Elsevier

Clinical Biomechanics

Volume 24, Issue 3, March 2009, Pages 254-260
Clinical Biomechanics

The biomechanics of reverse anatomy shoulder replacement – A modelling study

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2008.12.004Get rights and content

Abstract

Background

Reverse anatomy shoulder prostheses, in which a partial sphere is attached to the scapula and a socket to the humerus, have become popular for the treatment of arthritic shoulders with severe rotator cuff arthropathy. While they have been in relatively common use, their biomechanical aspects have not been fully investigated.

Methods

This study uses an adaptation of a 3D biomechanical shoulder model to describe the DELTA® reverse prosthetic shoulder geometry and to investigate its properties. The muscle configuration was modified to represent the pathology and joint contact forces were computed for standardised activities. The model also uses a contact detect algorithm to record the impingement of the prosthesis with the scapula.

Findings

Results showed that the reverse design increases the deltoid function compensating for the dysfunctional rotator cuff muscles by providing sufficient moment arm (increased by 42%) to elevate the arm. It also restores joint stability by reversing the envelope of the joint contact forces and reacting to the increased shear forces. Despite these advantages, the model also confirms impingement and predicts bone notches from the contact of the prosthesis with the scapula border. Results indicate that optimised fixation and design alterations can reduce the problem but is difficult to eliminate it without compromising the joint stability.

Interpretation

The study provides a deep understanding of the function of the reverse designs highlighting their advantages in irreparable rotator cuff arthropathy but also the associated problems that compromise their use. Despite the limitations results indicate that reverse designs can be optimised to provide maximum functionality.

Introduction

The normal shoulder is required to have basic mechanical characteristics of range of motion (mobility), stability and strength. However, each of these is commonly compromised in an arthritic or rotator cuff tear shoulder. Arthoplasty is a common solution for immediate pain relief and to restore shoulder functionality (Neer et al., 1982).

Many prostheses are used to address these pathologies and the designs vary in shape and dimensions and in some cases try to address stability issues by fully constraining the joint (Brostrom et al., 1992, Post et al., 1980). Reverse anatomy prostheses are introduced as an alternative solution in challenging pathologies like the arthritic shoulder with massive rotator cuff (RC) tears (Kessel and Bayley, 1979).

The DELTA® prosthesis (produced by DePuy) was first developed by (Grammont et al., 1987), but further modifications were made to the original prosthesis until the Delta® III version (Grammont et al., 1987, Grammont and Baulot, 1993) which has been extensively used in rotator cuff tear arthropathies. There are many clinical reviews reporting stability and good performance of this design (Sirveaux et al., 2004, Woodruff et al., 2003), but also indicating problems of impingement and glenoid loosening after long term use (Nyffeler et al., 2004). There are now a number of competing prostheses in the United Sates (e.g. from Encore, and Zimmer) and in Europe (e.g. Lima, Aston, Tornier, Implants Industries) following the same basic design but with modifications intended to address the above problems.

Despite the longterm use and the popularity of the Grammont type prosthesis, there are only few two dimensional (De Wilde et al., 2004) or three dimensional biomechanical studies (Terrier et al., 2008, Van der Helm, 1998) focusing either on muscle and joint contact analysis or impingement (Nyffeler et al., 2005) without examining how the different aspect of the reverse designs can affect the general joint performance. In this study we try to analyse in more depth the biomechanical properties of the DELTA® (and in general the reverse) design using an interactive biomechanical model of the upper limb (Charlton and Johnson, 2006). The comparison of the results will also lead to a discussion of the relative importance of the implantation and the design features of reverse prostheses and how they can affect the loading, stability and impingement of the prosthetic joint.

The above aim will be achieved by comparing modelling data between the reverse prosthetic and normal anatomy shoulder model on the following aspects:

  • (a)

    Lengthening and moment arms of deltoid and RC muscles.

  • (b)

    Predicted muscle and joint contact forces during standardised activities.

  • (c)

    Range of arm motion in reverse shoulder and prediction of impingement.

Section snippets

The reverse prosthetic biomechanical model

This modelling study was performed using a modified version of the three dimensional Newcastle upper limb model (Charlton and Johnson, 2006) which in its original state represent a normal anatomy shoulder and elbow. The model consists of six rigid bone segments; the thorax, clavicle, scapula, humerus, radius and ulna. The various bony structures and landmarks were digitised from the Visible Human male dataset (Spitzer and Whitlock, 1998). The segments are connected by three spherical joints

Muscle lengthening and moment arms after reverse joint replacement

After the DELTA® III replacement, the humerus (and as a result the whole arm) is positioned more medially and inferiorly compared to the normal shoulder, something that can be even observed visually in real subjects (Boileau et al., 2005). As a result the deltoid muscle is stretched giving a passive tension to the GH joint. The predicted lengthening of the middle deltoid was 21.6% compared to normal anatomy (Table 1). It is reported that deltoid extension more than 20%, could damage the

Moment arms, stability and loading

One of the most interesting results of the reverse geometry is how it affects the moment arms (and furthermore the function) of the muscles crossing the GH joint and especially the deltoid. The predicted results for the increased deltoid moment arms of this study agree well with the study of De Wilde et al., 2004, Van der Helm, 1998 where they used the same DELTA® geometry (Table 1). Terrier et al. (2007) using a similar type of prosthesis (Aequalis® Reversed Shoulder Prosthesis, Tornier)

Conclusions – stability over mobility

The results of this study showed the advantages of a reverse prosthesis, where the increased deltoid moment arm helps the muscle to elevate the arm compensating for the dysfunctional RC muscles. The prosthetic design also reverses the envelope of the forces providing a large glenoidal surface and stability to the increased shear forces.

The biomechanical model also confirms the impingement as the main problem on the reverse prosthesis and predicts scapular notches. The results show how the

References (32)

  • I.W. Charlton et al.

    A model for the prediction of the forces at the glenohumeral joint

    Proc. Inst. Mech. Eng.

    (2006)
  • DePuy. DELTA CTA Reverse Shoulder Prosthesis [9072-78-032], 2005. Ref Type:...
  • K.J. Ecklund et al.

    Rotator cuff tear arthropathy

    J. Am. Acad. Orthop. Surg.

    (2007)
  • P.M. Grammont et al.

    Etude et réalisation d’une nouvelle prosthèse d’ épaule

    Rhumatologie

    (1987)
  • P.M. Grammont et al.

    Delta shoulder prosthesis for rotator cuff rupture

    Orthopedics

    (1993)
  • G.A. Grant et al.

    Evaluation and surgical management of peripheral nerve problems

    Neurosurgery

    (1999)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text