Results and Limitations of Humeral Head Resurfacing: 105 Cases at a Mean Follow-Up of 5 Years

The objective of this study was to assess clinical and computed-tomography (CT) outcomes at least 2 years after humeral head resurfacing to treat concentric gleno-humeral osteoarthritis. Hypothesis Humeral head resurfacing provides similar outcomes to those achieved with stemmed humeral head implants. Materials and methods This single-centre retrospective studyincluded 40 Copeland™ and 65 Aequalis™ humeral resurfacing heads implanted between 2004 and 2012. Mean patient age at diagnosis was 64 years. The diagnoses were osteoarthritis with an intact (68%) or torn (21%) rotator cuff, avascular necrosis (5%), osteoarthritis complicating chronic instability (3%), post-traumatic osteoarthritis (2%), and chronic inflammatory joint disease (1%). Validated clinical scores, radiographs, and CT before surgery and at last follow-up were compared. Results During the mean follow-up of 56 months, complications occurred in 24 implants. Revision surgery with reverse shoulder replacement was required in 18 cases, after a mean of 43.6 months, to treat glenoid wear or a rotator cuff tear. At last follow-up, for the implants that did not require revision surgery, the mean Constant score was 64/100. The implants had a mean varus of 5° and mean retroversion of -13.3°. The mean increase in glenoid cavity depth was 2.4mm. Mean increases in medial and lateral humeral offset were 1.9mm and 2.7mm, respectively. Pre-operative factors significantly associated with failure were rotator cuff tear (...
Source: Orthopaedics and Traumatology: Surgery and Research - Category: Orthopaedics Source Type: research