Shoulder Arthroplasty
Conditions
Keywords
Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty, Patient-Specific Instrumentation, Augmented Reality Navigation, Glenoid Positioning, CT Accuracy, Functional Outcome
Brief summary
This monocentric observational cohort study compares conventional instrumentation, patient-specific instrumentation, and augmented reality navigation in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. The primary objective is to assess the accuracy of glenoid component positioning based on postoperative CT data. Secondary objectives include evaluation of functional outcomes and clinical performance at mid-term follow-up. Patients who underwent surgery between 2021 and 2024 are followed up clinically at 2 years postoperatively.
Detailed description
This study investigates the accuracy and clinical relevance of different planning and implementation techniques in reverse total shoulder arthroplasty. Patients treated at a single orthopedic center between 2021 and 2024 were included. Three established surgical approaches were analyzed: conventional instrumentation, patient-specific instrumentation, and augmented reality navigation. Initial data collection included retrospective and prospective assessment of preoperative planning parameters and their intraoperative implementation. Postoperative evaluation included low-dose CT imaging to assess glenoid component positioning accuracy. The current phase of the study focuses on long-term clinical outcomes, with a standardized 2-year follow-up including clinical examination and validated functional outcome scores. No additional imaging is performed as part of the follow-up phase. Patients were not randomized; group allocation reflects the surgical technique used at the time of treatment.
Interventions
None listed
Sponsors
Krankenhaus Barmherzige Schwestern Linz
Study design
Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
OTHER
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Age ≥ 18 years * Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty performed between 2021 and 2024 * Available preoperative imaging and planning (X-ray and/or CT) * Available postoperative CT imaging * Written informed consent
Exclusion criteria
* Major perioperative complications not related to the shoulder procedure affecting outcomes * Incomplete imaging or clinical data
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy of Glenoid Component Positioning | up to 2years postoperatively | Comparison of preoperative planning parameters with postoperative CT-based measurements of glenoid component positioning, including inclination, version, implant size, and screw placement. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Constant-Murley Score (Constant Score) | 2 years postoperatively | The Constant Score is a comprehensive shoulder function assessment. The total score ranges from 0 to 100 points. Higher scores indicate better shoulder performance and function; lower scores indicate greater functional impairment and symptoms. |
| American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES) | 2 years postoperatively | Shoulder pain and function will be assessed using the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons Score. The total score ranges from 0 to 100 points. Higher scores indicate less pain and better shoulder function. |
| Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score (DASH) | 2 years postoperatively | The Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Score measures disability and symptoms affecting the upper extremity, including the arm, shoulder, and hand. The total score ranges from 0 to 100 points. Lower scores indicate better upper-limb function and fewer symptoms; higher scores indicate greater disability and functional limitations. |
| Complications and Revision Surgery | Up to 2 years postoperatively | Occurrence of complications or revision procedures. |
Countries
Austria
Outcome results
None listed