Authors’ Disclosure Statement: Dr. Frankle reports that he receives royalties and consulting fees from DJO Surgical and is a paid consultant for Cayenne Medical. The other authors report no actual or potential conflict of interest in relation to this article.
Dr. McLendon is a Shoulder and Elbow Fellow, Florida Orthopaedic Institute, Tampa, Florida. Dr. Cox is an Orthopedic Resident, Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida. Dr. Frankle is Chief, Shoulder and Elbow Department, Florida Orthopaedic Institute, Tampa, Florida.
Address correspondence to: Mark A. Frankle, MD, Shoulder and Elbow Department, Florida Orthopaedic Institute, 13020 N Telecom Pkwy, Tampa, FL 33637 (tel, 813-978-9700; fax, 813-558-6135; email, mfrankle@floridaortho.com).
Paul B. McLendon, MD Jacob L. Cox, MD Mark A. Frankle, MD . Humeral Bone Loss in Revision Shoulder Arthroplasty. Am J Orthop. February 15, 2018
TAKE-HOME POINTS
Different preoperative diagnoses lead to distinct patterns of bone loss in revision shoulder arthroplasty.
A variety of techniques should be utilized to address the specific pathologies encountered.
Advanced proximal humeral bone loss results in limited substrate available for humeral component fixation.
Monoblock humeral stems can be used without allografts in cases with mild humeral bone loss.
The revision of loose humeral stems dictates the use of large diaphyseal allografts in the majority of cases.
References
ABSTRACT
Revision shoulder arthroplasty is becoming more prevalent as the rate of primary shoulder arthroplasty in the US continues to increase. The management of proximal humeral bone loss in the revision setting presents a difficult problem without a clear solution. Different preoperative diagnoses often lead to distinctly different patterns of bone loss. Successful management of these cases requires a clear understanding of the normal anatomy of the proximal humerus, as well as structural limitations imposed by significant bone loss and the effect this loss has on component fixation. Our preferred technique differs depending on the pattern of bone loss encountered. The use of allograft-prosthetic composites, the cement-within-cement technique, and combinations of these strategies comprise the mainstay of our treatment algorithm. This article focuses on indications, surgical techniques, and some of the published outcomes using these strategies in the management of proximal humeral bone loss.
Continue to: The demand for shoulder arthroplasty...