Positioning of the glenoid component is one of the most challenging steps in shoulder arthroplasty, and prosthesis longevity as well as functional outcomes is considered highly dependent on accurate positioning. This review considers the evidence supporting surgical navigation and patient-specific instruments for glenoid implant positioning in anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.
Methods
A systematic literature search was performed for studies assessing glenoid implant positioning accuracy as measured by cross-sectional imaging on live subjects or cadaver models. Meta-analysis of controlled studies was performed to estimate the primary effects of navigation and patient-specific instruments on glenoid implant positioning error. Meta-analysis of absolute positioning outcomes was also performed for each group incorporating data from controlled and uncontrolled studies.
Results
Nine studies, four controlled and five uncontrolled, with 258 total subjects were included in the analysis. Meta-analysis of controlled studies supported that both navigation and patient-specific instruments had a moderate statistically significant effect on improving glenoid implant positioning outcomes. Meta-analysis of absolute positioning outcomes demonstrates glenoid implant positioning with standard instrumentation results in a high rate of malposition.
Discussion
Navigation and patient-specific instruments improve glenoid positioning outcomes. Whether the improvement in positioning outcomes achieved translate to better clinical outcomes is unknown.
NyffelerRWWernerCMLGerberC. Biomechanical relevance of glenoid component positioning in the reverse Delta III total shoulder prosthesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2005; 14: 524–528.
2.
IannottiJPSpencerEEJrWinterUet al.Prosthetic positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2005; 14: S111–S121.
3.
Matsen IIIFA. Glenoid component failure in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am2008; 90: 885.
4.
NorrisTRIannottiJP. Functional outcome after shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis: a multicenter study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2002; 11: 130–135.
5.
GregoryTMSankeyAAugereauBet al.Accuracy of glenoid component placement in total shoulder arthroplasty and its effect on clinical and radiological outcome in a retrospective, longitudinal, monocentric open study. PLoS One2013; 8: e75791.
6.
IannottiJPGreesonCDowningDet al.Effect of glenoid deformity on glenoid component placement in primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2012; 21: 48–55.
7.
VerborgtOVanheesMHeylenSet al.Computer navigation and patient-specific instrumentation in shoulder arthroplasty. Sports Med Arthrosc Rev2014; 22: e42–e49.
8.
GauciMOBoileauPBabaMet al.Patient-specific glenoid guides provide accuracy and reproducibility in total shoulder arthroplasty. Bone Jt J2016; 98-B: 1080–1085.
9.
LauSCKeithPPA. Patient-specific instrumentation for total shoulder arthroplasty: not as accurate as it would seem. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2018; 27: 90–95.
10.
MulliganRPAzarFMThrockmortonTW. Generic targeting guides place revision glenoid components in more anatomic version than traditional techniques. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2017; 26: 786–791.
11.
TheopoldJPierohPSchargeMLet al.Improved accuracy of K-wire positioning into the glenoid vault by intraoperative 3D image intensifier-based navigation for the glenoid component in shoulder arthroplasty. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res2016; 102: 575–581.
12.
DallalanaRJMcMahonRAEastBet al.Accuracy of patient-specific instrumentation in anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Int J Shoulder Surg2016; 10: 59–66.
13.
EralyKStoffelenDVander SlotenJet al.A patient-specific guide for optimizing custom-made glenoid implantation in cases of severe glenoid defects: an in vitro study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2016; 25: 837–845.
14.
HeylenSVan HaverAVuylstekeKet al.Patient-specific instrument guidance of glenoid component implantation reduces inclination variability in total and reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2016; 25: 186–192.
15.
LewisGSStevensNMArmstrongAD. Testing of a novel pin array guide for accurate three-dimensional glenoid component positioning. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2015; 24: 1939–1947.
16.
MulliganRPAzarFMThrockmortonTW. Is a generic targeting guide useful for glenoid component placement in shoulder arthroplasty?. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2016; 25: e90–e95.
17.
VenneGRasquinhaBJPichoraDet al.Comparing conventional and computer-assisted surgery baseplate and screw placement in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2015; 24: 1112–1119.
18.
IannottiJPWeinerSRodriguezEet al.Three-dimensional imaging and templating improve glenoid implant positioning. J Bone Jt Surg Am2015; 97: 651–658.
19.
ThrockmortonTWGulottaLVBonnarensFOet al.Patient-specific targeting guides compared with traditional instrumentation for glenoid component placement in shoulder arthroplasty: a multi-surgeon study in 70 arthritic cadaver specimens. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2015; 24: 965–971.
20.
VerstraetenTRGMBerghsBTongelAVet al.Can an extracorporeal glenoid aiming device be used to optimize the position of the glenoid component in total shoulder arthroplasty?. Int J Shoulder Surg2015; 9: 114–120.
21.
WalchGVezeridisPSBoileauPet al.Three-dimensional planning and use of patient-specific guides improve glenoid component position: an in vitro study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2015; 24: 302–309.
22.
IannottiJBakerJRodriguezEet al.Three-dimensional preoperative planning software and a novel information transfer technology improve glenoid component positioning. J Bone Jt Surg2014; 96: e71.
23.
LevyJCEverdingNGFrankleMAet al.Accuracy of patient-specific guided glenoid baseplate positioning for reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2014; 23: 1563–1567.
24.
StübigTPetriMZeckeyCet al.3D navigated implantation of the glenoid component in reversed shoulder arthroplasty. Feasibility and results in an anatomic study. Int J Med Robot2013; 9: 480–485.
25.
SueroEMCitakMLoDet al.Use of a custom alignment guide to improve glenoid component position in total shoulder arthroplasty. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc2013; 21: 2860–2866.
26.
HendelMDBryanJABarsoumWKet al.Comparison of patient-specific instruments with standard surgical instruments in determining glenoid component position. J Bone Jt Surg2012; 94: 2167–2175.
27.
BriemDRueckerAHNeumannJet al.3D fluoroscopic navigated reaming of the glenoid for total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Comput Aided Surg2011; 16: 93–99.
28.
NguyenDFerreiraLMBrownhillJRet al.Improved accuracy of computer assisted glenoid implantation in total shoulder arthroplasty: an in-vitro randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2009; 18: 907–914.
29.
KircherJWiedemannMMagoschPet al.Improved accuracy of glenoid positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty with intraoperative navigation: a prospective-randomized clinical study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2009; 18: 515–520.
30.
NguyenDFerreiraLMBrownhillJRet al.Design and development of a computer assisted glenoid implantation technique for shoulder replacement surgery. Comput Aided Surg2007; 12: 152–159.
31.
SadoghiPVavkenJLeithnerAet al.Benefit of intraoperative navigation on glenoid component positioning during total shoulder arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg2015; 135: 41–47.
32.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJet al.Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med2009; 6: e1000097.
33.
FarronATerrierABüchlerP. Risks of loosening of a prosthetic glenoid implanted in retroversion. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2006; 15: 521–526.
34.
HigginsJPTAltmanDGGøtzschePCet al.The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ2011; 343: d5928.
35.
WrightJGSwiontkowskiMFHeckmanJD. Introducing levels of evidence to the journal. JBJS2003; 85: 1.
36.
BeggCBMazumdarM. Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics1994; 50: 1088–1101.
37.
EggerMSmithGDSchneiderMet al.Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ1997; 315: 629–634.
38.
BeggCBPiloteL. A model for incorporating historical controls into a meta-analysis. Biometrics1991; 47: 899–906.
39.
ViechtbauerW. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Stat Softw2010; 36: 1–48.
40.
NyffelerRWJostBPfirrmannCWet al.Measurement of glenoid version: conventional radiographs versus computed tomography scans. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2003; 12: 493–496.
41.
OosteromRRozingPMBerseeHEN. Effect of glenoid component inclination on its fixation and humeral head subluxation in total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Biomech2004; 19: 1000–1008.
42.
HopkinsARHansenUNAmisAAet al.The effects of glenoid component alignment variations on cement mantle stresses in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2004; 13: 668–675.
43.
FavrePMoorBSnedekerJGet al.Influence of component positioning on impingement in conventional total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Biomech2008; 23: 175–183.
HoJCSabesanVJIannottiJP. Glenoid component retroversion is associated with osteolysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am2013; 95: e82.
47.
GutiérrezSWalkerMWillisMet al.Effects of tilt and glenosphere eccentricity on baseplate/bone interface forces in a computational model, validated by a mechanical model, of reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2011; 20: 732–739.
48.
GutiérrezSGreiweRMFrankleMAet al.Biomechanical comparison of component position and hardware failure in the reverse shoulder prosthesis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg2007; 16: S9–S12.
49.
SimovitchRWZumsteinMALohriEet al.Predictors of scapular notching in patients managed with the Delta III reverse total shoulder replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am2007; 89: 588–600.
50.
LévigneCGarretJBoileauPet al.Scapular notching in reverse shoulder arthroplasty: is it important to avoid it and how?. Clin Orthop2011; 469: 2512–2520.
51.
SadoghiPLeithnerAVavkenPet al.Infraglenoidal scapular notching in reverse total shoulder replacement: a prospective series of 60 cases and systematic review of the literature. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2011; 12: 101.
52.
VanhoveBBeugniesA. Grammont's reverse shoulder prosthesis for rotator cuff arthropathy. A retrospective study of 32 cases. Acta Orthop Belg2004; 70: 219–225.
53.
DelloyeCJorisDColetteAet al.Complications mécaniques de la prothèse totale inversée de l'épaule. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot2002; 88: 410–414.
54.
NicholsonGPStraussEJShermanSL. Scapular notching: recognition and strategies to minimize clinical impact. Clin Orthop2011; 469: 2521–2530.
