Glenoid Bone Loss in Primary Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Evaluation and Management

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis is the most common reason for shoulder replacement. Total shoulder arthroplasty provides reliable pain relief and restoration of function, with implant survivorship reported at 85% at 15 years. Glenoid component wear and aseptic loosening are among the most common reasons...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons 2012-09, Vol.20 (9), p.604-613
Hauptverfasser: Sears, Benjamin W, Johnston, Peter S, Ramsey, Matthew L, Williams, Gerald R
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 613
container_issue 9
container_start_page 604
container_title Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons
container_volume 20
creator Sears, Benjamin W
Johnston, Peter S
Ramsey, Matthew L
Williams, Gerald R
description Glenohumeral osteoarthritis is the most common reason for shoulder replacement. Total shoulder arthroplasty provides reliable pain relief and restoration of function, with implant survivorship reported at 85% at 15 years. Glenoid component wear and aseptic loosening are among the most common reasons for revision. Glenoid wear characteristics have been correlated with, among other things, the degree of anatomic glenoid version correction. Anatomic glenoid reconstruction is particularly challenging in the presence of glenoid bone deficiency. Walch classified glenoid morphology into five types: type A, centered, without posterior subluxation but with minor erosion (A1) or major erosion (A2); type B, posteriorly subluxated (B1) or posteriorly subluxated with posterior glenoid erosion (B2); and type C, excessive glenoid retroversion. The type A glenoid represents only 59% of patients; thus, the need to address glenoid deformity is common. Methods of correction include asymmetric reaming of the anterior glenoid, bone grafting of the posterior glenoid, and implanting a specialized glenoid component with posterior augmentation. In many cases of type C or hypoplastic glenoid, the humerus is concentrically reduced in the deficient glenoid and glenoid deformity may not need to be corrected. Severely hypoplastic glenoid may require the use of bone-sparing glenoid components or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.
doi_str_mv 10.5435/JAAOS-20-09-604
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>gale_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1038068853</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A308599876</galeid><sourcerecordid>A308599876</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-e45239a21cbc739b4755a23c356fb71cb1240a1afa53a3ef4b04e62e36dcf8eb3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkUtr3DAUhU1paB7tursiKIVunOhpW925IU0bJqQwKXQnru3rGRXZmkh2h_z7KHVaKAQtJC7fOVeck2VvGT1VUqizq7q-Weec5lTnBZUvsiOmJc2VrOjL9KZFmTPFfh5mxzH-opQVstCvskPOtWQVFUfZ-tLh6G1HPvsRycrHSOxIvgc7QLgnt34CR9ZbP7sOA6nDtA1-5yBO95_IxW9wM0zWjwTGjlzDCBsccJxeZwc9uIhvnu6T7MeXi9vzr_nq5vLbeb3KW6HllKNUXGjgrG3aUuhGlkoBF61QRd-Uacq4pMCgByVAYC8bKrHgKIqu7StsxEn2cfHdBX83Y5zMYGOLzsGIfo6GUVHRoqqUSOj7Bd2AQ2PH3k8B2kfc1IJWSuuqLBJ1-gyVToeDbVNAvU3z_wRni6ANKbmAvdktyaXd5rEg86cgw6mh2qSCkuLd05_nZsDuH_-3kQR8WICt3Wz3NqCJAziXcG72-31yWoweAPwGl28</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1038068853</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Glenoid Bone Loss in Primary Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Evaluation and Management</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><creator>Sears, Benjamin W ; Johnston, Peter S ; Ramsey, Matthew L ; Williams, Gerald R</creator><creatorcontrib>Sears, Benjamin W ; Johnston, Peter S ; Ramsey, Matthew L ; Williams, Gerald R</creatorcontrib><description>Glenohumeral osteoarthritis is the most common reason for shoulder replacement. Total shoulder arthroplasty provides reliable pain relief and restoration of function, with implant survivorship reported at 85% at 15 years. Glenoid component wear and aseptic loosening are among the most common reasons for revision. Glenoid wear characteristics have been correlated with, among other things, the degree of anatomic glenoid version correction. Anatomic glenoid reconstruction is particularly challenging in the presence of glenoid bone deficiency. Walch classified glenoid morphology into five types: type A, centered, without posterior subluxation but with minor erosion (A1) or major erosion (A2); type B, posteriorly subluxated (B1) or posteriorly subluxated with posterior glenoid erosion (B2); and type C, excessive glenoid retroversion. The type A glenoid represents only 59% of patients; thus, the need to address glenoid deformity is common. Methods of correction include asymmetric reaming of the anterior glenoid, bone grafting of the posterior glenoid, and implanting a specialized glenoid component with posterior augmentation. In many cases of type C or hypoplastic glenoid, the humerus is concentrically reduced in the deficient glenoid and glenoid deformity may not need to be corrected. Severely hypoplastic glenoid may require the use of bone-sparing glenoid components or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1067-151X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1940-5480</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5435/JAAOS-20-09-604</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22941803</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons</publisher><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement ; Biomechanical Phenomena ; Bone Transplantation ; Glenoid Cavity - pathology ; Humans ; Joint Instability - surgery ; Osteoarthritis - pathology ; Osteoarthritis - physiopathology ; Osteoarthritis - surgery ; Reconstructive Surgical Procedures ; Shoulder Joint - pathology ; Shoulder Joint - physiopathology ; Shoulder Joint - surgery ; Treatment Outcome</subject><ispartof>Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2012-09, Vol.20 (9), p.604-613</ispartof><rights>COPYRIGHT 2012 American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-e45239a21cbc739b4755a23c356fb71cb1240a1afa53a3ef4b04e62e36dcf8eb3</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27903,27904</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22941803$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Sears, Benjamin W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnston, Peter S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramsey, Matthew L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Gerald R</creatorcontrib><title>Glenoid Bone Loss in Primary Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Evaluation and Management</title><title>Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons</title><addtitle>J Am Acad Orthop Surg</addtitle><description>Glenohumeral osteoarthritis is the most common reason for shoulder replacement. Total shoulder arthroplasty provides reliable pain relief and restoration of function, with implant survivorship reported at 85% at 15 years. Glenoid component wear and aseptic loosening are among the most common reasons for revision. Glenoid wear characteristics have been correlated with, among other things, the degree of anatomic glenoid version correction. Anatomic glenoid reconstruction is particularly challenging in the presence of glenoid bone deficiency. Walch classified glenoid morphology into five types: type A, centered, without posterior subluxation but with minor erosion (A1) or major erosion (A2); type B, posteriorly subluxated (B1) or posteriorly subluxated with posterior glenoid erosion (B2); and type C, excessive glenoid retroversion. The type A glenoid represents only 59% of patients; thus, the need to address glenoid deformity is common. Methods of correction include asymmetric reaming of the anterior glenoid, bone grafting of the posterior glenoid, and implanting a specialized glenoid component with posterior augmentation. In many cases of type C or hypoplastic glenoid, the humerus is concentrically reduced in the deficient glenoid and glenoid deformity may not need to be corrected. Severely hypoplastic glenoid may require the use of bone-sparing glenoid components or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.</description><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement</subject><subject>Biomechanical Phenomena</subject><subject>Bone Transplantation</subject><subject>Glenoid Cavity - pathology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Joint Instability - surgery</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis - pathology</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis - physiopathology</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis - surgery</subject><subject>Reconstructive Surgical Procedures</subject><subject>Shoulder Joint - pathology</subject><subject>Shoulder Joint - physiopathology</subject><subject>Shoulder Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Treatment Outcome</subject><issn>1067-151X</issn><issn>1940-5480</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNptkUtr3DAUhU1paB7tursiKIVunOhpW925IU0bJqQwKXQnru3rGRXZmkh2h_z7KHVaKAQtJC7fOVeck2VvGT1VUqizq7q-Weec5lTnBZUvsiOmJc2VrOjL9KZFmTPFfh5mxzH-opQVstCvskPOtWQVFUfZ-tLh6G1HPvsRycrHSOxIvgc7QLgnt34CR9ZbP7sOA6nDtA1-5yBO95_IxW9wM0zWjwTGjlzDCBsccJxeZwc9uIhvnu6T7MeXi9vzr_nq5vLbeb3KW6HllKNUXGjgrG3aUuhGlkoBF61QRd-Uacq4pMCgByVAYC8bKrHgKIqu7StsxEn2cfHdBX83Y5zMYGOLzsGIfo6GUVHRoqqUSOj7Bd2AQ2PH3k8B2kfc1IJWSuuqLBJ1-gyVToeDbVNAvU3z_wRni6ANKbmAvdktyaXd5rEg86cgw6mh2qSCkuLd05_nZsDuH_-3kQR8WICt3Wz3NqCJAziXcG72-31yWoweAPwGl28</recordid><startdate>20120901</startdate><enddate>20120901</enddate><creator>Sears, Benjamin W</creator><creator>Johnston, Peter S</creator><creator>Ramsey, Matthew L</creator><creator>Williams, Gerald R</creator><general>American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120901</creationdate><title>Glenoid Bone Loss in Primary Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Evaluation and Management</title><author>Sears, Benjamin W ; Johnston, Peter S ; Ramsey, Matthew L ; Williams, Gerald R</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c394t-e45239a21cbc739b4755a23c356fb71cb1240a1afa53a3ef4b04e62e36dcf8eb3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement</topic><topic>Biomechanical Phenomena</topic><topic>Bone Transplantation</topic><topic>Glenoid Cavity - pathology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Joint Instability - surgery</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis - pathology</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis - physiopathology</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis - surgery</topic><topic>Reconstructive Surgical Procedures</topic><topic>Shoulder Joint - pathology</topic><topic>Shoulder Joint - physiopathology</topic><topic>Shoulder Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Treatment Outcome</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Sears, Benjamin W</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Johnston, Peter S</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramsey, Matthew L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Williams, Gerald R</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Sears, Benjamin W</au><au>Johnston, Peter S</au><au>Ramsey, Matthew L</au><au>Williams, Gerald R</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Glenoid Bone Loss in Primary Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Evaluation and Management</atitle><jtitle>Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons</jtitle><addtitle>J Am Acad Orthop Surg</addtitle><date>2012-09-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>9</issue><spage>604</spage><epage>613</epage><pages>604-613</pages><issn>1067-151X</issn><eissn>1940-5480</eissn><abstract>Glenohumeral osteoarthritis is the most common reason for shoulder replacement. Total shoulder arthroplasty provides reliable pain relief and restoration of function, with implant survivorship reported at 85% at 15 years. Glenoid component wear and aseptic loosening are among the most common reasons for revision. Glenoid wear characteristics have been correlated with, among other things, the degree of anatomic glenoid version correction. Anatomic glenoid reconstruction is particularly challenging in the presence of glenoid bone deficiency. Walch classified glenoid morphology into five types: type A, centered, without posterior subluxation but with minor erosion (A1) or major erosion (A2); type B, posteriorly subluxated (B1) or posteriorly subluxated with posterior glenoid erosion (B2); and type C, excessive glenoid retroversion. The type A glenoid represents only 59% of patients; thus, the need to address glenoid deformity is common. Methods of correction include asymmetric reaming of the anterior glenoid, bone grafting of the posterior glenoid, and implanting a specialized glenoid component with posterior augmentation. In many cases of type C or hypoplastic glenoid, the humerus is concentrically reduced in the deficient glenoid and glenoid deformity may not need to be corrected. Severely hypoplastic glenoid may require the use of bone-sparing glenoid components or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons</pub><pmid>22941803</pmid><doi>10.5435/JAAOS-20-09-604</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1067-151X
ispartof Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, 2012-09, Vol.20 (9), p.604-613
issn 1067-151X
1940-5480
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1038068853
source MEDLINE; Journals@Ovid Complete
subjects Arthroplasty, Replacement
Biomechanical Phenomena
Bone Transplantation
Glenoid Cavity - pathology
Humans
Joint Instability - surgery
Osteoarthritis - pathology
Osteoarthritis - physiopathology
Osteoarthritis - surgery
Reconstructive Surgical Procedures
Shoulder Joint - pathology
Shoulder Joint - physiopathology
Shoulder Joint - surgery
Treatment Outcome
title Glenoid Bone Loss in Primary Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: Evaluation and Management
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T05%3A52%3A53IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Glenoid%20Bone%20Loss%20in%20Primary%20Total%20Shoulder%20Arthroplasty:%20Evaluation%20and%20Management&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20the%20American%20Academy%20of%20Orthopaedic%20Surgeons&rft.au=Sears,%20Benjamin%20W&rft.date=2012-09-01&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=9&rft.spage=604&rft.epage=613&rft.pages=604-613&rft.issn=1067-151X&rft.eissn=1940-5480&rft_id=info:doi/10.5435/JAAOS-20-09-604&rft_dat=%3Cgale_proqu%3EA308599876%3C/gale_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1038068853&rft_id=info:pmid/22941803&rft_galeid=A308599876&rfr_iscdi=true