract: Three-dimensional (3D) printing includes a group of technologies by means of which it is possible to generate three-dimensional objects from binary information. Orthopedics and traumatology are fields of medicine in which 3D planning has had the greatest impact, especially in trauma and oncological orthopedics. Applications of this technique include diagnosis, surgical planning, intraoperative guide creation, custom implants, surgical training, orthotic and prosthetic impression, and bioprinting. Advantages have been demonstrated in its use, such as greater technical precision, shorter surgical times, decreased blood loss and less exposure to X-rays. Although the process is increasingly optimized and accessible due to advances in software and automation, it is a technique that requires adequate training. The objective of this review is to offer an approach to this technology and its basic principles.

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Several benefits are published supporting patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) in total ankle arthroplasty (TAA). This study seeks to determine if TAA with PSI yields different radiographic outcomes vs standard instrumentation (SI). METHODS: Sixty-seven primary TAA patients having surgery using PSI or SI between 2013 and 2015 were retrospectively reviewed using weightbearing radiographs at 6-12 weeks postsurgery. Radiographic parameters analyzed were the medial distal tibia angle (MDTA), talar-tilt angle (TTA), anatomic sagittal distal tibia angle (aSDTA), lateral talar station (LTS), and talar component inclination angle (TCI). A comparison of the 2 groups for each radiologic parameter's distribution was performed using a nonparametric median test and Fisher exact test. Furthermore, TAAs with all radiographic measurements within acceptable limits were classified as "perfectly aligned." The rate of "perfectly aligned" TAAs between groups was compared using a Fisher exact test with a significance of .05. RESULTS: Of the 67 TAAs, 51 were done with PSI and 16 with SI. There were no differences between groups in MDTA (P = .174), TTA (P = .145), aSDTA (P = .98), LTS (P = .922), or TCI angle (P = .98). When the rate of "perfectly aligned TAA" between the 2 groups were compared, there was no significant difference (P = .35). CONCLUSION: No significant radiographic alignment differences were found between PSI and SI implants. This study showed that both techniques achieve reproducible TAA radiographic coronal and sagittal alignment for the tibial component when performed by experienced surgeons. The talar component's sagittal alignment is similar whether or not PSI was used but is noticeably different from normal anatomic alignment by design. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective cohort study using prospectively collected data.

Assuntos