Is a generic targeting guide useful for glenoid component placement in shoulder arthroplasty?

Background This study compared postoperative glenoid component version using traditional instrumentation to a generic glenoid targeting guide during total or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Methods Glenoid component version was measured on postoperative radiographs of 184 shoulders (traditional, 109; targeting guide, 75). Demographics, preoperative imaging, and operative technique were identified from medical records. Absolute deviation from neutral version and standard deviations (SDs) were calculated. Results Average mean ± SD deviation in component version for the traditional technique group was 10° ± 7° compared with 9° ± 6° for the targeting guide group ( P = .37; SD P = .12). No significant difference was noted based on operation, body mass index, preoperative version, or operative indication. For the last 30 shoulders in the targeting group, the absolute mean deviation was 6° compared with 11° in the first 30 of that group ( P