The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery (American). 2009;91:1965-1972.
doi:10.2106/JBJS.H.00938
© 2009 The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Inc.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow CME: Take the activities for this article:
Adult Hip Reconstruction Test 33: Fall 2009 (publication date November 16, ...
Shoulder/Elbow Test 28: Fall 2009 (publication date November 16, 2009; expi...
CME 3: July, August, September 2009 (publication date October 5, 2009; expi...
Right arrow Letters to the Editor: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when Letters to the Editor are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Rights and Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Rahme, H.
Right arrow Articles by Larsson, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Rahme, H.
Right arrow Articles by Larsson, S.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Stability of Cemented in-Line Pegged Glenoid Compared with Keeled Glenoid Components in Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Hans Rahme, MD1, Per Mattsson, MD1, Lars Wikblad, MD1, Jan Nowak, MD1 and Sune Larsson, MD1

1 Department of Orthopedics, Uppsala University Hospital, S-751 85 Uppsala, Sweden. E-mail address for H. Rahme: hans.rahme{at}telia.com

Investigation performed at the Department of Orthopedics, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, and at the Elisabeth Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden

Disclosure: In support of their research for or preparation of this work, one or more of the authors received, in any one year, outside funding or grants in excess of $10,000 from Zimmer. Neither they nor a member of their immediate families received payments or other benefits or a commitment or agreement to provide such benefits from a commercial entity. No commercial entity paid or directed, or agreed to pay or direct, any benefits to any research fund, foundation, division, center, clinical practice, or other charitable or nonprofit organization with which the authors, or a member of their immediate families, are affiliated or associated.


Background: Considerable interest has been focused on the design of the glenoid component used in total shoulder arthroplasty in order to reduce the risk of loosening. One design-related feature that has attracted attention is whether to use pegged or keeled cemented glenoid components. The main purpose of this study was to compare the fixation of cemented keeled glenoid components with that of cemented in-line pegged glenoid components.

Methods: In a prospective randomized study, we compared the stability of cemented, all-polyethylene, keeled glenoid components and cemented, all-polyethylene, in-line three-pegged glenoid components by radiostereometric analysis. Twenty-seven shoulders in twenty-five patients with osteoarthritis (twenty-two shoulders had primary and five shoulders had secondary osteoarthritis) were included. There were sixteen women and nine men, and the mean age was sixty-four years. Radiostereometric analysis and conventional radiographs were carried out at five days, at four months, and at one and two years postoperatively.

Results: The mean Constant and Murley score preoperatively and two years postoperatively was 25 and 70, respectively, for shoulders with the keeled glenoid component and 22 and 70 for the shoulders with a pegged component. No significant difference was detected between groups with regard to the average micromigration of the glenoid components at any of the time points. The average translation was <1 mm, while the median value was <0.3 mm at two years, with no significant difference between the different axes. In five shoulders (three with the keeled component and two with the pegged component), translation at two years was >1 mm. In fourteen shoulders (eight with the keeled and six with the pegged component), the rotation around one or several axes was >2°. We were not able to detect any specific pattern with regard to movement for either type of component nor were we able to detect any difference between the two types of components in the way they migrated, if migration occurred.

Conclusions: Cemented all-polyethylene keeled or in-line three-pegged glenoid components appear to have similar stability during the first two years after surgery. Studies with a longer follow-up period are needed to relate these findings to long-term clinical and radiographic outcomes.

Level of Evidence: Therapeutic Level I. See Instructions to Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Facebook Facebook   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?