Short-Term Results of the DePuy Global Unite Platform Shoulder System: A Two-Year Outcome Study | ||
| The Archives of Bone and Joint Surgery | ||
| مقاله 3، دوره 6، شماره 5، آذر 2018، صفحه 353-358 اصل مقاله (479.79 K) | ||
| نوع مقاله: RESEARCH PAPER | ||
| شناسه دیجیتال (DOI): 10.22038/abjs.2017.25571.1678 | ||
| نویسندگان | ||
| Gary F. Updegrove؛ Thema A. Nicholson؛ Surena Namdari؛ Gerald R. Williams؛ Joseph A. Abboud* | ||
| The Rothman Institute at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, PA, USA | ||
| چکیده | ||
| Background: The Global Unite Shoulder System is the next generation of implant from the Depuy Global Shoulder line. The primary feature of the Global Unite is adaptability through the interchangeable modular bodies, modular suture collars, and stems. Short-term functional and radiographic outcomes of the Global Unite Platform Shoulder System were assessed as well as complication and revision rates. Methods: 95 subjects were enrolled prospectively between 2013 and 2015 that underwent anatomic or reverse shoulder arthroplasty utilizing the DePuy Global Unite Anatomic Platform Shoulder System. Functional outcome data (ASES and SANE) as well as radiographic data was collected on these patients pre-operatively, and at 6 months, 1 year and 2 years post-operatively. Results: The cohort consisted of 97 shoulders in 95 patients of which 54 (56.8%) are males and 41 (43.2%) are female. There were 55/97 (56.7%) were primary anatomic total shoulder arthroplasties, 37/97 (38.1%) primary reverse shoulder arthroplasties, and 3/97 (3.1%) revision procedures to a reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Outcome scores demonstrated an increase in ASES score from a mean of 33.00 to 79.56 and SANE score of 21.30 to 84.08. Conclusion: The Depuy Global Unite shoulder system demonstrated very good short-term results in this two-year outcome study. Functional outcome scores are similar to current literature for anatomic and reverse primary cases. Radiographic measures at two years are promising with only 2 cases of grade 1 scapular notching and one case of grade 2 scapular notching. Overall the Depuy Global Unite is a versatile shoulder system with very good early outcomes. Level of evidence: IV | ||
| کلیدواژهها | ||
| Anatomic Total Shoulder Arthroplasty؛ Convertible؛ Modular؛ Reverse shoulder arthroplasty؛ Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty | ||
| مراجع | ||
|
1. Lugli T. Artificial shoulder joint by péan (1893): the facts of an exceptional intervention and the prosthetic method. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1978; 133:215-8. 2. Neer CS. Articular replacement for the humeral head. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1955; 37-A(2):215-28. 3. Neer CS 2nd, Watson KC, Stanton FJ. Recent experience in total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1982; 64(3):319-37. 4. Boileau P, Watkinson D, Hatzidakis AM, Hovorka I. Neer Award 2005: The Grammont reverse shoulder prosthesis: results in cuff tear arthritis, fracture sequelae, and revision arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2006; 15(5):527-40. 5. Boileau P, Watkinson DJ, Hatzidakis AM, Balg F. Grammont reverse prosthesis: design, rationale, and biomechanics. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005; 14 (1 Suppl S): 147S-61S. 6. Williams AA, Tischler EH, Sholder D, Nicholson TA, Maltenfort MG, Getz C, et al. Identification of risk factors for abnormal postoperative chemistry labs after primary shoulder arthroplasty. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2018; 6(4):282-8. 7. Favard L, Lautmann S, Clement P. Osteoarthritis with massive rotator cuff-tear: the limitation of its current definitions. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg; 1999. P. 261-5. 8. Hamada K, Fukuda H, Mikasa M, Kobayashi Y. Roentgenographic findings in massive rotator cuff tears. A long-term observation. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990; 254:92-6. 9. Sirveaux F, Favard L, Oudet D, Huquet D, Walch G, Molé D. Grammont inverted total shoulder arthroplasty in the treatment of glenohumeral osteoarthritis with massive rupture of the cuff. Results of a multicentre study of 80 shoulders. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2004; 86(3):388-95. 10. Day JS, Lau E, Ong KL, Williams GR, Ramsey ML, Kurtz SM. Prevalence and projections of total shoulder and elbow arthroplasty in the United States to 2015. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010; 19(8):1115-20. 11. Wiater JM, Fabing MH. Shoulder arthroplasty: prosthetic options and indications. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009; 17(7):415-25. 12. Deshmukh AV, Koris M, Zurakowski D, Thornhill TS. Total shoulder arthroplasty: long-term survivorship, functional outcome, and quality of life. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005; 14(5):471-9. 13. Nicholson T, Maltenfort M, Getz C, Lazarus M, Williams G, Namdari S. Multimodal pain management protocol versus patient controlled narcotic analgesia for postoperative pain control after shoulder arthroplasty. Arch Bone Jt Surg. 2018; 6(3):196-202. 14. Gerber C, Pennington SD, Nyffeler RW. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009; 17(5):284-95. 15. Gruber S, Schoch C, Geyer M. The reverse shoulder arthroplasty Delta Xtend: Mid-term results. Orthopade. 2017; 46(3):222-6. 16. Austin L, Zmistowski B, Chang ES, Williams GR Jr. Is reverse shoulder arthroplasty a reasonable alternative for revision arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011; 469(9):2531-7. 17. Crosby LA, Wright TW, Yu S, Zuckerman JD. Conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with and without humeral stem retention: the role of a convertible-platform stem. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017; 99(9):736-42. 18. Weinheimer KT, Smuin DM, Dhawan A. Patient Outcomes as a function of shoulder surgeon volume: a systematic review. Arthroscopy. 2017; 33(7):1273-81. | ||
|
آمار تعداد مشاهده مقاله: 649 تعداد دریافت فایل اصل مقاله: 730 |
||