Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Rev Bras Ortop (Sao Paulo) 2022; 57(01): 120-127
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1715509
Artigos Originais
Ombro e Cotovelo

Integração óssea e prevalência de linhas radiotransparentes ao redor dos pinos de componentes glenoidais minimamente cimentados na artroplastia total de ombro[∗]

Article in several languages: português | English
Márcio Schiefer 
1   Departamento de Ortopedia, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
2   Departamento de Ortopedia, Instituto Nacional de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
,
Gláucio Siqueira 
2   Departamento de Ortopedia, Instituto Nacional de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
,
Alan Figueira 
2   Departamento de Ortopedia, Instituto Nacional de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
,
Patrícia Martins Souza 
3   Departamento de Radiologia, Instituto Nacional de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
,
Martim Teixeira Monteiro 
2   Departamento de Ortopedia, Instituto Nacional de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
,
Geraldo Motta Filho 
2   Departamento de Ortopedia, Instituto Nacional de Ortopedia e Traumatologia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Resumo

Objetivos A falha do componente glenoidal é a principal causa de revisão da artroplastia total do ombro (ATO) e sua frequência parece ser influenciada pelo design do componente. O objetivo deste estudo foi a avaliação clínica e radiográfica (através de raios X e tomografia computadorizada) dos resultados da ATO com componente glenoidal minimamente cimentado.

Métodos O presente trabalho analisou ATOs realizadas com componente glenoidal Anchor Peg (DuPuy Synthes, Warsaw, IN, EUA) minimamente cimentado entre 2008 e 2013. Por um período mínimo de acompanhamento de 24 meses, escores segundo critérios da University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) e imagens padronizadas de radiografia simples e tomografia computadorizada foram analisadas. A presença de osso entre as aletas do pino do componente central, que é um indicador de sua integração, foi avaliada nas imagens, bem como a presença de linhas radiotransparentes ao redor do componente glenoidal.

Resultados Dezenove ombros de 17 pacientes foram avaliados. De acordo com o escore da UCLA, os resultados clínicos foram satisfatórios em 74% dos casos e moderados em 21% dos casos. O resultado foi ruim em um paciente. A integração de componentes foi observada em 58% dos pacientes, sendo total em 42% e parcial em 16% dos casos. Linhas radiotransparentes foram observadas em 52% dos pacientes. Nenhuma relação entre a integração de componentes e os resultados clínicos foi detectada.

Conclusão A maioria dos pacientes submetidos à ATO com componente glenoidal minimamente cimentado apresentou resultados clínicos satisfatórios. Linhas radiotransparentes ao redor do componente glenoidal são comuns, mas não interferem nos resultados clínicos

Nível de evidência IV; Série de caso; Estudo terapêutico.

Palavras-chave

artroplastia de substituição - ombro - tomografia - radiografia digital - falha da prótese

∗ Pesquisa realizada no Instituto Nacional de Traumatologia e Ortopedia (INTO), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil.




Publication History

Received: 17 February 2020

Accepted: 01 June 2020

Article published online:
25 September 2020

© 2020. Sociedade Brasileira de Ortopedia e Traumatologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commecial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil

 

  • Referências

  • 1 Raiss P, Schmitt M, Bruckner T. et al. Results of cemented total shoulder replacement with a minimum follow-up of ten years. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012; 94 (23) e1711-e10
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Throckmorton TW, Zarkadas PC, Sperling JW, Cofield RH. Pegged versus keeled glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010; 19 (05) 726-733
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Vidil A, Valenti P, Guichoux F, Barthas JH. CT scan evaluation of glenoid component fixation: a prospective study of 27 minimally cemented shoulder arthroplasties. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 2013; 23 (05) 521-525
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 De Wilde L, Dayerizadeh N, De Neve F, Basamania C, Van Tongel A. Fully uncemented glenoid component in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2013; 22 (10) e1-e7
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Jain NB, Yamaguchi K. The contribution of reverse shoulder arthroplasty to utilization of primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2014; 23 (12) 1905-1912
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Kim SH, Wise BL, Zhang Y, Szabo RM. Increasing incidence of shoulder arthroplasty in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2011; 93 (24) 2249-2254
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Motta Filho G, Galvão MV, Monteiro M, Cohen M, Brandão B. Registro de artroplastias do ombro. Rev Bras Ortop 2009; 44 (02) 125-133
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Gadea F, Alami G, Pape G, Boileau P, Favard L. Shoulder hemiarthroplasty: outcomes and long-term survival analysis according to etiology. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 2012; 98 (06) 659-665
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Rowland CM. Minimum fifteen-year follow-up of Neer hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in patients aged fifty years or younger. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2004; 13 (06) 604-613
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Boileau P, Sinnerton RJ, Chuinard C, Walch G. Arthroplasty of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2006; 88 (05) 562-575
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Bryant D, Litchfield R, Sandow M, Gartsman GM, Guyatt G, Kirkley A. A comparison of pain, strength, range of motion, and functional outcomes after hemiarthroplasty and total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with osteoarthritis of the shoulder. A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87 (09) 1947-1956
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Matsen 3rd FA, Clinton J, Lynch J, Bertelsen A, Richardson ML. Glenoid component failure in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2008; 90 (04) 885-896
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Vavken P, Sadoghi P, von Keudell A, Rosso C, Valderrabano V, Müller AM. Rates of radiolucency and loosening after total shoulder arthroplasty with pegged or keeled glenoid components. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2013; 95 (03) 215-221
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Wirth MA, Korvick DL, Basamania CJ, Toro F, Aufdemorte TB, Rockwood Jr CA. Radiologic, mechanical, and histologic evaluation of 2 glenoid prosthesis designs in a canine model. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2001; 10 (02) 140-148
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Wirth MA, Loredo R, Garcia G, Rockwood Jr CA, Southworth C, Iannotti JP. Total shoulder arthroplasty with an all-polyethylene pegged bone-ingrowth glenoid component: a clinical and radiographic outcome study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2012; 94 (03) 260-267
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Amstutz HC, Sew Hoy AL, Clarke IC. UCLA anatomic total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1981; (155) 7-20
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Kilian CM, Morris BJ, Sochacki KR. et al. Radiographic comparison of finned, cementless central pegged glenoid component and conventional cemented pegged glenoid component in total shoulder arthroplasty: a prospective randomized study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2018; 27 (6S): S10-S16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Bonnevialle N, Melis B, Neyton L. et al. Aseptic glenoid loosening or failure in total shoulder arthroplasty: revision with glenoid reimplantation. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2013; 22 (06) 745-751
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Churchill RS, Boorman RS, Fehringer EV, Matsen III FA. Glenoid cementing may generate sufficient heat to endanger the surrounding bone. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2004; (419) 76-79
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Lazarus MD, Jensen KL, Southworth C, Matsen III FA. The radiographic evaluation of keeled and pegged glenoid component insertion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2002; 84 (07) 1174-1182
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Churchill RS, Zellmer C, Zimmers HJ, Ruggero R. Clinical and radiographic analysis of a partially cemented glenoid implant: five-year minimum follow-up. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010; 19 (07) 1091-1097
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Groh GI. Survival and radiographic analysis of a glenoid component with a cementless fluted central peg. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010; 19 (08) 1265-1268
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Arnold RM, High RR, Grosshans KT, Walker CW, Fehringer EV. Bone presence between the central peg's radial fins of a partially cemented pegged all poly glenoid component suggest few radiolucencies. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2011; 20 (02) 315-321
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Wijeratna M, Taylor DM, Lee S, Hoy G, Evans MC. Clinical and radiographic results of an all-polyethylene pegged bone-ingrowth glenoid component. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2016; 98 (13) 1090-1096
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Merolla G, Ciaramella G, Fabbri E, Walch G, Paladini P, Porcellini G. Total shoulder replacement using a bone ingrowth central peg polyethylene glenoid component: a prospective clinical and computed tomography study with short- to mid-term follow-up. Int Orthop 2016; 40 (11) 2355-2363
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Gregory T, Hansen U, Khanna M. et al. A CT scan protocol for the detection of radiographic loosening of the glenoid component after total shoulder arthroplasty. Acta Orthop 2014; 85 (01) 91-96
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Hoenecke Jr HR, Hermida JC, Flores-Hernandez C, D'Lima DD. Accuracy of CT-based measurements of glenoid version for total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2010; 19 (02) 166-171
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Barwood S, Setter KJ, Blaine TA, Bigliani LU. The incidence of early radiolucencies about a pegged glenoid component using cement pressurization. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2008; 17 (05) 703-708
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Choi T, Horodyski M, Struk AM, Sahajpal DT, Wright TW. Incidence of early radiolucent lines after glenoid component insertion for total shoulder arthroplasty: a radiographic study comparing pressurized and unpressurized cementing techniques. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2013; 22 (03) 403-408
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Sperling JW, Cofield RH, O'Driscoll SW, Torchia ME, Rowland CM. Radiographic assessment of ingrowth total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2000; 9 (06) 507-513
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Schoch BS, Wright TW, Zuckerman JD. et al. Glenoid component lucencies are associated with poorer patient-reported outcomes following anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2019; 28 (10) 1956-1963
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Nuttall D, Haines JF, Trail IA. The early migration of a partially cemented fluted pegged glenoid component using radiostereometric analysis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 2012; 21 (09) 1191-1196
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Yian EH, Werner CML, Nyffeler RW. et al. Radiographic and computed tomography analysis of cemented pegged polyethylene glenoid components in total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2005; 87 (09) 1928-1936
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar