%0 Journal Article
%T Aequalis Humeral Head Resurfacing in Glenohumeral Arthritis at a Minimum Followup of 2 Years
%A Roshan Raghavan
%A Amitabh J. Dwyer
%A Andrew F. W. Chambler
%J ISRN Orthopedics
%D 2013
%R 10.1155/2013/541389
%X Aim. To evaluate results of Aequalis humeral head resurfacing in patients with end-stage glenohumeral arthritis at a minimum followup of two years. Patients and Methods. Twenty-one consecutive patients underwent humeral head resurfacing hemiarthroplasty between 2007 and 2009. Three patients did not fulfill the inclusion criteria. 18 patients with mean age of 75.1 years (range 58每91 years) and a mean duration of preoperative symptoms of 33.6 months (range 6每120 months) were analyzed. Patients＊ self-reported Oxford shoulder score (OSS) was collected prospectively and was used as an assessment tool to measure final outcome. Results. The mean initial OSS was 15 (range 3每29). The score improved by an average of 19.5 points at a mean followup of 36.3 months (range 24每54 months) to reach a mean final OSS of 34.5 (range 6每47). The improvement of OSS was highly significant with a two-tailed value less than 0.0001. The overall patient satisfaction was 94%. Conclusion. This study demonstrates Aequalis shoulder resurfacing hemiarthroplasty as a reliable procedure, away from its originating center, for improvement of shoulder function as shown by the patients＊ self-reported outcome score (OSS) in end-stage glenohumeral arthritis at a minimum followup of 2 years. 1. Introduction Humeral head resurfacing was proposed as a treatment for glenohumeral arthrosis in an attempt to preserve the original anatomy and avoid humeral head resection. Preservation of humeral head maintained the native inclination, offset, head shaft angle, and version of humerus [1每3]. Other advantages include a shorter operating time, reduced blood loss, and fewer complications [4]. Another advantage is that, unlike stemmed implant, there is no need for a straight humeral canal to accommodate a long stem [4]. Resection of bone is minimal and bone cement is not used. This allows easier later revision to a conventional total shoulder arthroplasty, if required [1, 2]. It is an attractive option in both the old and the young patients [4, 5]. The disadvantage of resurfacing is the limited exposure to glenoid when wanting to perform a total shoulder resurfacing arthroplasty, but this does not affect when resurfacing the humeral head alone. The primary aim of our study was to report the results of humeral resurfacing arthroplasty in a consecutive series of patients at a district general hospital practice. 2. Patients and Methods Twenty-one consecutive patients underwent shoulder resurfacing (Aequalis, Tornier, USA) between October 2007 and November 2009 for symptomatic end-stage glenohumeral arthrosis.
%U http://www.hindawi.com/journals/isrn.orthopedics/2013/541389/