3D preoperative planning for humeral head selection in total shoulder arthroplasty
Recreation of glenohumeral biomechanics and humeral anatomy has been shown to improve outcomes in shoulder arthroplasty. Recent research has focused on utilizing simulation software and intraoperative instrumentation to improve glenoid implant selection and positioning, but no study had evaluated the reliability of new features in 3D preoperative planning software for humeral planning in total shoulder arthroplasty.
Materials and methods
Preoperative plans were created for 26 patients using three different simulation software programs: an independent preoperative planning simulation (IPPS) software (OrthoVis) and two automated manufacturers preoperative simulation systems: ArthrexVIP™ (AMPS I) and Tornier Blueprint™ 3D Planning (AMPS II). Preoperative plans were compared for reliability and consistency among different software systems based on available variables including humeral head diameter (HD) and head height (HH).
The measured HD was consistent between the three systems with a maximum mean difference of 0.2 mm for HD among IPPS, AMPS I, and AMPS II (p = 0.964). There was a significant difference in measured humeral HH with 1.7 mm difference between IPPS and AMPS II (p ≤ 0.001). The strongest correlation when comparing humeral head measurements (diameter or height) obtained from all systems was seen between IPPS and AMPS I for humeral HD (r = 0.8; p ≤ 0.001).
There was a high level of consistency between independent and manufacturer preoperative planning software for humeral head measurements. These preoperative planning systems can improve efficiency and workflow during surgery by guiding surgeons on implant size selection to optimally reconstruct the glenohumeral kinematics, in order to improve patient outcomes.
Level of evidence
Level III, study of nonconsecutive patients and without a universally applied “gold” standard study of diagnostic test.
Keywords3D software Humeral head Shoulder arthroplasty templating TSA implant prediction Computer-aided preoperative planning
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards
- 5.Hendel MD, Bryan JA, Barsoum WK, Rodriguez EJ, Brems JJ, Evans PJ, Iannotti JP (2012) Comparison of patient-specific instruments with standard surgical instruments in determining glenoid component position: a randomized prospective clinical trial. J Bone Joint Surg Am 94(23):2167–2175. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.K.01209 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 9.Lewis GS, Bryce CD, Davison AC, Hollenbeak CS, Piazza SJ, Armstrong AD (2010) Location of the optimized centerline of the glenoid vault: a comparison of two operative techniques with use of three-dimensional computer modeling. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92(5):1188–1194. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.I.00131 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.von Eisenhart-Rothe R, Muller-Gerbl M, Wiedemann E, Englmeier KH, Graichen H (2008) Functional malcentering of the humeral head and asymmetric long-term stress on the glenoid: potential reasons for glenoid loosening in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 17(5):695–702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2008.02.008 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Gutierrez S, Levy JC, Frankle MA, Cuff D, Keller TS, Pupello DR, Lee WE III (2008) Evaluation of abduction range of motion and avoidance of inferior scapular impingement in a reverse shoulder model. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 17(4):608–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2007.11.010 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 19.Kircher J, Wiedemann M, Magosch P, Lichtenberg S, Habermeyer P (2009) Improved accuracy of glenoid positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty with intraoperative navigation: a prospective-randomized clinical study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18(4):515–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2009.03.014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 20.Nguyen D, Ferreira LM, Brownhill JR, King GJ, Drosdowech DS, Faber KJ, Johnson JA (2009) Improved accuracy of computer assisted glenoid implantation in total shoulder arthroplasty: an in-vitro randomized controlled trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18(6):907–914. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2009.02.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 36.Yang M, Li C, Li Y, Zhao Y, Wei X, Zhang G, Fan J, Ni H, Chen Z, Bai Y, Li M (2015) Application of 3D rapid prototyping technology in posterior corrective surgery for Lenke 1 adolescent idiopathic scoliosis patients. Medicine 94(8):e582. https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000000582 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Zhang YZ, Chen B, Lu S, Yang Y, Zhao JM, Liu R, Li YB, Pei GX (2011) Preliminary application of computer-assisted patient-specific acetabular navigational template for total hip arthroplasty in adult single development dysplasia of the hip. Int J Med Robot 7(4):469–474. https://doi.org/10.1002/rcs.423 CrossRefGoogle Scholar