Treatment of Glenoid Wear with the Use of Augmented Glenoid... : JBJS Reviews

You may be trying to access this site from a secured browser on the server. Please enable scripts and reload this page.

Review Articles

A Scoping Review

Contreras, Erik S. MD1; Kingery, Matthew T. MD1; Zuckerman, Joseph D. MD1; Virk, Mandeep S. MD1,a

Author Information

1NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital, New York, New York

aEmail address for corresponding author: [email protected]

Investigation performed at NYU Langone Orthopedic Hospital, New York, New York

Disclosure: The Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest forms are provided with the online version of the article (https://links.lww.com/JBJSREV/B20).

JBJS Reviews | DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.RVW.23.00063

Metrics Abstract » Treatment of glenoid bone loss continues to be a challenge in total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA). Although correcting glenoid wear to patient's native anatomy is desirable in TSA, there is lack of consensus regarding how much glenoid wear correction is acceptable and necessary in both anatomic and reverse TSA. » Use of augmented glenoid components is a relatively new treatment strategy for addressing moderate-to-severe glenoid wear in TSA. Augmented glenoid components allow for predictable and easy correction of glenoid wear in the coronal and/or axial planes while at the same time maximizing implant seating, improving rotator cuff biomechanics, and preserving glenoid bone stock because of off-axis glenoid reaming. » Augmented glenoid components have distinct advantages over glenoid bone grafting. Glenoid bone grafting is technically demanding, adds to the surgical time, and carries a risk of nonunion and graft resorption with subsequent failure of the glenoid component. » The use of augmented glenoid components in TSA is steadily increasing with easy availability of computed tomography–based preoperative planning software and guidance technology (patient-specific instrumentation and computer navigation). » Although different augment designs (full wedge, half wedge, and step cut) are available and a particular design may provide advantages in specific glenoid wear patterns to minimize bone removal (i.e. a half wedge in B2 glenoids), there is no evidence to demonstrate the superiority of 1 design over others. Copyright © 2023 by The Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, Incorporated Full Text Access for Subscribers:

You can read the full text of this article if you:

Select an optionLog InBuy ArticleSubscribeContent & PermissionsAccess through Ovid

Log In Access through Ovid Article Level Metrics