Abstract
Introduction and Objective
In recent years, along with the extending longevity of patients and the increase in their functional demands, the number of annually performed RSA and the incidence of complications are also increasing. When a complication occurs, the patient often needs multiple surgeries to restore the function of the upper limb. Revision implants are directly responsible for the critical reduction of the bone stock, especially in the shoulder. The purpose of this paper is to report the use of allograft bone to restore the bone stock of the glenoid in the treatment of an aseptic glenoid component loosening after a reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA).
Materials and Methods
An 86-years-old man came to our attention for aseptic glenoid component loosening after RSA. Plain radiographs showed a complete dislocation of the glenoid component with 2 broken screws in the neck of glenoid. CT scans confirmed the severe reduction of the glenoid bone stock and critical bone resorption and were used for the preoperative planning. To our opinion, given the critical bone defect, the only viable option was revision surgery with restoration of bone stock. We planned to use a bone graft harvested from distal bone bank femur as component augmentation. During the revision procedure the baseplate with a long central peg was implanted “on table” on the allograft and an appropriate osteotomy was made to customize the allograft on the glenoid defect according to the CT-based preoperative planning. The Bio-component was implanted with stable screws fixation on residual scapula. We decided not to replace the humeral component since it was stable and showed no signs of mobilization.
Results
The new bio-implant was stable, and the patient gained a complete functional recovery of the shoulder. The scheduled radiological assessments up to 12 months showed no signs of bone resorption or mobilization of the glenoid component.
Conclusions
The use of bone allograft in revision surgery after a RSA is a versatile and effective technique to treat severe glenoid bone loss and to improve the global stability of the implant. Furthermore, it represents a viable alternative to autologous graft since it requires shorter operative times and reduces graft site complications. There are very few data available regarding the use of allografts and, although the first studies are encouraging, further investigation is needed to determine the biological capabilities of the transplant and its validity in complex revisions after RSA.
