Reverse shoulder arthroplasty: Evolution in design, indications, surgical technique, and associated complications

Kamal I. Bohsali, Michael A Wirth

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Abstract

In the 1970s, the reverse ball and socket design was employed for use in the clinical scenario of glenohumeral arthrosis associated with a structurally or functionally deficient rotator cuff. Implant designs from this era demonstrated minimal success due to issues related to metallurgy, lateralized center of rotation, and fixed fulcrum kinematics. Complication rates regarding semi-constrained and constrained implants approached 90 %, resulting in abandonment of these implants [1, 2]. Current implant designs have focused on a medialized center of rotation, increased glenosphere radius of curvature, modularity of components, and improved baseplate fixation options. Indications for reverse shoulder arthroplasty have continued to evolve and currently include the treatment of proximal humerus fractures, failed unconstrained total shoulder arthroplasty, rheumatoid arthritis with irreparable rotator cuff tears, tumors, and massive rotator cuff tears without arthritis [3, 4]. Despite the current implant designs, surgical technique, and rehabilitation protocols, reverse shoulder arthroplasty has continued to demonstrate complication rates that exceed that of conventional total shoulder arthroplasty [5-7]. Even with its widespread use, there remains a paucity of long-term data regarding survivorship and functional outcomes.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Title of host publicationRotator Cuff Tear: Pathogenesis, Evaluation and Treatment
PublisherSpringer International Publishing
Pages391-413
Number of pages23
ISBN (Electronic)9783319333557
ISBN (Print)9783319333540
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2016

Fingerprint

Arthroplasty
Metallurgy
Rotator Cuff
Joint Diseases
Humerus
Biomechanical Phenomena
Arthritis
Rheumatoid Arthritis
Rehabilitation
Neoplasms
Rotator Cuff Injuries
Therapeutics

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Bohsali, K. I., & Wirth, M. A. (2016). Reverse shoulder arthroplasty: Evolution in design, indications, surgical technique, and associated complications. In Rotator Cuff Tear: Pathogenesis, Evaluation and Treatment (pp. 391-413). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33355-7_47

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty : Evolution in design, indications, surgical technique, and associated complications. / Bohsali, Kamal I.; Wirth, Michael A.

Rotator Cuff Tear: Pathogenesis, Evaluation and Treatment. Springer International Publishing, 2016. p. 391-413.

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter

Bohsali, KI & Wirth, MA 2016, Reverse shoulder arthroplasty: Evolution in design, indications, surgical technique, and associated complications. in Rotator Cuff Tear: Pathogenesis, Evaluation and Treatment. Springer International Publishing, pp. 391-413. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33355-7_47
Bohsali KI, Wirth MA. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty: Evolution in design, indications, surgical technique, and associated complications. In Rotator Cuff Tear: Pathogenesis, Evaluation and Treatment. Springer International Publishing. 2016. p. 391-413 https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33355-7_47
Bohsali, Kamal I. ; Wirth, Michael A. / Reverse shoulder arthroplasty : Evolution in design, indications, surgical technique, and associated complications. Rotator Cuff Tear: Pathogenesis, Evaluation and Treatment. Springer International Publishing, 2016. pp. 391-413
@inbook{222d83cdd38a4971a54c337af4ca8af9,
title = "Reverse shoulder arthroplasty: Evolution in design, indications, surgical technique, and associated complications",
abstract = "In the 1970s, the reverse ball and socket design was employed for use in the clinical scenario of glenohumeral arthrosis associated with a structurally or functionally deficient rotator cuff. Implant designs from this era demonstrated minimal success due to issues related to metallurgy, lateralized center of rotation, and fixed fulcrum kinematics. Complication rates regarding semi-constrained and constrained implants approached 90 {\%}, resulting in abandonment of these implants [1, 2]. Current implant designs have focused on a medialized center of rotation, increased glenosphere radius of curvature, modularity of components, and improved baseplate fixation options. Indications for reverse shoulder arthroplasty have continued to evolve and currently include the treatment of proximal humerus fractures, failed unconstrained total shoulder arthroplasty, rheumatoid arthritis with irreparable rotator cuff tears, tumors, and massive rotator cuff tears without arthritis [3, 4]. Despite the current implant designs, surgical technique, and rehabilitation protocols, reverse shoulder arthroplasty has continued to demonstrate complication rates that exceed that of conventional total shoulder arthroplasty [5-7]. Even with its widespread use, there remains a paucity of long-term data regarding survivorship and functional outcomes.",
author = "Bohsali, {Kamal I.} and Wirth, {Michael A}",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1007/978-3-319-33355-7_47",
language = "English (US)",
isbn = "9783319333540",
pages = "391--413",
booktitle = "Rotator Cuff Tear: Pathogenesis, Evaluation and Treatment",
publisher = "Springer International Publishing",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Reverse shoulder arthroplasty

T2 - Evolution in design, indications, surgical technique, and associated complications

AU - Bohsali, Kamal I.

AU - Wirth, Michael A

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - In the 1970s, the reverse ball and socket design was employed for use in the clinical scenario of glenohumeral arthrosis associated with a structurally or functionally deficient rotator cuff. Implant designs from this era demonstrated minimal success due to issues related to metallurgy, lateralized center of rotation, and fixed fulcrum kinematics. Complication rates regarding semi-constrained and constrained implants approached 90 %, resulting in abandonment of these implants [1, 2]. Current implant designs have focused on a medialized center of rotation, increased glenosphere radius of curvature, modularity of components, and improved baseplate fixation options. Indications for reverse shoulder arthroplasty have continued to evolve and currently include the treatment of proximal humerus fractures, failed unconstrained total shoulder arthroplasty, rheumatoid arthritis with irreparable rotator cuff tears, tumors, and massive rotator cuff tears without arthritis [3, 4]. Despite the current implant designs, surgical technique, and rehabilitation protocols, reverse shoulder arthroplasty has continued to demonstrate complication rates that exceed that of conventional total shoulder arthroplasty [5-7]. Even with its widespread use, there remains a paucity of long-term data regarding survivorship and functional outcomes.

AB - In the 1970s, the reverse ball and socket design was employed for use in the clinical scenario of glenohumeral arthrosis associated with a structurally or functionally deficient rotator cuff. Implant designs from this era demonstrated minimal success due to issues related to metallurgy, lateralized center of rotation, and fixed fulcrum kinematics. Complication rates regarding semi-constrained and constrained implants approached 90 %, resulting in abandonment of these implants [1, 2]. Current implant designs have focused on a medialized center of rotation, increased glenosphere radius of curvature, modularity of components, and improved baseplate fixation options. Indications for reverse shoulder arthroplasty have continued to evolve and currently include the treatment of proximal humerus fractures, failed unconstrained total shoulder arthroplasty, rheumatoid arthritis with irreparable rotator cuff tears, tumors, and massive rotator cuff tears without arthritis [3, 4]. Despite the current implant designs, surgical technique, and rehabilitation protocols, reverse shoulder arthroplasty has continued to demonstrate complication rates that exceed that of conventional total shoulder arthroplasty [5-7]. Even with its widespread use, there remains a paucity of long-term data regarding survivorship and functional outcomes.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85018918767&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85018918767&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/978-3-319-33355-7_47

DO - 10.1007/978-3-319-33355-7_47

M3 - Chapter

AN - SCOPUS:85018918767

SN - 9783319333540

SP - 391

EP - 413

BT - Rotator Cuff Tear: Pathogenesis, Evaluation and Treatment

PB - Springer International Publishing

ER -