Advanced search
1 file | 1.17 MB Add to list

Consequences of reaming with flat and convex reamers for bone volume and surface area of the glenoid : a basic science study

Author
Organization
Abstract
Background: The effect of reaming on bone volume and surface area of the glenoid is not precisely known. We hypothesize that (1) convex reamers create a larger surface area than flat reamers, (2) flat reamers cause less bone loss than convex reamers, and (3) the amount of bone loss increases with the amount of version correction. Methods: Reaming procedures with different types of reamers are performed on similar-sized uniconcave and biconcave glenoids created from Sawbones foam blocks. The loss of bone volume, the size of the remaining surface area, and the reaming depth are measured and evaluated. Results: Reaming with convex reamers results in a significantly larger surface area than with flat reamers for both uniconcave and biconcave glenoids (p = 0.013 and p = 0.001). Convex reamers cause more bone loss than flat reamers, but the difference is only significant for uniconcave glenoids (p = 0.007). Conclusions: In biconcave glenoids, convex reamers remove a similar amount of bone as flat reamers, but offer a larger surface area while maximizing the correction of the retroversion. In pathological uniconcave glenoids, convex reamers are preferred because of the conforming shape.
Keywords
3-DIMENSIONAL COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY, TOTAL SHOULDER ARTHROPLASTY, RETROVERSION, RECONSTRUCTION, COMPLICATIONS, MULTICENTER, COMPONENT POSITION, POSTERIOR EROSION, FOLLOW-UP, PRIMARY GLENOHUMERAL OSTEOARTHRITIS, Prosthesis, Shoulder, Version, Erosion, Reaming, Glenoid

Downloads

  • 13018 2015 Article 312.pdf
    • full text
    • |
    • open access
    • |
    • PDF
    • |
    • 1.17 MB

Citation

Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:

MLA
Karelse, Tannetje Jannetje Adriana et al. “Consequences of Reaming with Flat and Convex Reamers for Bone Volume and Surface Area of the Glenoid : a Basic Science Study.” JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH 10 (2015): n. pag. Print.
APA
Karelse, T. J. A., Leuridan, S., Van Tongel, A., Debeer, P., Van Der Sloten, J., Denis, K., & De Wilde, L. (2015). Consequences of reaming with flat and convex reamers for bone volume and surface area of the glenoid : a basic science study. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, 10.
Chicago author-date
Karelse, Tannetje Jannetje Adriana, Steven Leuridan, Alexander Van Tongel, Philippe Debeer, Jos Van Der Sloten, Kathleen Denis, and Lieven De Wilde. 2015. “Consequences of Reaming with Flat and Convex Reamers for Bone Volume and Surface Area of the Glenoid : a Basic Science Study.” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 10.
Chicago author-date (all authors)
Karelse, Tannetje Jannetje Adriana, Steven Leuridan, Alexander Van Tongel, Philippe Debeer, Jos Van Der Sloten, Kathleen Denis, and Lieven De Wilde. 2015. “Consequences of Reaming with Flat and Convex Reamers for Bone Volume and Surface Area of the Glenoid : a Basic Science Study.” Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research 10.
Vancouver
1.
Karelse TJA, Leuridan S, Van Tongel A, Debeer P, Van Der Sloten J, Denis K, et al. Consequences of reaming with flat and convex reamers for bone volume and surface area of the glenoid : a basic science study. JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH. 2015;10.
IEEE
[1]
T. J. A. Karelse et al., “Consequences of reaming with flat and convex reamers for bone volume and surface area of the glenoid : a basic science study,” JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH, vol. 10, 2015.
@article{7037617,
  abstract     = {Background: The effect of reaming on bone volume and surface area of the glenoid is not precisely known. We hypothesize that (1) convex reamers create a larger surface area than flat reamers, (2) flat reamers cause less bone loss than convex reamers, and (3) the amount of bone loss increases with the amount of version correction. 
Methods: Reaming procedures with different types of reamers are performed on similar-sized uniconcave and biconcave glenoids created from Sawbones foam blocks. The loss of bone volume, the size of the remaining surface area, and the reaming depth are measured and evaluated. 
Results: Reaming with convex reamers results in a significantly larger surface area than with flat reamers for both uniconcave and biconcave glenoids (p = 0.013 and p = 0.001). Convex reamers cause more bone loss than flat reamers, but the difference is only significant for uniconcave glenoids (p = 0.007). 
Conclusions: In biconcave glenoids, convex reamers remove a similar amount of bone as flat reamers, but offer a larger surface area while maximizing the correction of the retroversion. In pathological uniconcave glenoids, convex reamers are preferred because of the conforming shape.},
  articleno    = {181},
  author       = {Karelse, Tannetje Jannetje Adriana and Leuridan, Steven and Van Tongel, Alexander and Debeer, Philippe and Van Der Sloten, Jos and Denis, Kathleen and De Wilde, Lieven},
  issn         = {1749-799X},
  journal      = {JOURNAL OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGERY AND RESEARCH},
  keywords     = {3-DIMENSIONAL COMPUTED-TOMOGRAPHY,TOTAL SHOULDER ARTHROPLASTY,RETROVERSION,RECONSTRUCTION,COMPLICATIONS,MULTICENTER,COMPONENT POSITION,POSTERIOR EROSION,FOLLOW-UP,PRIMARY GLENOHUMERAL OSTEOARTHRITIS,Prosthesis,Shoulder,Version,Erosion,Reaming,Glenoid},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {8},
  title        = {Consequences of reaming with flat and convex reamers for bone volume and surface area of the glenoid : a basic science study},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-015-0312-7},
  volume       = {10},
  year         = {2015},
}

Altmetric
View in Altmetric
Web of Science
Times cited: