Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty in patients with type B2, B3, and type C glenoids: comparable clinical outcome to patients without compromised glenoid bone stock—a matched pair analysis

摘要

Abstract Background Primarily posterior bone deficient (dysplastic) (Walch type C) or secondarily eroded (Walch type B2 or B3) glenoids represent a surgical challenge for shoulder arthroplasty. Due to the posteriorly static decentered head, reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is often considered as the treatment of choice. The purpose of this study is to report the clinical and radiographic outcomes, complications and reoperations of RTSA for posteriorly deficient glenoids.Materials and methods All patients who underwent RTSA for osteoarthritis secondary to underlying glenoid deficiency (Walch type B2, B3 and C) between 2005 and 2018 (study group), were identified from our institutional shoulder arthroplasty database and gender- and age-matched to a cohort of patients with normal glenoid bone stock (control group). Longitudinal pre- and postoperative clinical [Constant–Murley (CS) score, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV)] and radiographic outcomes were assessed.Results We included 188 patients (94 in each group). The median follow-up was 43?±?26 (24–144) months in the study group and 59?±?32 (24–124) months in the control group. The glenoid deficiency was addressed by using glenoid bone reconstruction. The surgical site complication and revision rate of RTSA in patients with bony deficient glenoids were 17% and 7%. Although glenoid loosening was slightly higher in the study group (5 vs. 2), overall no significant differences were found between the study and control groups in satisfaction scores, preoperative and postoperative absolute and relative Constant scores, complication and revision rates, respectively.Conclusion Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) seems to be a valuable treatment option for patients with primary (dysplasia) or secondary (wear) posterior glenoid deficiency. Although severe glenoid bone loss seems to be a risk factor for glenoid component failure, the overall complication and revision rates as well as clinical and radiographic outcome are comparable to RTSA in patients without compromised glenoid bone stock.Level of evidence Level III: case–control study