Advertisement

Biomechanics and Pathomechanics of the Shoulder Joint with Reference to Prosthetic Joint Replacement

  • G. Bergmann

Abstract

The extremely large range of motion of the upper arm is made possible by the coordinated interaction of multiple joints, and the biomechanics of the glenohumeral joint can be studied and understood only in relation to the biomechanics of the shoulder as a whole. When the glenohumeral joint is replaced with a prosthesis, four closely interrelated problems arise that assume major importance:
  1. 1.

    Contact of the joint surfaces can be maintained either by the balance of imposed forces (unconstrained prosthesis) or by the geometry of the artificial joint (constrained prosthesis).

     
  2. 2.

    The possible range of motion of the joint depends on the selected design.

     
  3. 3.

    Both factors jointly determine the loads that are transmitted through the sites of attachment of the prosthesis.

     
  4. 4.

    The loads on the bone vary according to the manner in which the prosthesis is attached to the bone. These problems, together with the mechanical durability of the prosthesis and other factors, critically influence the long-term success of the arthroplasty.

     

Keywords

Shoulder Joint Glenohumeral Joint Glenoid Component Joint Force Neck Diameter 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Beddow FH, Elloy MA (1977) The Liverpool total replacement for the glenohumeral joint. In: Joint replacement of the upper limb. The Justitution of Mechanical Engineers, Conference Publication No 5, pp 21–25Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Freedman L, Munro RR (1966) Abduction of the arm in the scapular plane: Scapular and glenohumeral movements. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 48: 1503–1510Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Inman VT, Saunders JB, Abbott LC (1944) Observations on the function of the shoulder joint. J Bone Joint Surg 26: 1 – 40Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kölbel R, Rohlmann A, Bergmann G (1980) Experimentelle Untersuchungen zur Verankerung einer Schultergelenkendoprothese. In: Jager M, Hackenbroch MH, Refior HJ (Hrsg) Endprothese, Endoprothetik und Biomechanik der Gelenke. Thieme, Stuttgart, S 54–61Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Poppen NK, Walker PS (1976) Normal and abnormal motion of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg [Am] 58: 195–201Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Poppen NK, Walker PS (1978) Forces at the glenohumeral joint in abduction. Clin Orthop 135: 165–170PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Post M, Jablon M, Miller H, Singh M (1979) Constrained shoulder joint replacement: A critical review. Clin Orthop 144: 135–149PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reeves B, Jobbins B, Flowers M (1972) Biomechanical problems in the developement of a total shoulder endoprosthesis. (Proc Br Orthop Res Soc) J Bone Joint Surg [Br] 54: 193Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rohlmann A, Mossner U, Bergmann G (1985) Rechnerische Spannungsanalyse am endoprothetisch versorgten Schulterblatt. In: Refior HJ, Plitz W, Jager M, Hackenbroch MH (Hrsg) Biomechanik der gesunden und kranken Schulter. Thieme, Stuttgart, S198–202Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1987

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Bergmann

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations