Introduction: Patients who are candidates for a reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA) may have varying amounts and patterns of glenoid wear. The usual treatment of these deformities has been eccentric reaming or bone grafting. Eccentric reaming often removes a large amount of subchondral bone. Bone grafting is technically more difficult and introduces another mode of failure if the graft does not heal. The purpose of this study is to evaluate patients undergoing a rTSA with concomitant superior or posterior glenoid wear who were treated with a superior augmented baseplate (SAB) or posterior augmented baseplate (PAB) without eccentric reaming or bone grafting.
Materials and methods: Prospectively obtained data were queried from a multi-institutional IRB-approved database. Preoperative and postoperative data were analyzed from 39 patients who received a primary rTSA with either an 8° PAB or a 10° SAB and a minimum of 2 years follow-up. Twenty-four (10 females and 14 males, aged 72.3 ± 8.2 years) received a primary rTSA shoulder with a PAB. Fifteen patients (4 females and 11 males, aged 71.7 ± 9.2 years) received a primary rTSA shoulder with a SAB. Each patient was scored preoperatively and at latest follow-up using the SST, UCLA, ASES, Constant, and SPADI metrics. Active abduction, forward flexion, and active and passive external rotation with the arm at the side were also measured. The average follow-up for rTSA patients with a PAB was 25.6 ± 3.1 months, and the average follow-up for rTSA patients with a SAB was 32.5 ± 6.5 months. A Student's two-tailed, unpaired t-test was used to identify differences in preoperative and postoperative results, where p < 0.05 denoted a significant difference.
Results: All patients in both groups demonstrated significant improvements in pain and function following treatment with the reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The PAB rTSA cohort had a scapular notching rate of 6.3%, whereas the SAB rTSA cohort had a scapular notching rate of 14.3%. The PAB outperformed the SAB with the ASES, Constant, and active forward elevation measures.
Discussion: The PAB group outperformed the SAB group with the ASES and Constant outcome scores and forward flexion. The reason for this is unknown; however, it may be due to the posterior augment baseplate itself tensioning the remaining external rotators better than the superior augment, or it may be that the posterior augment group had a better posterior cuff. Both implant groups had no revisions or dislocations and had a low notching rate. It appears that a SAB for superior glenoid wear and a PAB for posterior glenoid wear are viable simple solutions in patients undergoing a rTSA, where each preserves glenoid bone and eliminates the need for glenoid bone grafting.