Mid-term Results Following Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty and the Role of Navigation in the Management of Glenoid Bone Loss

TL;DR

This study examines mid-term outcomes of reverse shoulder arthroplasty and finds that navigation systems may improve baseplate positioning, though clinical benefits remain unclear.

Contribution

The study evaluates the role of intraoperative navigation in managing glenoid bone loss during reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Findings

Patients who underwent navigated RSA showed higher use of augmented baseplates compared to conventional RSA.

Clinical scores improved in both groups, with navigated RSA showing slightly better results.

Navigation systems appear to enhance preoperative planning and baseplate positioning accuracy.

Abstract

Background

Inaccurate positioning of the glenoid component has been well described as the most common cause of early failure following a reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). Among the latest developments in operative technique, three-dimensional preoperative planning and navigation intraoperative systems have been developed to improve the accuracy of the baseplate positioning during RSA. The primary purpose of this retrospective analysis was to investigate the mid-term results of patients who underwent an elective RSA or for acute highly comminuted proximal humerus fractures. The secondary goal was to investigate the role of navigation in the execution of preoperative planning, especially in the management of glenoid bone loss.

Methodology

In total, 101 cases were included in this study. Patients were divided into the following two groups: 88 cases of RSA performed without the use of navigation (conventional RSA) and 13 cases performed using intraoperative navigation (navigated RSA). For all patients included in the study, preoperative planning software was employed. Patient demographics, gender, past medical history, indication of procedure, operated site, type of glenoid component used, length of baseplate screws, and clinical assessment scores (Oxford Shoulder Score, OSS) were reported for all patients. Cases of revision shoulder arthroplasty were excluded from this study.

Results

The postoperative clinical assessment of patients revealed that following RSA, all patients improved significantly with a consistently upward trend of the OSS noted for both groups (conventional and navigated RSA) throughout the postoperative assessment. Despite no statistically significant difference detected, the clinical scores of the navigated RSA group outperformed those of the conventional RSA group in the postoperative period. A higher incidence of augmented baseplate use was noted in the navigated RSA group than in the conventional group (23.07% vs. 5.68%, p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Our results indicate that the use of intraoperative navigation appears to be a valuable tool in preoperative planning, providing accurate positioning of the baseplate, a better understanding of the glenoid anatomy, and real-time monitoring of the length and direction of the baseplate screws. It is difficult to conclude if the use of navigation leads to superior clinical outcomes, and the cost-effectiveness of its use needs to be further analyzed. Prospective randomized trials are required to assess the cost-effectiveness of routine use of navigation in RSA.

Figures