Loading…

Quantifying the competing relationship between adduction range of motion and baseplate micromotion with lateralization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

Abstract Lateralizing the center of rotation (COR) of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) could improve functional outcomes and mitigate scapular notching, a commonly occurring complication of the procedure. However, resulting increases in torque at the bone-implant interface may negatively a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of biomechanics 2017-02, Vol.52, p.24-30
Main Authors: Elwell, Josie, Choi, Joseph, Willing, Ryan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c620t-d57b92ff3c0c70795c9c935fb11e7f9a8d13ca4e566f355ff361674f94e709c93
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c620t-d57b92ff3c0c70795c9c935fb11e7f9a8d13ca4e566f355ff361674f94e709c93
container_end_page 30
container_issue
container_start_page 24
container_title Journal of biomechanics
container_volume 52
creator Elwell, Josie
Choi, Joseph
Willing, Ryan
description Abstract Lateralizing the center of rotation (COR) of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) could improve functional outcomes and mitigate scapular notching, a commonly occurring complication of the procedure. However, resulting increases in torque at the bone-implant interface may negatively affect initial fixation of the glenoid-side component, especially if only two fixation screws can be placed. Shoulder-specific finite element (FE) models of four fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were constructed. Scapular geometry and material property distributions were derived from CT data. Generic baseplates with two and four fixation screws were virtually implanted, after which superiorly-oriented shear loads, accompanied by a compressive load, were applied incrementally further from the glenoid surface to simulate lateralization of the COR. Relationships between lateralization, adduction range of motion (ROM), the number of fixation screws and micromotion of the baseplate (initial implant fixation) were characterized. Lateralization significantly increases micromotion ( p =0.015) and adduction ROM ( p =0.001). Using two, versus four, baseplate fixation screws significantly increases micromotion ( p =0.008). The effect of lateralization and the number of screws on adduction ROM and baseplate fixation is variable on a shoulder-specific basis. Trade-offs exist between functional outcomes, namely adduction ROM, and initial implant fixation and the negative effect of lateralization on implant fixation is amplified when only two fixation screws are used. The possibility of lateralizing the COR in order to improve functional outcomes of the procedure should be considered on a patient-specific basis accounting for factors such as availability and quality of bone stock.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.11.053
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5309173</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S0021929016312325</els_id><sourcerecordid>1884116663</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c620t-d57b92ff3c0c70795c9c935fb11e7f9a8d13ca4e566f355ff361674f94e709c93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqNkk1v1DAQhiMEokvhL1SWuHDZxR-xnVwqUFU-pEoIAWfLcSYbL4m92M5Wy3_hv-J0twV6oSdrxs-84_G8RXFG8IpgIl5vVpvG-hFMv6I5XhGywpw9KhakkmxJWYUfFwuMKVnWtMYnxbMYNxhjWcr6aXFCK0xLIeii-PV50i7Zbm_dGqUekPHjFtIcBRh0st7F3m5RA-kawCHdtpOZsyhotwbkOzT6m1i7FjU6wjZXARqtCf54c21Tj-Zs0IP9eaM51wXYQYiAkk96QLH309BCQDqkPvisEtP-efGk00OEF8fztPj27vLrxYfl1af3Hy_eXi2NoDgtWy6bmnYdM9hILGtualMz3jWEgOxqXbWEGV0CF6JjnGdQECHLri5B4hk9Lc4PutupGaE14FJ-q9oGO-qwV15b9e-Ns71a-53iDNdEsizw6igQ_I8JYlKjjQaGQTvwU1SkqkpChBAPQSWtsizGD0A5Y7wqy3mCl_fQjZ-Cy5-WKSFrwnL7TIkDlZcTY4DubkSC1ewrtVG3vlKzrxQhKvsqF579_UF3ZbdGysCbAwB5TTsLQUVjwRlobQCTVOvt_3uc35Mwg3XW6OE77CH-mUdFqrD6Mrt7Nneei1BGOfsNj3L7ng</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1867913116</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Quantifying the competing relationship between adduction range of motion and baseplate micromotion with lateralization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty</title><source>ScienceDirect Freedom Collection 2022-2024</source><creator>Elwell, Josie ; Choi, Joseph ; Willing, Ryan</creator><creatorcontrib>Elwell, Josie ; Choi, Joseph ; Willing, Ryan</creatorcontrib><description>Abstract Lateralizing the center of rotation (COR) of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) could improve functional outcomes and mitigate scapular notching, a commonly occurring complication of the procedure. However, resulting increases in torque at the bone-implant interface may negatively affect initial fixation of the glenoid-side component, especially if only two fixation screws can be placed. Shoulder-specific finite element (FE) models of four fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were constructed. Scapular geometry and material property distributions were derived from CT data. Generic baseplates with two and four fixation screws were virtually implanted, after which superiorly-oriented shear loads, accompanied by a compressive load, were applied incrementally further from the glenoid surface to simulate lateralization of the COR. Relationships between lateralization, adduction range of motion (ROM), the number of fixation screws and micromotion of the baseplate (initial implant fixation) were characterized. Lateralization significantly increases micromotion ( p =0.015) and adduction ROM ( p =0.001). Using two, versus four, baseplate fixation screws significantly increases micromotion ( p =0.008). The effect of lateralization and the number of screws on adduction ROM and baseplate fixation is variable on a shoulder-specific basis. Trade-offs exist between functional outcomes, namely adduction ROM, and initial implant fixation and the negative effect of lateralization on implant fixation is amplified when only two fixation screws are used. The possibility of lateralizing the COR in order to improve functional outcomes of the procedure should be considered on a patient-specific basis accounting for factors such as availability and quality of bone stock.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9290</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1873-2380</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.11.053</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28024662</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Adduction range of motion ; Aged ; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Shoulder ; Biomechanical Phenomena ; Biomedical materials ; Bone density ; Bone-Implant Interface - physiology ; Computer simulation ; Conflicts of interest ; Costs ; Female ; Finite element modelling ; Fixation ; Geometry ; Humans ; Implants ; Joint Prosthesis ; Joint surgery ; Lateralization ; Male ; Mathematical models ; Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation ; Range of Motion, Articular ; Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty ; Scapula - physiology ; Screws ; Shoulder ; Shoulder Joint - physiology ; Shoulder Joint - surgery ; Shoulders ; Surgical implants ; Torque</subject><ispartof>Journal of biomechanics, 2017-02, Vol.52, p.24-30</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>2016 Elsevier Ltd</rights><rights>Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Limited 2017</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c620t-d57b92ff3c0c70795c9c935fb11e7f9a8d13ca4e566f355ff361674f94e709c93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c620t-d57b92ff3c0c70795c9c935fb11e7f9a8d13ca4e566f355ff361674f94e709c93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28024662$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Elwell, Josie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Joseph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willing, Ryan</creatorcontrib><title>Quantifying the competing relationship between adduction range of motion and baseplate micromotion with lateralization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty</title><title>Journal of biomechanics</title><addtitle>J Biomech</addtitle><description>Abstract Lateralizing the center of rotation (COR) of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) could improve functional outcomes and mitigate scapular notching, a commonly occurring complication of the procedure. However, resulting increases in torque at the bone-implant interface may negatively affect initial fixation of the glenoid-side component, especially if only two fixation screws can be placed. Shoulder-specific finite element (FE) models of four fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were constructed. Scapular geometry and material property distributions were derived from CT data. Generic baseplates with two and four fixation screws were virtually implanted, after which superiorly-oriented shear loads, accompanied by a compressive load, were applied incrementally further from the glenoid surface to simulate lateralization of the COR. Relationships between lateralization, adduction range of motion (ROM), the number of fixation screws and micromotion of the baseplate (initial implant fixation) were characterized. Lateralization significantly increases micromotion ( p =0.015) and adduction ROM ( p =0.001). Using two, versus four, baseplate fixation screws significantly increases micromotion ( p =0.008). The effect of lateralization and the number of screws on adduction ROM and baseplate fixation is variable on a shoulder-specific basis. Trade-offs exist between functional outcomes, namely adduction ROM, and initial implant fixation and the negative effect of lateralization on implant fixation is amplified when only two fixation screws are used. The possibility of lateralizing the COR in order to improve functional outcomes of the procedure should be considered on a patient-specific basis accounting for factors such as availability and quality of bone stock.</description><subject>Adduction range of motion</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Shoulder</subject><subject>Biomechanical Phenomena</subject><subject>Biomedical materials</subject><subject>Bone density</subject><subject>Bone-Implant Interface - physiology</subject><subject>Computer simulation</subject><subject>Conflicts of interest</subject><subject>Costs</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Finite element modelling</subject><subject>Fixation</subject><subject>Geometry</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Implants</subject><subject>Joint Prosthesis</subject><subject>Joint surgery</subject><subject>Lateralization</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Mathematical models</subject><subject>Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation</subject><subject>Range of Motion, Articular</subject><subject>Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty</subject><subject>Scapula - physiology</subject><subject>Screws</subject><subject>Shoulder</subject><subject>Shoulder Joint - physiology</subject><subject>Shoulder Joint - surgery</subject><subject>Shoulders</subject><subject>Surgical implants</subject><subject>Torque</subject><issn>0021-9290</issn><issn>1873-2380</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqNkk1v1DAQhiMEokvhL1SWuHDZxR-xnVwqUFU-pEoIAWfLcSYbL4m92M5Wy3_hv-J0twV6oSdrxs-84_G8RXFG8IpgIl5vVpvG-hFMv6I5XhGywpw9KhakkmxJWYUfFwuMKVnWtMYnxbMYNxhjWcr6aXFCK0xLIeii-PV50i7Zbm_dGqUekPHjFtIcBRh0st7F3m5RA-kawCHdtpOZsyhotwbkOzT6m1i7FjU6wjZXARqtCf54c21Tj-Zs0IP9eaM51wXYQYiAkk96QLH309BCQDqkPvisEtP-efGk00OEF8fztPj27vLrxYfl1af3Hy_eXi2NoDgtWy6bmnYdM9hILGtualMz3jWEgOxqXbWEGV0CF6JjnGdQECHLri5B4hk9Lc4PutupGaE14FJ-q9oGO-qwV15b9e-Ns71a-53iDNdEsizw6igQ_I8JYlKjjQaGQTvwU1SkqkpChBAPQSWtsizGD0A5Y7wqy3mCl_fQjZ-Cy5-WKSFrwnL7TIkDlZcTY4DubkSC1ewrtVG3vlKzrxQhKvsqF579_UF3ZbdGysCbAwB5TTsLQUVjwRlobQCTVOvt_3uc35Mwg3XW6OE77CH-mUdFqrD6Mrt7Nneei1BGOfsNj3L7ng</recordid><startdate>20170208</startdate><enddate>20170208</enddate><creator>Elwell, Josie</creator><creator>Choi, Joseph</creator><creator>Willing, Ryan</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><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>3V.</scope><scope>7QP</scope><scope>7TB</scope><scope>7TS</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20170208</creationdate><title>Quantifying the competing relationship between adduction range of motion and baseplate micromotion with lateralization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty</title><author>Elwell, Josie ; Choi, Joseph ; Willing, Ryan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c620t-d57b92ff3c0c70795c9c935fb11e7f9a8d13ca4e566f355ff361674f94e709c93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Adduction range of motion</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Arthroplasty, Replacement, Shoulder</topic><topic>Biomechanical Phenomena</topic><topic>Biomedical materials</topic><topic>Bone density</topic><topic>Bone-Implant Interface - physiology</topic><topic>Computer simulation</topic><topic>Conflicts of interest</topic><topic>Costs</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Finite element modelling</topic><topic>Fixation</topic><topic>Geometry</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Implants</topic><topic>Joint Prosthesis</topic><topic>Joint surgery</topic><topic>Lateralization</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Mathematical models</topic><topic>Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation</topic><topic>Range of Motion, Articular</topic><topic>Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty</topic><topic>Scapula - physiology</topic><topic>Screws</topic><topic>Shoulder</topic><topic>Shoulder Joint - physiology</topic><topic>Shoulder Joint - surgery</topic><topic>Shoulders</topic><topic>Surgical implants</topic><topic>Torque</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Elwell, Josie</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Choi, Joseph</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Willing, Ryan</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Calcium &amp; Calcified Tissue Abstracts</collection><collection>Mechanical &amp; Transportation Engineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Physical Education Index</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>AUTh Library subscriptions: ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Biological Sciences</collection><collection>Health &amp; Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>PML(ProQuest Medical Library)</collection><collection>ProQuest research library</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of biomechanics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Elwell, Josie</au><au>Choi, Joseph</au><au>Willing, Ryan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Quantifying the competing relationship between adduction range of motion and baseplate micromotion with lateralization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty</atitle><jtitle>Journal of biomechanics</jtitle><addtitle>J Biomech</addtitle><date>2017-02-08</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>52</volume><spage>24</spage><epage>30</epage><pages>24-30</pages><issn>0021-9290</issn><eissn>1873-2380</eissn><abstract>Abstract Lateralizing the center of rotation (COR) of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) could improve functional outcomes and mitigate scapular notching, a commonly occurring complication of the procedure. However, resulting increases in torque at the bone-implant interface may negatively affect initial fixation of the glenoid-side component, especially if only two fixation screws can be placed. Shoulder-specific finite element (FE) models of four fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were constructed. Scapular geometry and material property distributions were derived from CT data. Generic baseplates with two and four fixation screws were virtually implanted, after which superiorly-oriented shear loads, accompanied by a compressive load, were applied incrementally further from the glenoid surface to simulate lateralization of the COR. Relationships between lateralization, adduction range of motion (ROM), the number of fixation screws and micromotion of the baseplate (initial implant fixation) were characterized. Lateralization significantly increases micromotion ( p =0.015) and adduction ROM ( p =0.001). Using two, versus four, baseplate fixation screws significantly increases micromotion ( p =0.008). The effect of lateralization and the number of screws on adduction ROM and baseplate fixation is variable on a shoulder-specific basis. Trade-offs exist between functional outcomes, namely adduction ROM, and initial implant fixation and the negative effect of lateralization on implant fixation is amplified when only two fixation screws are used. The possibility of lateralizing the COR in order to improve functional outcomes of the procedure should be considered on a patient-specific basis accounting for factors such as availability and quality of bone stock.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><pmid>28024662</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.11.053</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-9290
ispartof Journal of biomechanics, 2017-02, Vol.52, p.24-30
issn 0021-9290
1873-2380
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5309173
source ScienceDirect Freedom Collection 2022-2024
subjects Adduction range of motion
Aged
Arthroplasty, Replacement, Shoulder
Biomechanical Phenomena
Biomedical materials
Bone density
Bone-Implant Interface - physiology
Computer simulation
Conflicts of interest
Costs
Female
Finite element modelling
Fixation
Geometry
Humans
Implants
Joint Prosthesis
Joint surgery
Lateralization
Male
Mathematical models
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
Range of Motion, Articular
Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty
Scapula - physiology
Screws
Shoulder
Shoulder Joint - physiology
Shoulder Joint - surgery
Shoulders
Surgical implants
Torque
title Quantifying the competing relationship between adduction range of motion and baseplate micromotion with lateralization of reverse total shoulder arthroplasty
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-13T06%3A50%3A56IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Quantifying%20the%20competing%20relationship%20between%20adduction%20range%20of%20motion%20and%20baseplate%20micromotion%20with%20lateralization%20of%20reverse%20total%20shoulder%20arthroplasty&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20biomechanics&rft.au=Elwell,%20Josie&rft.date=2017-02-08&rft.volume=52&rft.spage=24&rft.epage=30&rft.pages=24-30&rft.issn=0021-9290&rft.eissn=1873-2380&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jbiomech.2016.11.053&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1884116663%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c620t-d57b92ff3c0c70795c9c935fb11e7f9a8d13ca4e566f355ff361674f94e709c93%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1867913116&rft_id=info:pmid/28024662&rfr_iscdi=true