Convertible glenoid replacement in the anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty: medium-term results.

INTRODUCTION

The older generation of high thickness metal-backed glenoid prostheses had a high failure rate. The goal of our study was to analyze the medium-term clinical and radiological results of a technically modified generation of metal backed glenoids with 35% decrease in thickness.

METHODS

Thirty-nine patients (43 shoulders) with a mean age of 66.5 years at surgery were examined from two to ten years (mean 71.2 months) using the Constant-Score, Subjective Shoulder Value and X-ray in a.p. and axial view. Indication for surgery included patients with glenoid types B1, B2, or B3 and/or posterior subluxation but intact rotator cuff, or patients who did not want a reverse prosthesis and had high functional demands. Inclusion criteria comprised participation in a clinical and radiological follow-up examination, along with a minimum follow-up duration of 24 months. Additionally, in all cases, the Constant Score and the Subjective Shoulder Value (PROM) had to be determined. Exclusion criteria were an incomplete dataset, implantation of a different prosthesis type, and failure to meet the minimum follow-up time.

RESULTS

The absolute Constant Score (CS) improved significantly (p < 0.0001) from 43 ± 13 (range: 20-69) points before to 80 ± 13 (range: 46-98) points after surgery. The only preoperative negative influencing factor on the result was the glenoid protrusion according to Lévigne (p = 0.0150). No significant differences in functional outcomes were found between glenoid types A2, B1, B2 and B3. Radiolucent lines at the interface were observed in a total of four patients (13%). Radiological signs of glenoid osteolysis were seen in six patients (20%). Humeral upward migration was observed in four patients (13%) and posterior shoulder joint decentering occurred in one patient (3%). Implant-specific complications occurred in three cases (7%). Due to a massive rotator cuff tear, two cases (4.7%) had to be converted to a reversed implant, with the primary metal component remaining in place. If the implant-specific and rotator cuff-associated complications are summarized, the rate is 11.7%. All components that required conversion to an reverse implant have so far remained free of complications.

CONCLUSION

Favorable clinical results can be achieved, especially in patients with an eccentric glenoid type. Severe preoperative glenoid erosion (Walch A2, B2, B3) does not appear to have any influence on postoperative functional results. The complication and revision rates are significantly better than in previous studies with conventional metal-backed glenoid components. Conversion of the anatomical glenoid component to a reverse system was always possible and good clinical results were achieved.