English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of eccentric humeral components with different degrees of posterior offset on range of glenohumeral motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Uncemented PROMOS® reverse shoulder prostheses were implanted in eight human cadaveric shoulder specimens. Passive range of motion was evaluated with a robot-assisted shoulder simulator. Three movements were tested: abduction, anterior elevation and external rotation. Each specimen was tested with a customary reverse humeral component and two eccentric components with 3 and 6 mm of posterior offset respectively. Mean abduction was 81° (standard deviation [SD] 12) for the customary reverse components, 81° (SD 13) for the 3 mm eccentric and 82° (SD 15) for 6-mm eccentric implants. Mean anterior elevation was 68° (SD 13) in the regular group and 66° (SD 14) and 63° (SD 14) for 3- and 6-mm eccentric groups. With all configurations, 90° of external rotation were achieved without requiring more than 2 N·m of applied rotational moment. Although there was no statistically significant difference between the conventional and the eccentric implants, anterior elevation was decreased by almost 20° in three of eight shoulders with the posterior offset configurations. This was due to a conflict between the proximal humerus and the anterior aspect of the acromion or the coracoid. Although eccentric humeral components can be useful in reverse shoulder arthroplasty to avoid anterior cortical defects in individuals with pronounced humeral head posterior offset, a potential conflict between proximal humerus and scapula may have an unfavourable effect on range of anterior elevation. However, this observation is only true for the uncemented PROMOS® reverse prosthesis. Other reverse shoulder designs with posterior offset components are yet to be tested.

Effect of posterior offset humeral components on range of motion in reverse shoulder arthroplasty