Glenoid bony morphology of osteoarthritis prior to shoulder arthroplasty: what the surgeon wants to know and why.

Shoulder arthroplasty is performed with increasing frequency, and osteoarthritis is the most common indication for this procedure. However, the glenoid side of the joint is widely recognized as a limiting factor in the long-term durability of shoulder replacement, and osteoarthritis leads to characteristic bony changes at the glenoid which can exacerbate this challenge by reducing the already limited glenoid bone stock, by altering biomechanics, and by interfering with operative exposure. This article reviews the Walch classification system for glenoid morphology. Several typical findings of osteoarthritis at the glenoid are discussed including central bone loss, posterior bone loss, retroversion, biconcavity, inclination, osteophyte formation, subchondral bone quality, and bone density. The three primary types of shoulder arthroplasty are reviewed, along with several techniques for addressing glenoid deformity, including eccentric reaming, bone grafting, and the use of augmented glenoid components. Ultimately, a primary objective at shoulder arthroplasty is to correct glenoid deformity while preserving bone stock, which depends critically on characterizing the glenoid at pre-operative imaging. Understanding the surgical techniques and the implications of glenoid morphology on surgical decision-making enables the radiologist to provide the morphologic information needed by the surgeon.

Determining glenoid component version after total shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Glenoid component loosening after total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) may occur if retroversion is not corrected to <10°. However, accurately measuring postoperative glenoid component version has been difficult without postoperative computed tomography (CT), adding cost and radiation exposure outside of the standard radiographic follow-up. We present a new method to assess glenoid component version after TSA using only routine preoperative CT and postoperative radiographs (x-rays). METHODS: Preoperative glenoid version was measured using established methods with an axillary x-ray, 2-dimensional CT, and Glenosys software (Imascap, Plouzané, France). Postoperative glenoid component version and inclination were measured for 61 TSA patients using Mimics software (Materialise, Leuven, Belgium) with preoperative CT and postoperative x-rays. Four patients also had postoperative CTs. Glenoid implantation and imaging were performed on 14 cadavers, allowing validation of results against the gold standard postoperative CT glenoid retroversion measurement. RESULTS: Compared with the gold standard, retroversion and inclination measurement error was 2° ± 1° and 2° ± 1°, respectively. Average postoperative version correction was 6° ± 7°, with 35 of 61 patients (57%) corrected to <10° of retroversion. Correlation between preoperative version measurement methods was good to very good, except on the axillary x-ray. Patients not corrected to <10° of retroversion had significantly higher preoperative retroversion (14° ± 6°) than those corrected to <10° (6° ± 7°; P < .00001). CONCLUSIONS: Glenoid component retroversion after TSA can be accurately measured with a method using only routine preoperative CT and postoperative x-rays, validated to within 1.9° of the gold standard postoperative CT measurement. Future studies using this method may correlate glenoid retroversion correction with glenoid component longevity to help optimize shoulder arthroplasty outcomes.

Outcomes of lesser tuberosity osteotomy in revision anatomic shoulder arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Lesser tuberosity osteotomy (LTO) is a common surgical approach during anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. Outcomes of LTO have been shown to be similar to subscapularis tenotomy and peel techniques, but little is known about the outcomes of LTO during revision arthroplasty. METHODS: This retrospective case series included 10 consecutive patients who underwent LTO during revision shoulder arthroplasty at a single institution from 2012 to 2016. Patients underwent a preoperative computed tomography scan to evaluate the lesser tuberosity bone stock. Demographic information, radiographic evidence of LTO healing, outcomes of range of motion, subscapularis strength, and visual analog scale pain scores were analyzed. RESULTS: Revision total shoulder arthroplasty with LTO was performed for glenoid arthritis after hemiarthroplasty in 10 patients. Average age at surgery was 59.8 years, and no humeral stems were revised. Eight of 10 patients had prior subscapularis tenotomy. Average follow-up after revision surgery was 9.2 months. LTO union was documented in 80% and nondisplaced nonunion in 20%. At follow-up, 50% reported mild pain. Subscapularis strength testing was graded normal in 80% and weak in 20%. Average visual analog scale pain improved from 9.4 prerevision to 4.8 postrevision (P < .05). On average, range of motion improved in active forward elevation from 123° to 141° and remained unchanged in active external rotation from 42° to 42°. CONCLUSION: Patients undergoing LTO during revision anatomic shoulder arthroplasty demonstrate successful LTO bony healing, improvement in pain, and improved forward elevation. In select patients not requiring humeral stem revision, LTO is a safe and effective surgical approach to subscapularis management during revision anatomic shoulder arthroplasty.