medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8036 (Electronic)
ISSN 2306-4102 (Print)
Órgano Oficial del Colegio Mexicano de Ortopedia y Traumatología

2018, Number 6

<< Back Next >>

Acta Ortop Mex 2018; 32 (6)

Proximal humeral resurfacing. What’s today indication?

Sánchez-Hernández J, Jiménez I, Kiimetoglou D, Muratore G, Medina J, García AM

Language: Spanish
References: 34
Page: 316-321
PDF size: 261.68 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Data published in the literature about humeral resurfacing prostheses are not conclusive with good functional results but with large differences in the revision rate. The aim of our study was to evaluate the clinical and functional outcomes in patients operated at our center. Material and methods: Retrospective study of 19 cases in 18 patients. Follow-up of 31 (12-61) months. Surgery was indicated in cases of primary or secondary osteoarthritis. Demographic data, Constant scale, DASH questionnaire, complications and satisfaction were analyzed. Three patients were lost to follow-up due to death unrelated to surgery. Results: Mean age of 56 (25-80) years. Constant normalized of 73 (23-104) points. DASH questionnaire of 31 (7-84) points. Ninety four percent of the patients resumed their recreational activities and 81% sports activities. In seven cases, inferior conflict in the glenoid with varus implant was observed radiologically. There were five complications; a conservatively resolved capsulitis, three reinterventions due to symptomatic inferior glenoid usury and another to uncontrollable pain in a conservative way. Patients without rotator cuff lesion presented better scores on the functional questionnaires. All patients were satisfied with the symptomatic improvement over the previous situation and would be operated again if necessary. Conclusions: The functional outcomes reported are similar to those previously published and, based on them, we believe that the resurfacing prosthesis is an option to be considered in cases of primary or secondary osteoarthritis when there is no rotator cuff injury, regardless of age.


REFERENCES

  1. Krueger FJ. A vitallium replica arthroplasty on the shoulder; a case report of aseptic necrosis of the proximal end of the humerus. Surgery. 1951; 30(6): 1005-11.

  2. Johnson MH, Paxton ES, Green A. Shoulder arthroplasty options in young (<50 years old) patients: review of current concepts. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015; 24(2): 317-25.

  3. Edwards TB, Kadakia NR, Boulahia A, Kempf JF, Boileau P, Némoz C, et al. A comparison of hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: results of a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2003; 12(3): 207-13.

  4. Gartsman GM, Roddey TS, Hammerman SM. Shoulder arthroplasty with or without resurfacing of the glenoid in patients who have osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2000; 82(1): 26-34.

  5. Radnay CS, Setter KJ, Chambers L, Levine WN, Bigliani LU, Ahmad CS. Total shoulder replacement compared with humeral head replacement for the treatment of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis: a systematic review. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007; 16(4): 396-402.

  6. Rai P, Davies O, Wand J, Bigsby E. Long-term follow-up of the Copeland mark III shoulder resurfacing hemi-arthroplasty. J Orthop. 2015; 13(1): 52-6.

  7. Burgess DL, McGrath MS, Bonutti PM, Marker DR, Delanois RE, Mont MA. Shoulder resurfacing. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009; 91(5): 1228-38.

  8. Hammond G, Tibone JE, McGarry MH, Jun BJ, Lee TQ. Biomechanical comparison of anatomic humeral head resurfacing and hemiarthroplasty in functional glenohumeral positions. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2012; 94(1): 68-76.

  9. Rasmussen JV, Polk A, Sorensen AK, Olsen BS, Brorson S. Outcome, revision rate and indication for revision following resurfacing hemiarthroplasty for osteoarthritis of the shoulder: 837 operations reported to the Danish Shoulder Arthroplasty Registry. Bone Joint J. 2014; 96-B(4): 519-25.

  10. Levy O. Shoulder resurfacing: is it really as good as total shoulder replacement? Curr Orthop Pract. 2012; 23: 2-9.

  11. Constant CR, Murley AH. A clinical method of functional assessment of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1987; (214): 160-4.

  12. Katolik LI, Romeo AA, Cole BJ, Verma NN, Hayden JK, Bach BR. Normalization of the Constant score. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005; 14(3): 279-85.

  13. Rosales RS, Delgado EB, Díez de la Lastra-Bosch I. Evaluation of the Spanish version of the DASH and carpal tunnel syndrome health-related quality-of-life instruments: cross-cultural adaptation process and reliability. J Hand Surg Am. 2002; 27(2): 334-43.

  14. Deladerrière JY, Szymanski C, Vervoort T, Budzik JF, Maynou C. Geometrical analysis results of 42 resurfacing shoulder prostheses: A CT scan study. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012; 98(5): 520-7.

  15. Haines JF, Trail IA, Nuttall D, Birch A, Barrow A. The results of arthroplasty in osteoarthritis of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2006; 88(4): 496-501.

  16. Jensen KL. Humeral resurfacing arthroplasty: rationale, indications, technique, and results. Am J Orthop (Belle Mead NJ). 2007; 36(12 Suppl 1): 4-8.

  17. Levy O, Copeland SA. Cementless surface replacement arthroplasty of the shoulder. 5- to 10-year results with the Copeland mark-2 prosthesis. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2001; 83(2): 213-21.

  18. Pritchett JW. Long-term results and patient satisfaction after shoulder resurfacing. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011; 20(5): 771-7.

  19. Lebon J, Delclaux S, Bonnevialle N, Rongières M, Bonnevialle P, Mansat P; French Society for Shoulder, Elbow (SOFEC). Stemmed hemiarthroplasty versus resurfacing in primary shoulder osteoarthritis: a single-center retrospective series of 78 patients. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2014; 100(6 Suppl): S327-32.

  20. Alizadehkhaiyat O, Kyriakos A, Singer MS, Frostick SP. Outcome of Copeland shoulder resurfacing arthroplasty with a 4-year mean follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013; 22(10): 1352-8.

  21. Smith T, Gettmann A, Wellmann M, Pastor F, Struck M. Humeral surface replacement for osteoarthritis. Acta Orthop. 2013; 84(5): 468-72.

  22. Mansat P, Coutié AS, Bonnevialle N, Rongières M, Mansat M, Bonnevialle P. Resurfacing humeral prosthesis: do we really reconstruct the anatomy? J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013; 22(5): 612-9.

  23. Soudy K, Szymanski C, Lalanne C, Bourgault C, Thiounn A, Cotten A, et al. Results and limitations of humeral head resurfacing: 105 cases at a mean follow-up of 5 years. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2017; 103(3): 415-20.

  24. Rydholm U, Sjögren J. Surface replacement of the humeral head in the rheumatoid shoulder. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1993; 2(6): 286-95.

  25. Jónsson E, Lidgren L, Mjöberg B, Rydholm U, Selvik G. Humeral cup fixation in rheumatoid shoulders. Roentgen stereophotogrammetry of 12 cases. Acta Orthop Scand. 1990; 61(2): 116-7.

  26. Pritchett JW. Curved-stem hip resurfacing: minimum 20-year followup. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008; 466(5): 1177-85.

  27. Levy O, Copeland SA. Cementless surface replacement arthroplasty (Copeland CSRA) for osteoarthritis of the shoulder. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2004; 13(3): 266-71.

  28. Al-Hadithy N, Domos P, Sewell MD, Naleem A, Papanna MC, Pandit R. Cementless surface replacement arthroplasty of the shoulder for osteoarthritis: results of fifty Mark III Copeland prosthesis from an independent center with four-year mean follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012; 21(12): 1776-81.

  29. Mullett H, Levy O, Raj D, Even T, Abraham R, Copeland SA. Copeland surface replacement of the shoulder. Results of an hydroxyapatite-coated cementless implant in patients over 80 years of age. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007; 89(11): 1466-9.

  30. Levy O, Tsvieli O, Merchant J, Young L, Trimarchi A, Dattani R, et al. Surface replacement arthroplasty for glenohumeral arthropathy in patients aged younger than fifty years: results after a minimum ten-year follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015; 24(7): 1049-60.

  31. Thomas SR, Wilson AJ, Chambler A, Harding I, Thomas M. Outcome of Copeland surface replacement shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005; 14(5): 485-91.

  32. Geervliet P, van den Bekerom M, Spruyt P, Curvers M, Visser C, van Noort A. Short-term results of the global C.A.P. uncemented resurfacing shoulder prosthesis. Orthopedics. 2014; 37(1): 42-7.

  33. Merolla G, Bianchi P, Lollino N, Rossi R, Paladini P, Porcellini G. Clinical and radiographic mid-term outcomes after shoulder resurfacing in patients aged 50 years old or younger. Musculoskelet Surg. 2013; 97 Suppl 1: 23-9.

  34. Glanzmann M, Kolling C, Schwyzer HK, Flury M, Audigé L. Radiological and functional 24-month outcomes of resurfacing versus stemmed anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Int Orthop. 2017; 41(2): 375-84.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com