Patient-specific Instrumentation Versus Standard Surgical Instruments in Primary Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Clinical Study.



Elsheikh, Ahmed A ORCID: 0000-0001-5814-6684, Galhoum, Mohamed S, Mokhtar, Mohamed A ORCID: 0000-0002-4887-9144, Roebuck, Margaret M ORCID: 0000-0002-1193-5149, Wood, Amanda ORCID: 0000-0001-5757-0731, Yin, Qi and Frostick, Simon P
(2022) Patient-specific Instrumentation Versus Standard Surgical Instruments in Primary Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty: A Retrospective Comparative Clinical Study. Journal of shoulder and elbow arthroplasty, 6. 24715492221075449-.

[img] PDF
Patient-specific Instrumentation Versus Standard Surgical Instruments in Primary Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty A Retro.pdf - Published version

Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

<h4>Aims</h4>Patient-specific instrumentation (PSI) in primary shoulder arthroplasty has been studied; results supported the positive impact of the PSI on the glenoid positioning. Nevertheless, no clinical outcomes have been reported. We compare the clinical outcomes of primary reverse total shoulder arthroplasty using PSI versus the standard methods.<h4>Methods</h4>Fifty-three patients with full records and a minimum of 24-months follow-up were reviewed, 35 patients received primary standard RSTA, and 18 patients received primary PSI RSTA. All patients were operated on in a single center. The median follow-up was 46 months (53 months in the standard group vs 39 months in the PSI group).<h4>Results</h4>There was an overall significant post-operative improvement in the whole cohort (P< 0.05). The standard group had more deformed glenoids (B2, B3, C&D) and significantly low preoperative constant score and forward flexion (P=0.02 & 0.034). Compared to the PSI group (all were A1, A2, B1 &one type D), there were no statistically significant differences in any clinical outcome postoperatively. PSI neither prolonged the waiting time to surgery (P=0.693) nor the intraoperative time (P=0.962). Radiologically, PSI secured a higher percentage of optimum baseplate position and screw anchorage; however, no statistical correlation was found.<h4>Conclusion</h4>In this series, both groups achieved comparable good outcomes. PSI did not achieve significantly better clinical outcomes than Standard after primary RSTA. Yet comparison has some limitations. PSI did not negatively impact the waiting time or the surgical time.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: glenoid positioning, loosening, notching, patient-specific guide, patient-specific instrumentation, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty
Divisions: Faculty of Health and Life Sciences
Faculty of Health and Life Sciences > Institute of Life Courses and Medical Sciences
Depositing User: Symplectic Admin
Date Deposited: 04 Nov 2022 16:46
Last Modified: 18 Jan 2023 19:43
DOI: 10.1177/24715492221075449
Related URLs:
URI: https://livrepository.liverpool.ac.uk/id/eprint/3166010