1. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with proximal bone loss: a biomechanical comparison of partially vs. fully cemented humeral stems
- Author
-
Maturana, Carlos, Peterson, Brandon, Shi, Brendan, Mooney, Bailey, Clites, Tyler, and Kremen, Thomas J
- Subjects
Biomedical and Clinical Sciences ,Clinical Sciences ,Osteoporosis ,Bioengineering ,Assistive Technology ,Humans ,Arthroplasty ,Replacement ,Shoulder ,Biomechanical Phenomena ,Humerus ,Cadaver ,Aged ,Prosthesis Design ,Shoulder Prosthesis ,Female ,Bone Cements ,Male ,Cementation ,Shoulder Joint ,Aged ,80 and over ,Polymethyl Methacrylate ,Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty ,humeral stems ,implant subsidence ,shoulder biomechanics ,proximal humerus fracture ,bone cement ,Orthopedics ,Clinical sciences - Abstract
BackgroundThe appropriate amount of cementation at the time of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with significant proximal bone loss or resection is unknown. Extensive cementation of a humeral prosthesis makes eventual revision arthroplasty more challenging, increasing the risk of periprosthetic fracture. We analyzed the degree of subsidence and torque tolerance of humeral components undergoing standard cementation technique vs. our reduced polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA) protocol. Reduced cementation may provide sufficient biomechanical stability to resist physiologically relevant loads, while still permitting a clinically attainable torque for debonding the prosthesis.MethodsA total of 12 cadaveric humeri (6 matched pairs) underwent resection of 5 cm of bone distal to the greater tuberosity. Each pair of humeri underwent standard humeral arthroplasty preparation followed by either cementation using a 1.5-cm PMMA sphere at a location 3 cm inferior to the porous coating or standard full stem cementation. A 6-degree-of-freedom robot was used to perform all testing. Each humeral sample underwent 200 cycles of abduction, adduction, and forward elevation while being subjected to a physiologic compression force. Next, the samples were fixed in place and subjected to an increasing torque until implant-cement separation or failure occurred. Paired t tests were used to compare mean implant subsidence vs. a predetermined 5-mm threshold, as well as removal torque in matched samples.ResultsFully and partially cemented implants subsided 0.49 mm (95% CI 0.23-0.76 mm) and 1.85 mm (95% CI 0.41-3.29 mm), respectively, which were significantly less than the predetermined 5-mm threshold (P
- Published
- 2024