Results of a convex-back cemented keeled glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis: multicenter study with a follow-up greater than 5 years
Purpose We assessed the clinical and radiologic results of a cemented all-polyethylene convex-back keeled glenoid component used with a third-generation prosthesis. Methods Between 1996 and 2003, in 4 European centers, 333 shoulder arthroplasties were performed for primary osteoarthritis by use of a...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery 2011-04, Vol.20 (3), p.385-394 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 394 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 385 |
container_title | Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery |
container_volume | 20 |
creator | Walch, Gilles, MD Young, Allan A., MD Melis, Barbara, MD Gazielly, Dominique, MD Loew, Markus, MD Boileau, Pascal, MD |
description | Purpose We assessed the clinical and radiologic results of a cemented all-polyethylene convex-back keeled glenoid component used with a third-generation prosthesis. Methods Between 1996 and 2003, in 4 European centers, 333 shoulder arthroplasties were performed for primary osteoarthritis by use of a cemented all-polyethylene convex-back keeled glenoid component. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed, and clinical outcome was assessed with the Constant score, range of motion, and subjective evaluation. Results At a mean of 89.5 months’ follow-up, the Constant score improved from 31.4 to 67.6 points ( P < .0001). Active forward elevation improved from 94.9° to 146.6° ( P < .0001) and external rotation from 9.0° to 35.3° ( P < .0001). Of the patients, 93.5% were either satisfied or very satisfied. The rate of revision for glenoid loosening was 0.6%; however, the rate of radiologic glenoid loosening was 18.9%. Glenoid survival was 99.7% at 5 years and 98.3% at 10 years with endpoint defined as revision surgery for glenoid loosening and 99.7% at 5 years and 51.5% at 10 years with endpoint defined as radiologic loosening. Conclusions We showed highly satisfactory clinical outcomes and extremely low rates of revision for glenoid loosening using a cemented convex-back keeled glenoid. There was a concerning rate of radiologic loosening, which only became apparent after 5 years, and this was associated with excessive glenoid reaming. Because radiologic changes are progressive and precede the need for revision, innovations in this field need to report radiologic and clinical results with follow-up of at least 5 to 10 years to prove any superiority. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1016/j.jse.2010.07.011 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_857132101</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S1058274610002855</els_id><sourcerecordid>857132101</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-f08556b0a53f226aaa2eb35611ac86d1844b4fb42babf33873682fb39273c41a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UsuKFDEUDaI4M60f4EayEVfV5lGpqlYYkMFRYUDwsQ6p1M10qlNJm6Rm7I_wn03RrYILVzfhnnMf51yEnlGypoQ2r8b1mGDNSPmTdk0ofYDOqeCsagQhD8ubiK5ibd2coYuURkLIpibsMTpjJSM2LTtHPz9Dml1OOBissA7-Dn5UvdI7rGECn2HAOwBXwq0DH-xQMNM--JLC1uN9tJOKBxxShqBi3kabbXqNp1LT6oUfccrzcMD3Nm9LBxOcC_fVvMe3EdSSzlvlscAHUDE9QY-McgmenuIKfbt-9_XqQ3Xz6f3Hq7c3la55mytDOiGanijBDWONUopBz0VDqdJdM9Curvva9DXrVW8471redMz0fMNarmuq-Aq9PNbdx_B9hpTlZJMG55SHMCfZiZbyIhItSHpE6hhSimDkaWVJiVxMkKMsJsjFBElaWUwonOen6nM_wfCH8Vv1AnhxAqiklTNReW3TX1xNNoKUWVfozREHRYs7C1EmbcFrGGwEneUQ7H_HuPyHrZ31tjTcwQHSGOboi8iSysQkkV-Wa1mOhZY7YUVg_gsOrbtP</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>857132101</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Results of a convex-back cemented keeled glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis: multicenter study with a follow-up greater than 5 years</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier)</source><creator>Walch, Gilles, MD ; Young, Allan A., MD ; Melis, Barbara, MD ; Gazielly, Dominique, MD ; Loew, Markus, MD ; Boileau, Pascal, MD</creator><creatorcontrib>Walch, Gilles, MD ; Young, Allan A., MD ; Melis, Barbara, MD ; Gazielly, Dominique, MD ; Loew, Markus, MD ; Boileau, Pascal, MD</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose We assessed the clinical and radiologic results of a cemented all-polyethylene convex-back keeled glenoid component used with a third-generation prosthesis. Methods Between 1996 and 2003, in 4 European centers, 333 shoulder arthroplasties were performed for primary osteoarthritis by use of a cemented all-polyethylene convex-back keeled glenoid component. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed, and clinical outcome was assessed with the Constant score, range of motion, and subjective evaluation. Results At a mean of 89.5 months’ follow-up, the Constant score improved from 31.4 to 67.6 points ( P < .0001). Active forward elevation improved from 94.9° to 146.6° ( P < .0001) and external rotation from 9.0° to 35.3° ( P < .0001). Of the patients, 93.5% were either satisfied or very satisfied. The rate of revision for glenoid loosening was 0.6%; however, the rate of radiologic glenoid loosening was 18.9%. Glenoid survival was 99.7% at 5 years and 98.3% at 10 years with endpoint defined as revision surgery for glenoid loosening and 99.7% at 5 years and 51.5% at 10 years with endpoint defined as radiologic loosening. Conclusions We showed highly satisfactory clinical outcomes and extremely low rates of revision for glenoid loosening using a cemented convex-back keeled glenoid. There was a concerning rate of radiologic loosening, which only became apparent after 5 years, and this was associated with excessive glenoid reaming. Because radiologic changes are progressive and precede the need for revision, innovations in this field need to report radiologic and clinical results with follow-up of at least 5 to 10 years to prove any superiority.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-2746</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-6500</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.07.011</identifier><identifier>PMID: 21055972</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York, NY: Mosby, Inc</publisher><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cementation ; convex ; Diseases of the osteoarticular system ; Follow-Up Studies ; glenoid ; Humans ; Joint Prosthesis ; Kaplan-Meier ; keel ; loosening ; Medical sciences ; Miscellaneous. Osteoarticular involvement in other diseases ; Orthopedics ; Osteoarthritis ; Osteoarthritis - surgery ; Prosthesis Design ; Reoperation ; revision ; Shoulder Joint - surgery ; TSA</subject><ispartof>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2011-04, Vol.20 (3), p.385-394</ispartof><rights>2011</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright © 2011. Published by Mosby, Inc.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-f08556b0a53f226aaa2eb35611ac86d1844b4fb42babf33873682fb39273c41a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-f08556b0a53f226aaa2eb35611ac86d1844b4fb42babf33873682fb39273c41a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.07.011$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,3551,27929,27930,46000</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&idt=24095027$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21055972$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Walch, Gilles, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Young, Allan A., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melis, Barbara, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gazielly, Dominique, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Loew, Markus, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boileau, Pascal, MD</creatorcontrib><title>Results of a convex-back cemented keeled glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis: multicenter study with a follow-up greater than 5 years</title><title>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</title><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><description>Purpose We assessed the clinical and radiologic results of a cemented all-polyethylene convex-back keeled glenoid component used with a third-generation prosthesis. Methods Between 1996 and 2003, in 4 European centers, 333 shoulder arthroplasties were performed for primary osteoarthritis by use of a cemented all-polyethylene convex-back keeled glenoid component. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed, and clinical outcome was assessed with the Constant score, range of motion, and subjective evaluation. Results At a mean of 89.5 months’ follow-up, the Constant score improved from 31.4 to 67.6 points ( P < .0001). Active forward elevation improved from 94.9° to 146.6° ( P < .0001) and external rotation from 9.0° to 35.3° ( P < .0001). Of the patients, 93.5% were either satisfied or very satisfied. The rate of revision for glenoid loosening was 0.6%; however, the rate of radiologic glenoid loosening was 18.9%. Glenoid survival was 99.7% at 5 years and 98.3% at 10 years with endpoint defined as revision surgery for glenoid loosening and 99.7% at 5 years and 51.5% at 10 years with endpoint defined as radiologic loosening. Conclusions We showed highly satisfactory clinical outcomes and extremely low rates of revision for glenoid loosening using a cemented convex-back keeled glenoid. There was a concerning rate of radiologic loosening, which only became apparent after 5 years, and this was associated with excessive glenoid reaming. Because radiologic changes are progressive and precede the need for revision, innovations in this field need to report radiologic and clinical results with follow-up of at least 5 to 10 years to prove any superiority.</description><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cementation</subject><subject>convex</subject><subject>Diseases of the osteoarticular system</subject><subject>Follow-Up Studies</subject><subject>glenoid</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Joint Prosthesis</subject><subject>Kaplan-Meier</subject><subject>keel</subject><subject>loosening</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Miscellaneous. Osteoarticular involvement in other diseases</subject><subject>Orthopedics</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis</subject><subject>Osteoarthritis - surgery</subject><subject>Prosthesis Design</subject><subject>Reoperation</subject><subject>revision</subject><subject>Shoulder Joint - surgery</subject><subject>TSA</subject><issn>1058-2746</issn><issn>1532-6500</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2011</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9UsuKFDEUDaI4M60f4EayEVfV5lGpqlYYkMFRYUDwsQ6p1M10qlNJm6Rm7I_wn03RrYILVzfhnnMf51yEnlGypoQ2r8b1mGDNSPmTdk0ofYDOqeCsagQhD8ubiK5ibd2coYuURkLIpibsMTpjJSM2LTtHPz9Dml1OOBissA7-Dn5UvdI7rGECn2HAOwBXwq0DH-xQMNM--JLC1uN9tJOKBxxShqBi3kabbXqNp1LT6oUfccrzcMD3Nm9LBxOcC_fVvMe3EdSSzlvlscAHUDE9QY-McgmenuIKfbt-9_XqQ3Xz6f3Hq7c3la55mytDOiGanijBDWONUopBz0VDqdJdM9Curvva9DXrVW8471redMz0fMNarmuq-Aq9PNbdx_B9hpTlZJMG55SHMCfZiZbyIhItSHpE6hhSimDkaWVJiVxMkKMsJsjFBElaWUwonOen6nM_wfCH8Vv1AnhxAqiklTNReW3TX1xNNoKUWVfozREHRYs7C1EmbcFrGGwEneUQ7H_HuPyHrZ31tjTcwQHSGOboi8iSysQkkV-Wa1mOhZY7YUVg_gsOrbtP</recordid><startdate>20110401</startdate><enddate>20110401</enddate><creator>Walch, Gilles, MD</creator><creator>Young, Allan A., MD</creator><creator>Melis, Barbara, MD</creator><creator>Gazielly, Dominique, MD</creator><creator>Loew, Markus, MD</creator><creator>Boileau, Pascal, MD</creator><general>Mosby, Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><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>20110401</creationdate><title>Results of a convex-back cemented keeled glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis: multicenter study with a follow-up greater than 5 years</title><author>Walch, Gilles, MD ; Young, Allan A., MD ; Melis, Barbara, MD ; Gazielly, Dominique, MD ; Loew, Markus, MD ; Boileau, Pascal, MD</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-f08556b0a53f226aaa2eb35611ac86d1844b4fb42babf33873682fb39273c41a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2011</creationdate><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cementation</topic><topic>convex</topic><topic>Diseases of the osteoarticular system</topic><topic>Follow-Up Studies</topic><topic>glenoid</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Joint Prosthesis</topic><topic>Kaplan-Meier</topic><topic>keel</topic><topic>loosening</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Miscellaneous. Osteoarticular involvement in other diseases</topic><topic>Orthopedics</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis</topic><topic>Osteoarthritis - surgery</topic><topic>Prosthesis Design</topic><topic>Reoperation</topic><topic>revision</topic><topic>Shoulder Joint - surgery</topic><topic>TSA</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Walch, Gilles, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Young, Allan A., MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Melis, Barbara, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gazielly, Dominique, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Loew, Markus, MD</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Boileau, Pascal, MD</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><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 shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Walch, Gilles, MD</au><au>Young, Allan A., MD</au><au>Melis, Barbara, MD</au><au>Gazielly, Dominique, MD</au><au>Loew, Markus, MD</au><au>Boileau, Pascal, MD</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Results of a convex-back cemented keeled glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis: multicenter study with a follow-up greater than 5 years</atitle><jtitle>Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery</jtitle><addtitle>J Shoulder Elbow Surg</addtitle><date>2011-04-01</date><risdate>2011</risdate><volume>20</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>385</spage><epage>394</epage><pages>385-394</pages><issn>1058-2746</issn><eissn>1532-6500</eissn><abstract>Purpose We assessed the clinical and radiologic results of a cemented all-polyethylene convex-back keeled glenoid component used with a third-generation prosthesis. Methods Between 1996 and 2003, in 4 European centers, 333 shoulder arthroplasties were performed for primary osteoarthritis by use of a cemented all-polyethylene convex-back keeled glenoid component. Kaplan-Meier survivorship analysis was performed, and clinical outcome was assessed with the Constant score, range of motion, and subjective evaluation. Results At a mean of 89.5 months’ follow-up, the Constant score improved from 31.4 to 67.6 points ( P < .0001). Active forward elevation improved from 94.9° to 146.6° ( P < .0001) and external rotation from 9.0° to 35.3° ( P < .0001). Of the patients, 93.5% were either satisfied or very satisfied. The rate of revision for glenoid loosening was 0.6%; however, the rate of radiologic glenoid loosening was 18.9%. Glenoid survival was 99.7% at 5 years and 98.3% at 10 years with endpoint defined as revision surgery for glenoid loosening and 99.7% at 5 years and 51.5% at 10 years with endpoint defined as radiologic loosening. Conclusions We showed highly satisfactory clinical outcomes and extremely low rates of revision for glenoid loosening using a cemented convex-back keeled glenoid. There was a concerning rate of radiologic loosening, which only became apparent after 5 years, and this was associated with excessive glenoid reaming. Because radiologic changes are progressive and precede the need for revision, innovations in this field need to report radiologic and clinical results with follow-up of at least 5 to 10 years to prove any superiority.</abstract><cop>New York, NY</cop><pub>Mosby, Inc</pub><pmid>21055972</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jse.2010.07.011</doi><tpages>10</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1058-2746 |
ispartof | Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery, 2011-04, Vol.20 (3), p.385-394 |
issn | 1058-2746 1532-6500 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_857132101 |
source | MEDLINE; Access via ScienceDirect (Elsevier) |
subjects | Arthroplasty, Replacement Biological and medical sciences Cementation convex Diseases of the osteoarticular system Follow-Up Studies glenoid Humans Joint Prosthesis Kaplan-Meier keel loosening Medical sciences Miscellaneous. Osteoarticular involvement in other diseases Orthopedics Osteoarthritis Osteoarthritis - surgery Prosthesis Design Reoperation revision Shoulder Joint - surgery TSA |
title | Results of a convex-back cemented keeled glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis: multicenter study with a follow-up greater than 5 years |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-14T02%3A01%3A12IST&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=Results%20of%20a%20convex-back%20cemented%20keeled%20glenoid%20component%20in%20primary%20osteoarthritis:%20multicenter%20study%20with%20a%20follow-up%20greater%20than%205%20years&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20shoulder%20and%20elbow%20surgery&rft.au=Walch,%20Gilles,%20MD&rft.date=2011-04-01&rft.volume=20&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=385&rft.epage=394&rft.pages=385-394&rft.issn=1058-2746&rft.eissn=1532-6500&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jse.2010.07.011&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E857132101%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=857132101&rft_id=info:pmid/21055972&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S1058274610002855&rfr_iscdi=true |