Influence of subscapularis stiffness with glenosphere lateralization on physiological external rotation limits after reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Autor: Linderman SE; Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA., Johnson JE; Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA., Anderson DD; Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA., Patterson BM; Department of Orthopedics and Rehabilitation, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA. Electronic address: brendan-patterson@uiowa.edu.
Jazyk: angličtina
Zdroj: Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery [J Shoulder Elbow Surg] 2021 Nov; Vol. 30 (11), pp. 2629-2637. Date of Electronic Publication: 2021 May 18.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jse.2021.04.039
Abstrakt: Background: Repair of the subscapularis following reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA) remains a controversial topic among surgeons. Poor rotator cuff muscle quality is associated with increased musculotendinous stiffness, and the subsequent effect of compromised tissue repair on RSA functional outcomes remains unclear. The objective was to investigate the influence of subscapularis stiffness together with glenoid component lateralization on pre- and postimpingement joint mechanics during external rotation after RSA.
Methods: A validated finite element model incorporating the Zimmer Trabecular Metal reverse system was used. The deltoid and subscapularis tendon were tensioned and wrapped around the joint prior to controlled shoulder external rotation. Baseline subscapularis stiffness, determined from cadaveric testing, was varied to 80%, 120% and 140% of baseline, to simulate a range of pliability associated with fatty infiltration and fibrosis. We evaluated the effects of varying subscapularis stiffness and the corresponding variation in joint tension with varying glenosphere lateralization (2, 4, and 10 mm) on the torque required to externally rotate the shoulder and the impingement/subluxation risk.
Results: Prior to any impingement, the torques required to externally rotate the shoulder ranged from 22-47 Nm across the range of parameters studied, with the greatest torques required for the 10-mm glenosphere lateralization. The impact of increasing subscapularis stiffness on torque requirements was most pronounced at the 10-mm lateralization, as well. A 20% increase in subscapularis stiffness necessitated a 7%-14% increase in preimpingement torque, whereas a 40% stiffness increase was associated with a 12%-27% increase in torque. Torque was proportional to lateralization. When lateralization was increased from 2 to 4 mm, the preimpingement torque increased by 10%-13%, whereas a 10-mm lateralization necessitated a 35%-62% torque increase relative to 2 mm of lateralization. Increased subscapularis stiffness did not limit impingement-free range of motion or substantially decrease postimpingement subluxation in this model.
Discussion: Mechanical gains achieved through lateralization may be hindered by increased torque demands, especially when a stiffer subscapularis is repaired. As lateralization increases subscapularis tension, greater torque is required to externally rotate the shoulder. The torque required for external rotation has been reported between 15-50 Nm. Subscapularis repair with the simulated increases in stiffness requires relative increases in torque that the reconstructed shoulder may not be able to physically produce to rotate the glenohumeral joint, particularly at 10-mm lateralization. These results suggest that subscapularis repair may not be indicated in cases where a lateralized glenoid component is used and the subscapularis is compromised.
(Copyright © 2021 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
Databáze: MEDLINE
Externí odkaz: