The radiographic evaluation of keeled and pegged glenoid component insertion

被引:274
|
作者
Lazarus, MD
Jensen, KL
Southworth, C
Matsen, FA
机构
[1] Thomas Jefferson Univ, Rothman Inst, Philadelphia, PA 19107 USA
[2] DePuy Orthopaed Inc, Warsaw, IN 46581 USA
[3] Univ Washington, Med Ctr, Dept Orthopaed Surg, Seattle, WA 98195 USA
来源
关键词
D O I
10.2106/00004623-200207000-00013
中图分类号
R826.8 [整形外科学]; R782.2 [口腔颌面部整形外科学]; R726.2 [小儿整形外科学]; R62 [整形外科学(修复外科学)];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Radiolucent lines about the glenoid component of a total shoulder replacement are a common finding, even on initial postoperative radiographs. The achievement of complete osseous support of the component has been shown to decrease micromotion. We evaluated the ability of a group of experienced shoulder surgeons to achieve complete cementing and support in a series of patients managed with keeled and pegged glenoid components. Methods: We reviewed the initial postoperative radiographs of 493 patients with primary osteoarthritis who had been managed with total shoulder arthroplasty by seventeen different surgeons. One hundred and sixty-five patients were excluded because of inadequate radiographs, leaving 328 patients available for review. Of these, thirty-nine patients had a keeled component and 289 had a pegged component. The method of Franklin was used to grade the degree of radiolucency around the keeled components, and a modification of that method was used to grade the degree of radiolucency around the pegged components. The efficacy of component seating on host subchondral bone was evaluated with a newly constructed five-grade scale based on the percentage of the component that was supported by subchondral bone. Each radiograph was graded four times, by two separate reviewers on two separate occasions. Results: Radiolucencies were extremely common, with only twenty of the 328 glenoids demonstrating no radiolucencies. On a numeric scale (with 0 indicating no radiolucency and 5 indicating gross loosening), the mean radiolucency score was 1.8 +/- 0.9 for keeled components and 1.3 +/- 0.9 for pegged components (p = 0.0004). After defining categories of "better" and "worse" cementing, we found that pegged components more commonly had "better cementing" than did keeled components (p = 0.0028). Incomplete seating was also common, particularly among patients with keeled components. Ninety-five of the 121 pegged components that had been inserted by the most experienced surgeon had "better cementing," compared with eighty-five of the 168 pegged components that had been inserted by the remaining surgeons (p < 0.00001). Conclusions: Perfectly cementing and seating a glenoid replacement is a difficult task. Radiolucencies and incomplete component seating occur more frequently in association with keeled components compared with pegged components. Surgeon experience may be an important variable in the achievement of a good technical outcome.
引用
收藏
页码:1174 / 1182
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Radiographic comparison of pegged and keeled glenoid components
    Gartsman, GM
    Elkousy, HA
    Warnock, KM
    Edwards, TB
    O'Connor, DP
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2005, 14 (03) : 252 - 257
  • [2] Radiographic comparison of pegged and keeled glenoid components using modern cementing techniques: A prospective randomized study
    Edwards, T. Bradley
    Labriola, Joanne E.
    Stanley, Rodney J.
    O'Connor, Daniel P.
    Elkousy, Hussein A.
    Gartsman, Gary M.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2010, 19 (02) : 251 - 257
  • [3] Pegged versus keeled glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty
    Throckmorton, Thomas W.
    Zarkadas, Peter C.
    Sperling, John W.
    Cofield, Robert H.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2010, 19 (05) : 726 - 733
  • [4] Radiographic comparison of finned, cementless central pegged glenoid component and conventional cemented pegged glenoid component in total shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study
    Kilian, Christopher M.
    Morris, Brent J.
    Sochacki, Kyle R.
    Gombera, Mufaddal M.
    Haigler, Richard E.
    O'Connor, Daniel P.
    Edwards, T. Bradley
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2018, 27 (06) : S10 - S16
  • [5] No correlation between radiolucency and biomechanical stability of keeled and pegged glenoid components
    Andreas Voss
    Knut Beitzel
    Elifho Obopilwe
    Stefan Buchmann
    John Apostolakos
    Jessica Di Venere
    Michael Nowak
    Mark P. Cote
    Anthony A. Romeo
    Augustus D. Mazzocca
    [J]. BMC Musculoskeletal Disorders, 18
  • [6] No correlation between radiolucency and biomechanical stability of keeled and pegged glenoid components
    Voss, Andreas
    Beitzel, Knut
    Obopilwe, Elifho
    Buchmann, Stefan
    Apostolakos, John
    Di Venere, Jessica
    Nowak, Michael
    Cote, Mark P.
    Romeo, Anthony A.
    Mazzocca, Augustus D.
    [J]. BMC MUSCULOSKELETAL DISORDERS, 2017, 18
  • [7] Stability of Cemented in-Line Pegged Glenoid Compared with Keeled Glenoid Components in Total Shoulder Arthroplasty
    Rahme, Hans
    Mattsson, Per
    Wikblad, Lars
    Nowak, Jan
    Larsson, Sune
    [J]. JOURNAL OF BONE AND JOINT SURGERY-AMERICAN VOLUME, 2009, 91A (08): : 1965 - 1972
  • [8] A study of the micromovement of pegged and keeled glenoid components compared using radiostereometric analysis
    Nuttall, David
    Haines, John F.
    Trail, Ian I.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2007, 16 (03) : 65S - 70S
  • [9] Heat Generated With Pegged or Keeled Glenoid Components Fixed With Defined Amounts of Cement
    Martens, Kelly A.
    Edwards, Sara L.
    Omar, Imran M.
    Saltzman, Matthew D.
    [J]. ORTHOPEDICS, 2012, 35 (04) : E469 - E473
  • [10] Radiographic and clinical comparison of pegged and keeled glenoid components using modern cementing techniques: midterm results of a prospective randomized study
    Kilian, Christopher M.
    Press, Cyrus M.
    Smith, Kevin M.
    O'Connor, Daniel P.
    Morris, Brent J.
    Elkousy, Hussein A.
    Gartsman, Gary M.
    Edwards, T. Bradley
    [J]. JOURNAL OF SHOULDER AND ELBOW SURGERY, 2017, 26 (12) : 2078 - 2085