Does fluoroscopy improve baseplate position compared to conventional technique in reverse shoulder arthroplasty? A preliminary study
Background: Accurate placement of glenoid component in reverse shoulder arthroplasty remains a challenge for surgeons of all levels of expertise; however, no studies have evaluated the utility of fluoroscopy as a surgical assistance method. Methods: Prospective comparative study of 33 patients under...
| Autores: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2021 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Universidad Complutense de Madrid (UCM) |
| Repositorio: | Docta Complutense |
| Idioma: | inglés |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:docta.ucm.es:20.500.14352/107477 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14352/107477 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | 616.7-76-089 Shoulder replacement arthroplasty Fluoroscopy Glenoid component Orthopaedic procedures Reverse shoulder arthroplasty Ciencias Biomédicas 32 Ciencias Médicas |
| Sumario: | Background: Accurate placement of glenoid component in reverse shoulder arthroplasty remains a challenge for surgeons of all levels of expertise; however, no studies have evaluated the utility of fluoroscopy as a surgical assistance method. Methods: Prospective comparative study of 33 patients undergoing primary reverse shoulder arthroplasty during a 12-month period. Fifteen patients had a baseplate placed using the conventional "free hand" technique (control group), and 18 patients using intraoperative fluoroscopy assistance group, in a case-control design. Postoperative glenoid position was evaluated on postoperative Computed Tomography (CT) scan. Results: The mean deviation of version and inclination for fluoroscopy assistance vs. control group was 1.75° (0.675-3.125) vs. 4.2° (1.975-10.45) (p = .015), and 3.85° (0-7.225) vs. 10.35° (4.35-18.75) (p = .009). The distance from the central peg midpoint to the inferior glenoid rim (fluoroscopy assistance 14.61 mm/control 4.75 mm, p = .581) and the surgical time (fluoroscopy assistance 1.93 ± 0.57/control 2.18 ± 0.44 h, p = .400) showed no differences, with an average radiation dose of 0.45 mGy and fluoroscopy time of 14 s. Conclusions: Accurate axial and coronal scapular plane positioning of glenoid component is improved with intraoperative fluoroscopy at the cost of a greater radiation dose and without differences in surgical time. Comparative studies are needed to determine whether their use in relation to more expensive surgical assistance systems result in similar effectiveness.L evel of evidence : Level III, therapeutic study. |
|---|