Hemiarthroplasty (HA) and total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) are often the preferred forms of treatment for patients with atraumatic avascular necrosis of the humeral head when conservative treatment fails. Little has been reported about the survival of HA and TSA for this indication. The aim of this study was to investigate the differences in revision rates between HA and TSA in these patients, to determine whether one of these implants has a superior survival and may be a better choice in the treatment of this condition. Data from 280 shoulders with 159 primary HAs and 121 TSAs, which were undertaken in patients with atraumatic avascular necrosis of the humeral head between January 2014 and January 2023 from the Dutch Arthroplasty Register (LROI), were included. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox regression analysis were undertaken.Aims
Methods
Roentgen stereophotogrammetric analysis (RSA) is currently the gold standard to measure early prosthetic migration which can predict aseptic loosening. However, RSA has some limitations such as the need for perioperative placed markers and exposure to X-radiation during follow up. Therefore, this study evaluates if low field MRI could be an alternative for RSA. Low field MRI was chosen because it is less hampered by metal artifacts of the prosthesis than high field MRI. 3D models of both the tibial component of a total knee prosthesis (Genesis II, Smith and Nephew) and the porcine tibia were made. The tibial component was implanted in the tibial bone. Consequently, 17 acquisitions with the low field MRI scanner (Esaote G-scan 0.25T) in transverse direction with a 2D PD weighted metal artifact reducing sequence PD-XMAR (TE/TR 10/1020ms, slice thickness 3mm, FOV 180×180×120 mm³, matrix size 224×224) were made. The first five acquisitions were made without repositioning the cadaver, the second twelve after slightly repositioning the cadaver within limits that are expected to be encountered in a clinical setting. Hence, in these 17 acquisitions no prosthetic-bone motions were induced. The scans were segmented and registered with Mimics. Virtual translation and rotation of the prosthesis with respect to the bone between two scans were calculated using a Procrustes algorithm. The first five scans without repositioning were used to calculate the measurement error, the following twelve to calculate the precision of low field MRI to measure prosthetic migration. Results were expressed as the maximum total point motion, mean error and 95% CI and expressed in boxplots.Introduction
Methods