Dataset Information

Glenoid failure after total shoulder arthroplasty with cemented all-polyethylene versus metal-backed implants: a systematic review protocol.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is an effective treatment adopted for patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA). The glenoid component failure is the main risk that occurs in this therapeutic choice; however, doubts remain regarding the selection of the best implant for avoiding complication. This systematic review aims to evaluate the glenoid component in TSA by comparing the complications of different types of implants.

Methods and analysis

A systematic review of randomised clinical trials or quasi-randomised trials will be performed by applying the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis protocols and comparing polyethylene (keeled and pegged) versus metal-backed implants in adult patients with glenohumeral OA. Our search strategy will be performed using MEDLINE, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, EMBASE and Web of Science. Data management and extraction will be performed using a data withdrawal form and by analysing study method characteristics, participant characteristics, intervention characteristics, results and methodological domains. The database search will be performed by February 2021. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation will be used for assessing the quality of evidence of each study selected; however, some critical and important outcomes were determined such as the shoulder function through functional scores (Constant-Murley and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons), complications represented by pain (Visual Analogue Scale), surgical revision, radiograph radiolucency and loosening. The confidence in estimated effects for these outcomes will be applied as the overall confidence. The outcomes will be defined as early or late, according to the postoperative follow-up of less than or greater than 1 year, respectively, for complications and radiographs. For the shoulder function, follow-ups will be divided into 6, 12 and 24 months. Heterogeneity is expected in systematic reviews; therefore, the selection of outcomes, as well as the sample size, and specific statistical analysis can lead to meta-analysis; however, if it fails, narrative evidence synthesis will be conducted. Other analyses such as descriptive, subgroup and sensitivity analyses will be performed whenever possible. This systematic review will, therefore, provide evidence concerning the best clinical practice for avoiding complications.

Ethics and dissemination

This study has been approved by the Institutional Review Board of Universidade Federal de São Paulo (protocols 0725/2017, 2.157.415 and 70473017.5.0000.5505), and the findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.

Prospero registration number

CRD42018079537.

SUBMITTER: Zan RAA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7768953 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Glenoid failure after total shoulder arthroplasty with cemented all-polyethylene versus metal-backed implants: a systematic review protocol.

Zan Renato Aroca Aroca RAA Lazarini Rafael Fuchs RF Matsunaga Fabio Teruo FT Netto Nicola Archetti NA Belloti João Carlos JC Tamaoki Marcel Jun Sugawara MJS

BMJ open 20201224 12

<h4>Introduction</h4>Anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) is an effective treatment adopted for patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis (OA). The glenoid component failure is the main risk that occurs in this therapeutic choice; however, doubts remain regarding the selection of the best implant for avoiding complication. This systematic review aims to evaluate the glenoid component in TSA by comparing the complications of different types of implants.<h4>Methods and analysis</h4>A syste ...[more]

PMID: 33361082

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAnatomical total shoulder arthroplasty (aTSA) has been used to manage degenerative diseases such as primary osteoarthritis. An increase in the use of this procedure has led to several developments in humeral and glenoid components to improve patient outcomes. This study aimed to compare clinical and radiological outcomes of the newly-introduced convertible metal-backed glenoid components with cemented polyethylene glenoid components in aTSA, and to determine whether the new component would be comparable to a conventional one for reducing the burden of future revision or conversion surgeries.MethodsMedical records of fifty patients who underwent aTSA with at least two years of follow-up were retrospectively reviewed. Eighteen patients received convertible metal-backed glenoid components with vitamin E1-coated liner (MB group), while thirty-two patients received conventional cemented polyethylene glenoid components (PE group). Pre- and postoperative clinical and radiological outcomes (acromion-greater tuberosity angle [AGA] and humeral lateral offset [LO]) at final follow-up were assessed. Radiolucent lines (RLLs) and loosening around the humeral and glenoid components were also evaluated.ResultsClinical outcomes improved after surgery in both groups (all p < 0.001). The arc of rotation measured by AGA improved postoperatively in both groups (all p < 0.001), and AGA and LO were not different according to the type of glenoid components (all p > 0.05). Overall complication rates including RLLs of PE and MB groups were 43.8% (14/32) and 16.7% (3/18), respectively (p = 0.031). Although the PE group had more RLLs than did the MB group (p < 0.05), related symptoms and/or glenoid implant loosening were not observed in both groups. Subscapularis failure occurred in two patients in the PE group and in one in the MB group.ConclusionThe convertible metal-backed glenoid implant with vitamin E1-coated liner may be a good alternative for considering the potential for an easier conversion to reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Several modern designs of metal-backed glenoids (MBG) have been devised to overcome flaws such as loosening and a high failure rate. This review aimed to compare rates of complications and revision surgeries between cemented polyethylene glenoid (PEG) and three examples of modern MBG designs. METHODS:Literature search was carried out using PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Google Scholar using MeSH terms and natural keywords. A total of 1186 articles were screened. We descriptively analyzed numerical data between the groups and statistically analyzed the categorical data, such as the presence of radiolucent line, loosening, and revision surgery (failure). Articles were divided into three groups based on follow-up duration: <?36-month, 36-72-month, and?>?72-month subgroups. RESULTS:This study included 35 articles (3769 shoulders); 25 on cemented PEG and ten on the modern MBG. Mean age was 66.4 (21-93) and 66.5?years (31-88). The mean duration of follow-up was 73.1 (12-211) and 56.1?months (24-100). Overall, the rate of the radiolucent line was 354/1302 (27%) and 47/282 (17%), the loosening rate was 465/3185 (15%) and 22/449 (5%), and the failure rate was 189/3316 (6%) and 11/457 (2%), for PEG and MBG, respectively. The results of <?36-month and 36-72-month subgroups showed lower rates of radiolucency and loosening in the cemented PEG group, but there was no significant difference in failure rate (P?=?0.754 and 0.829, respectively). In the >?72-month subgroup, MBG was better in terms of loosening (P?<?0.001) and failure rates (P?=?0.006). CONCLUSIONS:The modern MBG component, especially TM glenoid, seems to be a promising alternative to cemented PEGs, based on subgroup revision rates according to the follow-up duration and overall results of ROM and clinical scores. All polyethylene glenoids tend to increase loosening and failure over time. Three modern MBG designs seem to have no difference in failure, at least in the <?36-month and 36-72-month subgroups compared to the cemented PEG. More long-term follow-up studies on modern MBG should be ultimately conducted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:Level IV, systematic review.

Project description:AimsTo report early (two-year) postoperative findings from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) investigating disease-specific quality of life (QOL), clinical, patient-reported, and radiological outcomes in patients undergoing a total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) with a second-generation uncemented trabecular metal (TM) glenoid versus a cemented polyethylene glenoid (POLY) component.MethodsFive fellowship-trained surgeons from three centres participated. Patients aged between 18 and 79 years with a primary diagnosis of glenohumeral osteoarthritis were screened for eligibility. Patients were randomized intraoperatively to either a TM or POLY glenoid component. Study intervals were: baseline, six weeks, six-, 12-, and 24 months postoperatively. The primary outcome was the Western Ontario Osteoarthritis Shoulder QOL score. Radiological images were reviewed for metal debris. Mixed effects repeated measures analysis of variance for within and between group comparisons were performed.ResultsA total of 93 patients were randomized (46 TM; 47 POLY). No significant or clinically important differences were found with patient-reported outcomes at 24-month follow-up. Regarding the glenoid components, there were no complications or revision surgeries in either group. Grade 1 metal debris was observed in three (6.5%) patients with TM glenoids at 24 months but outcomes were not negatively impacted.ConclusionEarly results from this RCT showed no differences in disease-specific QOL, radiographs, complication rates, or shoulder function between uncemented second-generation TM and cemented POLY glenoids at 24 months postoperatively. Revision surgeries and reoperations were reported in both groups, but none attributed to glenoid implant failure. At 24 months postoperatively, Grade 1 metal debris was found in 6.5% of patients with a TM glenoid but did not negatively influence patient-reported outcomes. Longer-term follow-up is needed and is underway. Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(9):728-736.

Dataset Information

Glenoid failure after total shoulder arthroplasty with cemented all-polyethylene versus metal-backed implants: a systematic review protocol.

Introduction

Methods and analysis

Ethics and dissemination

Prospero registration number

Publications

Glenoid failure after total shoulder arthroplasty with cemented all-polyethylene versus metal-backed implants: a systematic review protocol.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets