Next article Search Articles Instructions for authors  Access Statistics | Citation Manager  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE  
[LN]

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3196    
    Printed147    
    Emailed1    
    PDF Downloaded35    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

Accuracy of patient-specific instrumentation in anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty


1 Department of Orthopaedics, Western Health; Park Clinic Orthopaedics, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
2 Department of Orthopaedics, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
3 Department of Orthopaedics, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia
4 Department of Orthopaedics, Western Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Correspondence Address:
Richard James Dallalana
Suite 71/166 Gipps Street, East Melbourne, Victoria 3002
Australia
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0973-6042.180717

Rights and Permissions

Year : 2016  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 59-66

 

SEARCH
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles

  Article in PDF (1,487 KB)
Email article
Print Article
Add to My List
Purpose: Glenoid component malposition is associated with poor function and early failure of both anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Glenoid positioning is challenging particularly in the setting of bone loss or deformity. Recently, the use of computer assistance has been shown to reduce implantation error. The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of patient-specific instrumentation in cases of anatomic and reverse shoulder replacement in vivo. Methods: Twenty patients underwent total shoulder arthroplasty using a computed tomography (CT)-based patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) system, ten anatomic and ten reverse. Preoperative three-dimensional digital templating of glenoid component position was undertaken and surgery then performed using a custom-made guide. Postoperative CT scans were used to compare final implanted component position to the preoperatively planned position in the same patient. Results: Final component position and orientation closely reflected the preoperatively templated position. Mean deviation in the glenoid version from planned was 1.8° ±1.9° (range, 0.1°-7.3°). Mean deviation in inclination was 1.3° ±1.0° (range, 0.2°-4.5°). Mean deviation in position on the glenoid face was 0.5 ± 0.3 mm (range, 0.0-1.3 mm) in the anteroposterior plane and 0.8 ± 0.5 mm (range, 0.0-1.9 mm) in the superoinferior plane. Actual achieved version was within 7° of neutral in all cases except for one where it was deliberately planned to be outside of this range. Conclusion: PSI in both anatomic and reverse shoulder arthroplasty is highly accurate in guiding glenoid component implantation in vivo. The system can reliably correct bony deformity.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
 

 


 

 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 
 
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
  *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 
 ORIGINAL ARTICLE
 




1 Department of Orthopaedics, Western Health; Park Clinic Orthopaedics, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
2 Department of Orthopaedics, St. Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
3 Department of Orthopaedics, John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia
4 Department of Orthopaedics, Western Health, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Correspondence Address:
Richard James Dallalana
Suite 71/166 Gipps Street, East Melbourne, Victoria 3002
Australia
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/0973-6042.180717

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: Glenoid component malposition is associated with poor function and early failure of both anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Glenoid positioning is challenging particularly in the setting of bone loss or deformity. Recently, the use of computer assistance has been shown to reduce implantation error. The aim of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of patient-specific instrumentation in cases of anatomic and reverse shoulder replacement in vivo. Methods: Twenty patients underwent total shoulder arthroplasty using a computed tomography (CT)-based patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) system, ten anatomic and ten reverse. Preoperative three-dimensional digital templating of glenoid component position was undertaken and surgery then performed using a custom-made guide. Postoperative CT scans were used to compare final implanted component position to the preoperatively planned position in the same patient. Results: Final component position and orientation closely reflected the preoperatively templated position. Mean deviation in the glenoid version from planned was 1.8° ±1.9° (range, 0.1°-7.3°). Mean deviation in inclination was 1.3° ±1.0° (range, 0.2°-4.5°). Mean deviation in position on the glenoid face was 0.5 ± 0.3 mm (range, 0.0-1.3 mm) in the anteroposterior plane and 0.8 ± 0.5 mm (range, 0.0-1.9 mm) in the superoinferior plane. Actual achieved version was within 7° of neutral in all cases except for one where it was deliberately planned to be outside of this range. Conclusion: PSI in both anatomic and reverse shoulder arthroplasty is highly accurate in guiding glenoid component implantation in vivo. The system can reliably correct bony deformity.






[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*


        
Print this article     Email this article