Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of thirty eight cemented pegged glenoid components with variable backside curvature: two-year minimum follow-up

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The PERFORM™ pegged glenoid system has been used for shoulder arthroplasty since 2012. This system offers multiple backside curvatures per size to better match variable patient anatomy. As a result, less reaming is required and subchondral bone is preserved—a critical factor in preventing glenoid migration and loosening, thus enhancing implant longevity.

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to analyze all radiographic modifications around this new glenoid implant.

Method

Thirty-eight shoulders which received the PERFORM™ pegged glenoid component between June 2012 and January 2014 for primary or secondary osteoarthritis were reviewed at two-years minimum follow-up. There were 13 men and 22 women with an average age of 67 years. Humeral components were an uncemented short stem implant in nine (23%) and a resurfacing implant in 29 (77%).

Results

At 27-months average follow-up (24–41), Constant score improved from 30 to 65 points. Range of motion improved significantly at follow-up from 100° to 142° for the anterior elevation, and from 15 to 40° for the external rotation. Radiographic lucent lines (RLL) were observed post-operatively in eight cases (21%), and in 16 cases (42%) at the last follow-up with an increase of the RLL score from 0.36 ± 0.8 to 1.3 ± 2 (p < 0.001) without signs of loosening (RLL > 12). One revision has been performed after anterior shoulder dislocation, rotator cuff tear and glenoid component migration. RLL score was not correlated with dominant side, sex, age, or Constant score.

Discussion-Conclusion

The cemented pegged glenoid component with multiple backside curvatures gave satisfactory results at two-years minimum follow-up for up to three years with a low RLL score. Long-term studies are mandatory to confirm these results.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Barwood S, Setter KJ, Blaine TA, Bigliani LU (2008) The incidence of early radiolucencies about a pegged glenoid component using cement pressurization. J Shoulder Elb Surg 17:703–708

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Choi T, Horodyski M, Struk AM, Sahajpal DT, Wright TW (2013) Incidence of early radiolucent lines after glenoid component insertion for total shoulder arthroplasty: a radiographic study comparing pressurized and unpressurized cementing techniques. J Shoulder Elb Surg 22:403–408

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Collin P, Tay AK, Melis B, Boileau P, Walch G (2011) A ten-year radiologic comparison of two-all polyethylene glenoid component designs: a prospective trial. J Shoulder Elb Surg 20:1217–1223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Edwards TB, Labriola JE, Stanley RJ, O'Connor DP, Elkousy HA, Gartsman GM (2010) Radiographic comparison of pegged and keeled glenoid components using modern cementing techniques: a prospective randomized study. J Shoulder Elb Surg 19:251–257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Fox TJ, Cil A, Sperling JW, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Schleck CD, Cofield RH (2009) Survival of the glenoid component in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 18:859–863

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fox TJ, Foruria AM, Klika BJ, Sperling JW, Schleck CD, Cofield RH (2013) Radiographic survival in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 22:1221–1227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Kasten P, Pape G, Raiss P, Bruckner T, Rickert M, Zeifang F, Loew M (2010) Mid-term survivorship analysis of a shoulder replacement with a keeled glenoid and a modern cementing technique. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 92:387–392

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Klepps S, Chiang AS, Miller S, Jiang CY, Hazrati Y, Flatow EL (2005) Incidence of early radiolucent glenoid lines in patients having total shoulder replacements. Clin Orthop Relat Res 435:118–125

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Lazarus MD, Jensen KL, Southworth C, Matsen FA 3rd (2002) The radiographic evaluation of keeled and pegged glenoid component insertion. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84-A:1174–1182

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Mansat P, Bonnevialle N (2013) Morphology of the normal and arthritic glenoid. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 23:287–299

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mansat P, Briot J, Mansat M, Swider P (2007) Evaluation of the glenoid implant survival using a biomechanical finite element analysis: influence of the implant design, bone properties, and loading location. J Shoulder Elb Surg 16(3 Suppl):S79–S83

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. McLendon PB, Schoch BS, Sperling JW, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Schleck CD, Cofield RH (2017) Survival of the pegged glenoid component in shoulder arthroplasty: part II. J Shoulder Elb Surg 26:1469–1476

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Molé D, Roche O, Riand N, Levigne C, Walch G (1999) Cemented glenoid component: results in osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. In: Walch G, Boileau P (eds) Shoulder arthroplasty. Springer, New York, pp 163–171

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Nyffeler RW, Meyer D, Sheikh R, Koller BJ, Gerber C (2006) The effect of cementing technique on structural fixation of pegged glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 15:106–111

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Rahme H, Mattsson P, Wikblad L, Nowak J, Larsson S (2009) Stability of cemented in-line pegged glenoid compared with keeled glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 91A:1965–1972

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Roche C, Angibaud L, Flurin PH, Wright T, Zuckerman J (2006) Glenoid loosening in response to dynamic multi-axis eccentric loading. A comparison between keeled and pegged designs with an equivalent radial mismatch. Bull Hosp J Dis 63:88–92

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Sabesan VJ, Ackerman J, Sharma V, Baker KC, Kurdziel MD, Wiater JM (2015) Glenohumeral mismatch affects micromotion of cemented glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24:814–822

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Szabo I, Buscayret F, Edwards TB, Nemoz C, O'Connor DP, Boileau P, Walch G (2005) Radiographic comparison of two glenoid preparation techniques in total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 431:104–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Szabo I, Buscayret F, Edwards TB, Nemoz C, Boileau P, Walch G (2005) Radiographic comparison of flat-back and convex-back glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 14:636–642

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Terrier A, Büchler P, Farron A (2005) Bone-cement interface of the glenoid component: stress analysis for varying cement thickness. Clin Biomech 20:710–717

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Terrier A, Büchler P, Farron A (2006) Influence of glenohumeral conformity on glenoid stresses after total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 15:515–520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Throckmorton TW, Zarkadas PC, Sperling JW, Cofield RH (2010) Pegged versus keeled glenoid components in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 19:726–733

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Torchia ME, Cofield RH, Settergren CR (1997) Total shoulder arthroplasty with the Neer prosthesis: long-term results. J Shoulder Elb Surg 6:495–505

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Vavken P, Sadoghi P, von Keudell A, Rosso C, Valderrabano V, Müller AM (2013) Rates of radiolucency and loosening after total shoulder arthroplasty with pegged or keeled glenoid components. J Bone Joint Surg Am 95:215–221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Walch G, Edwards TB, Boulahia A, Boileau P, Mole D, Adeleine P (2002) The influence of glenohumeral prosthetic mismatch on glenoid radiolucent lines. Results of a multicenter study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 84:2186–2191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Walch G, Young AA, Melis B, Gazielly D, Loew M, Boileau P (2011) Results of a convex-back cemented keeled glenoid component in primary osteoarthritis: multicenter study with a follow-up greater than 5 years. J Shoulder Elb Surg 20:385–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Walch G, Young AA, Boileau P, Loew M, Gazielly D, Molé D (2012) Patterns of loosening of polyethylene keeled glenoid components after shoulder arthroplasty for primary osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94:145–150

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Young AA, Walch G (2010) Fixation of the glenoid component in total shoulder arthroplasty: what is “modern cementing technique?”. J Shoulder Elb Surg 19:1129–1136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Young AA, Walch G, Boileau P, Favard L, Gohlke F, Loew M, Molé D (2011) A multicentre study of the long-term results of using a flat-back polyethylene glenoid component in shoulder replacement for primary osteoarthritis. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 93:210–216

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Département d’Orthopédie et Traumatologie – Urgences Mains, Hôpital Pierre-Paul RIQUET, Hôpital Universitaire de Toulouse, Place du Dr Baylac, 31059, Toulouse Cedex, France

    Florence Dauzère, Marine Arboucalot, Julie Lebon, Fanny Elia, Nicolas Bonnevialle & Pierre Mansat

Authors
  1. Florence Dauzère
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marine Arboucalot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Julie Lebon
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Fanny Elia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nicolas Bonnevialle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Pierre Mansat
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Pierre Mansat.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The implant manufacturer provided funding for the collection and entry of data.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dauzère, F., Arboucalot, M., Lebon, J. et al. Evaluation of thirty eight cemented pegged glenoid components with variable backside curvature: two-year minimum follow-up. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 41, 2353–2360 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3635-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-017-3635-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation