Cemented versus uncemented fixation of second-generation Trabecular Metal glenoid components: minimum 5-year outcomes

Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with second-generation Trabecular Metal™ implants (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA) has shown good short-term outcomes. Differences in outcomes between cemented and uncemented fixation are unknown. This study compared the clinical, radiographic, and patient-rated outcomes o...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery 2021-04, Vol.30 (4), p.e147-e156
Hauptverfasser: Chen, Raymond E., Brown, Alexander M., Greenstein, Alexander S., Miller, Richard J., Mannava, Sandeep, Voloshin, Ilya
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page e156
container_issue 4
container_start_page e147
container_title Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery
container_volume 30
creator Chen, Raymond E.
Brown, Alexander M.
Greenstein, Alexander S.
Miller, Richard J.
Mannava, Sandeep
Voloshin, Ilya
description Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with second-generation Trabecular Metal™ implants (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA) has shown good short-term outcomes. Differences in outcomes between cemented and uncemented fixation are unknown. This study compared the clinical, radiographic, and patient-rated outcomes of TSA with cemented vs. uncemented TM glenoids at minimum 5-year follow-up. Patients who underwent anatomic TSA with second-generation TM glenoid components for primary osteoarthritis were identified for minimum 5-year follow-up. The patients were divided into 2 groups: cemented and uncemented glenoid fixation. Outcome measures included implant survival, patient-rated outcome scores (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores), shoulder range of motion, and radiographic analysis. Findings were compared between groups. The study included 55 shoulders: 27 in the cemented group (21 with full radiographic follow-up) and 28 in the uncemented group (22 with full radiographic follow-up). Both groups had similar follow-up times (6.6 years in cemented group vs. 6.7 years in uncemented group, P = .60). Moreover, the groups did not differ significantly in sex composition, age at the time of surgery, or preoperative Walch glenoid grade distribution. No patients required revision surgery. The 2 groups had similar preoperative range of motion, but patients in the uncemented group had greater follow-up forward flexion (P = .03), external rotation (P < .01), and lateral elevation (P = .03) than did patients in the cemented group. PROMIS scores were not significantly different between groups. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores were similar (89.8 in cemented group vs. 94.1 in uncemented group, P = .21). Mid-term radiographs showed a metal debris rate of 24% in the cemented group and 27% in the uncemented group. Although these values were not significantly different (P = .90), the frequency of mild metal debris (grade 1-2), when present, was greater in the uncemented group (grade 2 in 6 shoulders) than in the cemented group (grade 1 in 4 and grade 2 in 1, P = .02). There was a greater presence of mild (grade 1) radiolucent lines in the uncemented group (64%) than in the cemented group (29%, P < .01). No glenoid had evidence of loosening (defined by a change in position or radiolucent lines > 2 mm). The presence of metal debris and radiolucent lines did not have a significant effect on clinical outcomes
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jse.2020.07.025
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2430648426</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S1058274620306194</els_id><sourcerecordid>2430648426</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-20379f013d5eeccda5c6a3c46f28d70b6794375c4ce41d9cc117669c71b2da4a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kE1vFDEMhqMK1O8fwAXNkcsMzvcOnNAKKFIRl3KOsomnymomWZJJ1f57Um3LkZMt-_Er-SHkHYWBAlUf98O-4MCAwQB6ACZPyDmVnPVKArxpPchNz7RQZ-SilD0AjALYKTnjTEuQbHNO6hYXjCv67gFzqaWr0b1OpvBo15Bil6auoEvR9_cYMR-Hd9nu0NXZ5u4nrnbu7meMKfjOpeWQYoson7olxLDUpZP9EzYw1bVtsVyRt5OdC16_1Evy-9vXu-1Nf_vr-4_tl9veccnXngHX4wSUe4nonLfSKcudUBPbeA07pUfBtXTCoaB-dI5SrdToNN0xb4Xll-TDMfeQ05-KZTVLKA7n2UZMtRgmOCixEUw1lB5Rl1MpGSdzyGGx-clQMM-2zd402-bZtgFtmu128_4lvu4W9P8uXvU24PMRwPbkQ8BsigvYDPuQ0a3Gp_Cf-L8S1pIJ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2430648426</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Cemented versus uncemented fixation of second-generation Trabecular Metal glenoid components: minimum 5-year outcomes</title><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Chen, Raymond E. ; Brown, Alexander M. ; Greenstein, Alexander S. ; Miller, Richard J. ; Mannava, Sandeep ; Voloshin, Ilya</creator><creatorcontrib>Chen, Raymond E. ; Brown, Alexander M. ; Greenstein, Alexander S. ; Miller, Richard J. ; Mannava, Sandeep ; Voloshin, Ilya</creatorcontrib><description>Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with second-generation Trabecular Metal™ implants (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA) has shown good short-term outcomes. Differences in outcomes between cemented and uncemented fixation are unknown. This study compared the clinical, radiographic, and patient-rated outcomes of TSA with cemented vs. uncemented TM glenoids at minimum 5-year follow-up. Patients who underwent anatomic TSA with second-generation TM glenoid components for primary osteoarthritis were identified for minimum 5-year follow-up. The patients were divided into 2 groups: cemented and uncemented glenoid fixation. Outcome measures included implant survival, patient-rated outcome scores (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores), shoulder range of motion, and radiographic analysis. Findings were compared between groups. The study included 55 shoulders: 27 in the cemented group (21 with full radiographic follow-up) and 28 in the uncemented group (22 with full radiographic follow-up). Both groups had similar follow-up times (6.6 years in cemented group vs. 6.7 years in uncemented group, P = .60). Moreover, the groups did not differ significantly in sex composition, age at the time of surgery, or preoperative Walch glenoid grade distribution. No patients required revision surgery. The 2 groups had similar preoperative range of motion, but patients in the uncemented group had greater follow-up forward flexion (P = .03), external rotation (P &lt; .01), and lateral elevation (P = .03) than did patients in the cemented group. PROMIS scores were not significantly different between groups. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores were similar (89.8 in cemented group vs. 94.1 in uncemented group, P = .21). Mid-term radiographs showed a metal debris rate of 24% in the cemented group and 27% in the uncemented group. Although these values were not significantly different (P = .90), the frequency of mild metal debris (grade 1-2), when present, was greater in the uncemented group (grade 2 in 6 shoulders) than in the cemented group (grade 1 in 4 and grade 2 in 1, P = .02). There was a greater presence of mild (grade 1) radiolucent lines in the uncemented group (64%) than in the cemented group (29%, P &lt; .01). No glenoid had evidence of loosening (defined by a change in position or radiolucent lines &gt; 2 mm). The presence of metal debris and radiolucent lines did not have a significant effect on clinical outcomes. At minimum 5-year follow-up, TSA patients with TM glenoids demonstrated excellent clinical and patient-reported outcomes with a 100% implant survival rate, regardless of cemented vs. uncemented fixation. However, the uncemented group showed a significantly higher rate of radiolucent lines and a higher frequency of mild metal debris. These radiographic findings did not affect the clinical outcomes, and their implications for long-term outcomes and prosthesis survival is unknown.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-2746</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-6500</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2020.07.025</identifier><identifier>PMID: 32750528</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>cemented glenoid ; implant survival ; Metal-backed glenoid ; tantalum ; total shoulder arthroplasty ; Trabecular Metal</subject><ispartof>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2021-04, Vol.30 (4), p.e147-e156</ispartof><rights>2020 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees</rights><rights>Copyright © 2020 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-20379f013d5eeccda5c6a3c46f28d70b6794375c4ce41d9cc117669c71b2da4a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-20379f013d5eeccda5c6a3c46f28d70b6794375c4ce41d9cc117669c71b2da4a3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-0161-4314</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1058274620306194$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32750528$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Chen, Raymond E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Alexander M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greenstein, Alexander S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Richard J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mannava, Sandeep</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Voloshin, Ilya</creatorcontrib><title>Cemented versus uncemented fixation of second-generation Trabecular Metal glenoid components: minimum 5-year outcomes</title><title>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</title><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><description>Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with second-generation Trabecular Metal™ implants (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA) has shown good short-term outcomes. Differences in outcomes between cemented and uncemented fixation are unknown. This study compared the clinical, radiographic, and patient-rated outcomes of TSA with cemented vs. uncemented TM glenoids at minimum 5-year follow-up. Patients who underwent anatomic TSA with second-generation TM glenoid components for primary osteoarthritis were identified for minimum 5-year follow-up. The patients were divided into 2 groups: cemented and uncemented glenoid fixation. Outcome measures included implant survival, patient-rated outcome scores (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores), shoulder range of motion, and radiographic analysis. Findings were compared between groups. The study included 55 shoulders: 27 in the cemented group (21 with full radiographic follow-up) and 28 in the uncemented group (22 with full radiographic follow-up). Both groups had similar follow-up times (6.6 years in cemented group vs. 6.7 years in uncemented group, P = .60). Moreover, the groups did not differ significantly in sex composition, age at the time of surgery, or preoperative Walch glenoid grade distribution. No patients required revision surgery. The 2 groups had similar preoperative range of motion, but patients in the uncemented group had greater follow-up forward flexion (P = .03), external rotation (P &lt; .01), and lateral elevation (P = .03) than did patients in the cemented group. PROMIS scores were not significantly different between groups. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores were similar (89.8 in cemented group vs. 94.1 in uncemented group, P = .21). Mid-term radiographs showed a metal debris rate of 24% in the cemented group and 27% in the uncemented group. Although these values were not significantly different (P = .90), the frequency of mild metal debris (grade 1-2), when present, was greater in the uncemented group (grade 2 in 6 shoulders) than in the cemented group (grade 1 in 4 and grade 2 in 1, P = .02). There was a greater presence of mild (grade 1) radiolucent lines in the uncemented group (64%) than in the cemented group (29%, P &lt; .01). No glenoid had evidence of loosening (defined by a change in position or radiolucent lines &gt; 2 mm). The presence of metal debris and radiolucent lines did not have a significant effect on clinical outcomes. At minimum 5-year follow-up, TSA patients with TM glenoids demonstrated excellent clinical and patient-reported outcomes with a 100% implant survival rate, regardless of cemented vs. uncemented fixation. However, the uncemented group showed a significantly higher rate of radiolucent lines and a higher frequency of mild metal debris. These radiographic findings did not affect the clinical outcomes, and their implications for long-term outcomes and prosthesis survival is unknown.</description><subject>cemented glenoid</subject><subject>implant survival</subject><subject>Metal-backed glenoid</subject><subject>tantalum</subject><subject>total shoulder arthroplasty</subject><subject>Trabecular Metal</subject><issn>1058-2746</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9kE1vFDEMhqMK1O8fwAXNkcsMzvcOnNAKKFIRl3KOsomnymomWZJJ1f57Um3LkZMt-_Er-SHkHYWBAlUf98O-4MCAwQB6ACZPyDmVnPVKArxpPchNz7RQZ-SilD0AjALYKTnjTEuQbHNO6hYXjCv67gFzqaWr0b1OpvBo15Bil6auoEvR9_cYMR-Hd9nu0NXZ5u4nrnbu7meMKfjOpeWQYoson7olxLDUpZP9EzYw1bVtsVyRt5OdC16_1Evy-9vXu-1Nf_vr-4_tl9veccnXngHX4wSUe4nonLfSKcudUBPbeA07pUfBtXTCoaB-dI5SrdToNN0xb4Xll-TDMfeQ05-KZTVLKA7n2UZMtRgmOCixEUw1lB5Rl1MpGSdzyGGx-clQMM-2zd402-bZtgFtmu128_4lvu4W9P8uXvU24PMRwPbkQ8BsigvYDPuQ0a3Gp_Cf-L8S1pIJ</recordid><startdate>202104</startdate><enddate>202104</enddate><creator>Chen, Raymond E.</creator><creator>Brown, Alexander M.</creator><creator>Greenstein, Alexander S.</creator><creator>Miller, Richard J.</creator><creator>Mannava, Sandeep</creator><creator>Voloshin, Ilya</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0161-4314</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202104</creationdate><title>Cemented versus uncemented fixation of second-generation Trabecular Metal glenoid components: minimum 5-year outcomes</title><author>Chen, Raymond E. ; Brown, Alexander M. ; Greenstein, Alexander S. ; Miller, Richard J. ; Mannava, Sandeep ; Voloshin, Ilya</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c353t-20379f013d5eeccda5c6a3c46f28d70b6794375c4ce41d9cc117669c71b2da4a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>cemented glenoid</topic><topic>implant survival</topic><topic>Metal-backed glenoid</topic><topic>tantalum</topic><topic>total shoulder arthroplasty</topic><topic>Trabecular Metal</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Chen, Raymond E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brown, Alexander M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Greenstein, Alexander S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Richard J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mannava, Sandeep</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Voloshin, Ilya</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Chen, Raymond E.</au><au>Brown, Alexander M.</au><au>Greenstein, Alexander S.</au><au>Miller, Richard J.</au><au>Mannava, Sandeep</au><au>Voloshin, Ilya</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Cemented versus uncemented fixation of second-generation Trabecular Metal glenoid components: minimum 5-year outcomes</atitle><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><date>2021-04</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>30</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>e147</spage><epage>e156</epage><pages>e147-e156</pages><issn>1058-2746</issn><eissn>1532-6500</eissn><abstract>Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with second-generation Trabecular Metal™ implants (Zimmer, Warsaw, IN, USA) has shown good short-term outcomes. Differences in outcomes between cemented and uncemented fixation are unknown. This study compared the clinical, radiographic, and patient-rated outcomes of TSA with cemented vs. uncemented TM glenoids at minimum 5-year follow-up. Patients who underwent anatomic TSA with second-generation TM glenoid components for primary osteoarthritis were identified for minimum 5-year follow-up. The patients were divided into 2 groups: cemented and uncemented glenoid fixation. Outcome measures included implant survival, patient-rated outcome scores (Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS] and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores), shoulder range of motion, and radiographic analysis. Findings were compared between groups. The study included 55 shoulders: 27 in the cemented group (21 with full radiographic follow-up) and 28 in the uncemented group (22 with full radiographic follow-up). Both groups had similar follow-up times (6.6 years in cemented group vs. 6.7 years in uncemented group, P = .60). Moreover, the groups did not differ significantly in sex composition, age at the time of surgery, or preoperative Walch glenoid grade distribution. No patients required revision surgery. The 2 groups had similar preoperative range of motion, but patients in the uncemented group had greater follow-up forward flexion (P = .03), external rotation (P &lt; .01), and lateral elevation (P = .03) than did patients in the cemented group. PROMIS scores were not significantly different between groups. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scores were similar (89.8 in cemented group vs. 94.1 in uncemented group, P = .21). Mid-term radiographs showed a metal debris rate of 24% in the cemented group and 27% in the uncemented group. Although these values were not significantly different (P = .90), the frequency of mild metal debris (grade 1-2), when present, was greater in the uncemented group (grade 2 in 6 shoulders) than in the cemented group (grade 1 in 4 and grade 2 in 1, P = .02). There was a greater presence of mild (grade 1) radiolucent lines in the uncemented group (64%) than in the cemented group (29%, P &lt; .01). No glenoid had evidence of loosening (defined by a change in position or radiolucent lines &gt; 2 mm). The presence of metal debris and radiolucent lines did not have a significant effect on clinical outcomes. At minimum 5-year follow-up, TSA patients with TM glenoids demonstrated excellent clinical and patient-reported outcomes with a 100% implant survival rate, regardless of cemented vs. uncemented fixation. However, the uncemented group showed a significantly higher rate of radiolucent lines and a higher frequency of mild metal debris. These radiographic findings did not affect the clinical outcomes, and their implications for long-term outcomes and prosthesis survival is unknown.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>32750528</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jse.2020.07.025</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0161-4314</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1058-2746
ispartof Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2021-04, Vol.30 (4), p.e147-e156
issn 1058-2746
1532-6500
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2430648426
source Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects cemented glenoid
implant survival
Metal-backed glenoid
tantalum
total shoulder arthroplasty
Trabecular Metal
title Cemented versus uncemented fixation of second-generation Trabecular Metal glenoid components: minimum 5-year outcomes
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-11T05%3A36%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Cemented%20versus%20uncemented%20fixation%20of%20second-generation%20Trabecular%20Metal%20glenoid%20components:%20minimum%205-year%20outcomes&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20shoulder%20and%20elbow%20surgery&rft.au=Chen,%20Raymond%20E.&rft.date=2021-04&rft.volume=30&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=e147&rft.epage=e156&rft.pages=e147-e156&rft.issn=1058-2746&rft.eissn=1532-6500&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jse.2020.07.025&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2430648426%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2430648426&rft_id=info:pmid/32750528&rft_els_id=S1058274620306194&rfr_iscdi=true