Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Shoulder arthroplasty

  • Musculoskeletal
  • Published:
European Radiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Shoulder prostheses are now commonly used. Clinical results and patient satisfaction are usually good. The most commonly used types are humeral hemiarthroplasty, unconstrained total shoulder arthroplasty, and semiconstrained inversed shoulder prosthesis. Complications of shoulder arthroplasty depend on the prosthesis type used. The most common complications are prosthetic loosening, glenohumeral instability, periprosthetic fracture, rotator cuff tears, nerve injury, infection, and deltoid muscle dysfunction. Standard radiographs are the basis of both pre- and postoperative imaging. Skeletal scintigraphy has a rather limited role because there is overlap between postoperative changes which may persist for up to 1 year and early loosening and infection. Sonography is most commonly used postoperatively in order to demonstrate complications (hematoma and abscess formation) but may also be useful for the demonstration of rotator cuff tears occurring during follow-up. CT is useful for the demonstration of bone details both pre- and postoperatively. MR imaging is mainly used preoperatively, for instance for demonstration of rotator cuff tears.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Lugli T (1978) Artificial shoulder joint by Pean (1893): the facts of an exceptional intervention and the prosthetic method. Clin Orthop Relat Res 133:215–218

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Péan JE (1894) Des moyens prosthetiques destinés à obtenir la reparation des parties osseuses. Gaz des Hôp 67:291 Reprinted in English (1973) Clin Orthop 94:4

    Google Scholar 

  3. Wright TW, Cofield RH (1995) Humeral fractures after shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 77:1340–1346

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Palestro CJ, Love C, Miller TT (2006) Infection and musculoskeletal conditions: imaging of musculoskeletal infections. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 20:1197–1218

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Love C, Tomas MB, Marwin SE, Pugliese PV, Palestro CJ (2001) Role of nuclear medicine in diagnosis of the infected joint replacement. Radiographics 21:1229–1238

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Pakos EE, Koumoulis HD, Fotopoulos AD, Ioannidis JP (2007) Osteomyelitis: antigranulocyte scintigraphy with 99mTC radiolabeled monoclonal antibodies for diagnosis - meta-analysis. Radiology 245(3):732–741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Friedman RJ, Hawthorne KB, Genez BM (1992) The use of computerized tomography in the measurement of glenoid version. J Bone Jt Surg Am 74:1032–1037

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Nyffeler RW, Jost B, Pfirrmann CW, Gerber C (2003) Measurement of glenoid version: conventional radiographs versus computed tomography scans. J Shoulder Elb Surg 12:493–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hernigou P, Duparc F, Hernigou A (2002) Determining humeral retroversion with computed tomography. J Bone Jt Surg Am 84-A:1753–1762

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Goutallier D, Postel JM, Bernageau J, Lavau L, Voisin MC (1994) Fatty muscle degeneration in cuff ruptures. Pre- and postoperative evaluation by CT scan. Clin Orthop Relat Res 304:78–83

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Ohashi K, El-Khoury GY, Bennett DL, Restrepo JM, Berbaum KS (2005) Orthopedic hardware complications diagnosed with multi-detector row CT. Radiology 237:570–577

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Haramati N, Staron RB, Mazel-Sperling K et al (1994) CT scans through metal scanning technique versus hardware composition. Comput Med Imaging Graph 18:429–434

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. White LM, Buckwalter KA (2002) Technical considerations: CT and MR Imaging in the postoperative orthopedic patient. Sem Musculoskelet Radiol 6:5–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Vande Berg B, Malghem J, Maldague B, Lecouvet F (2006) Multi-detector CT imaging in the postoperative orthopedic patient with metal hardware. Eur J Radiol 60:470–479

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Barrett JF, Keat N (2004) Artifacts in CT: recognition and avoidance. Radiographics 24:1679–1691

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wilting JE, Timmer J (1999) Artefacts in spiral-CT images and their relation to pitch and subject morphology. Eur Radiol 9:316–322

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Zanetti M, Hodler J (2004) MR imaging of the shoulder after surgery. Magn Reson Imaging Clin N Am 12:169–183

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Owen RS, Iannotti JP, Kneeland JB, Dalinka MK, Deren JA, Oleaga L (1993) Shoulder after surgery: MR imaging with surgical validation. Radiology 186:443–447

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Gaenslen ES, Satterlee CC, Hinson GW (1996) Magnetic resonance imaging for evaluation of failed repairs of the rotator cuff. J Bone Jt Surg Am 78:1391–1396

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Suh JS, Jeong EK, Shin KH et al (1998) Minimizing artifacts caused by metallic implants at MR imaging: experimental and clinical studies. AJR Am J Roentgenol 171:1207–1213

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Port JD, Pomper MG (2000) Quantification and minimization of magnetic susceptibility artifacts on GRE images. J Comput Assist Tomogr 24:958–964

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Hilfiker P, Zanetti M, Debatin JF, McKinnon G, Hodler J (1995) Fast spin-echo inversion-recovery imaging versus fast T2-weighted spin-echo imaging in bone marrow abnormalities. Invest Radiol 30:110–114

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Hauger O, Dumont E, Chateil JF, Moinard M, Diard F (2002) Water excitation as an alternative to fat saturation in MR imaging: preliminary results in musculoskeletal imaging. Radiology 224:657–663

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Merkle EM, Dale BM, Thomas J, Paulson EK (2006) MR liver imaging and cholangiography in the presence of surgical metallic clips at 1.5 and 3 Tesla. Eur Radiol 16:2309–2316

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pauchard Y, Smith MR, Mintchev MP (2005) Improving geometric accuracy in the presence of susceptibility difference artifacts produced by metallic implants in magnetic resonance imaging. IEEE Trans Med Imaging 24:1387–1399

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. White CB, Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Rowland CM (2003) Ninety-day mortality after shoulder arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 18:886–888

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Bohsali KI, Wirth MA, Rockwood CA Jr (2006) Complications of total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 88:2279–2292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hasan SS, Leith JM, Smith KL, Matsen FA (2003) The distribution of shoulder replacement among surgeons and hospitals is significantly different than that of hip or knee replacement. J Shoulder Elb Surg 12:164–169

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hammond JW, Queale WS, Kim TK, McFarland EG (2003) Surgeon experience and clinical and economic outcomes for shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 85-A:2318–2324

    Google Scholar 

  30. Deshmukh AV, Koris M, Zurakowski D, Thornhill TS (2005) Total shoulder arthroplasty: long-term survivorship, functional outcome, and quality of life. J Shoulder Elb Surg 14:471–479

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wirth MA, Rockwood CA Jr (1996) Complications of total shoulder-replacement arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am 78:603–616

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Gruen TA, McNeice GM, Amstutz HC (1979) “Modes of failure” of cemented stem-type femoral components: a radiographic analysis of loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 141:17–27

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Martin SD, Zurakowski D, Thornhill TS (2005) Uncemented glenoid component in total shoulder arthroplasty. Survivorship and outcomes. J Bone Jt Surg Am 87:1284–1292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Sperling JW, Cofield RH, O’Driscoll SW, Torchia ME, Rowland CM (2000) Radiographic assessment of ingrowth total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 9:507–513

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. Torrens C, Martinez-Diaz S, Ruiz A, Gines A, Caceres E (2007) Assessment of radiolucent lines in cemented shoulder hemi-arthroplasties: study of concordance and reproducibility. Int Orthop doi:10.1007/s00264-007-0452-4

  36. Boileau P, Watkinson D, Hatzidakis AM, Hovorka I (2006) Neer Award 2005: The Grammont reverse shoulder prosthesis: results in cuff tear arthritis, fracture sequelae, and revision arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 15(5):527–540

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Farron A (2006) Die Schultergelenkprothese. Schweiz Med Forum 6:53–58

    Google Scholar 

  38. Sanchez-Sotelo J, O’Discroll SW, Torchia ME, Cofield RH, Rowland CM (2001) Radiographic assessment of cemented humeral components in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 10:526–531

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  39. Collins D, Tencer A, Sidles J, Matsen F 3rd (1992) Edge displacement and deformation of glenoid components in response to eccentric loading. The effect of preparation of the glenoid bone. J Bone Jt Surg Am 74:501–507

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Walch G, Edwards TB, Boulahia A, Boileau P, Mole D, Adeleine P (2002) The influence of glenohumeral prosthetic mismatch on glenoid radiolucent lines: results of a multicenter study. J Bone Jt Surg Am 84-A:2186–2191

    Google Scholar 

  41. Iannotti JP, Gabriel JP, Schneck SL, Evans BG, Misra S (1992) The normal glenohumeral relationships. An anatomical study of one hundred and forty shoulders. J Bone Jt Surg Am 74:491–500

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Warren RF, Coleman SH, Dines JS (2002) Instability after arthroplasty: the shoulder. J Arthroplasty 17:28–31

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Boyd AD Jr, Aliabadi P, Thornhill TS (1991) Postoperative proximal migration in total shoulder arthroplasty. Incidence and significance. J Arthroplasty 6:31–37

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. McDonough EB, Crosby LA (2005) Periprosthetic fractures of the humerus. Am J orthop 34(12):586–591

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Groh G, Heckman M, Curtis R et al (1994) Treatment of fractures adjacent to humeral prosthesis. In: Annual meeting of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. New Orleans, LA

  46. Campbell JT, Moore RS, Iannotti JP, Norris TR, Williams GR (1998) Periprosthetic humeral fractures: mechanisms of fracture and treatment options. J Shoulder Elb Surg 7:406–413

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Worland RL, Kim DY, Arredondo J (1999) Periprosthetic humeral fractures: management and classification. J Shoulder Elb Surg 8:590–594

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Brems JJ (2002) Complications of shoulder arthroplasty: infections, instability, and loosening. Instr Course Lect 51:29–30

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Bonutti PM, Hawkins RJ (1992) Fracture of the humeral shaft associated with total replacement arthroplasty of the shoulder. A case report. J Bone Jt Surg Am 74:617–618

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Miller BS, Joseph TA, Noonan TJ, Horan MP, Hawkins RJ (2005) Rupture of the subscapularis tendon after shoulder arthroplasty: diagnosis, treatment, and outcome. J Shoulder Elb Surg 14:492–496

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Gerber C, Pennington SD, Yian EH, Pfirrmann CA, Werner CM, Zumstein MA (2006) Lesser tuberosity osteotomy for total shoulder arthroplasty. Surgical technique. J Bone Jt Surg Am 88(Suppl 1 Pt 2):170–177

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Wolfe SW, Figgie MP, Inglis AE, Bohn WW, Ranawat CS (1990) Management of infection about total elbow prostheses. J Bone Jt Surg Am 72:198–212

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  53. Yamaguchi K, Adams RA, Morrey RF (1998) Infection after total elbow arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 80:481–491

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Matsen FA 3rd, Rockwood CAJ, Wirth MA, Lippitt SB, Parsons M (2004) Glenohumeral arthritis and its management. In: Rockwood CAJ (ed) The shoulder, 3rd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia, pp 879–1008

    Google Scholar 

  55. Rosenberg N, Neuann L, Modi A, Mersich IJ, Wallace AW (2007) Improvements in survival of the uncemented Nottingham total shoulder prosthesis: a prospective comparative study. BMC Musculoskelet Disord 8:76

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Sperling JW, Kozak TK, Hanssen AD, Cofield RH (2001) Infection after shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 382:206–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Coste JS, Reig S, Trojani C, Berg M, Walch G, Boileau P (2004) The management of infection in arthroplasty of the shoulder. J Bone Jt Surg Br 86:65–69

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Proubasta IR, Itarte JP, Lamas CG, Escriba IU (2005) Permanent articulated antibiotic-impregnated cement spacer in septic shoulder arthroplasty: a case report. J Orthop Trauma 19:666–668

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Ince A, Seemann K, Frommelt L, Katzer A, Loehr JF (2005) One-stage exchange shoulder arthroplasty for periprosthetic infection. J Bone Jt Surg Br 87:814–818

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Seitz WH Jr, Damacen H (2002) Staged exchange arthroplasty for shoulder sepsis. J Arthroplasty 17:36–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Ramsey ML, Fenlin JM Jr (1996) Use of an antibiotic-impregnated bone cement block in the revision of an infected shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 5:479–482

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  62. Loebenberg MI, Zuckerman JD (2004) An articulating interval spacer in the treatment of an infected total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 13:476–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  63. Sperling JW, Cofield RH, Rowland CM (2000) Heterotopic ossification after total shoulder arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 15:179–182

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  64. Kjaersgaard-Andersen P, Frich LH, Sojbjerg JO, Sneppen O (1989) Heterotopic bone formation following total shoulder arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 4:99–104

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  65. Brenner BC, Ferlic DC, Clayton ML, Dennis DA (1989) Survivorship of unconstrained total shoulder arthroplasty. J Bone Jt Surg Am 71:1289–1296

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  66. Clayton ML, Ferlic DC, Jeffers PD (1982) Prosthetic arthroplasties of the shoulder. Clin Orthop Relat Res 164:184–191

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. McElwain JP, English E (1987) The early results of porous-coated total shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 218:217–224

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Martin SDSC, Thomas WH, Thornhill TS (1995) Total shoulder arthroplasty with an uncemented glenoid component. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons, Orlando

  69. Cofield RHDP (1992) Total shoulder arthroplasty with a tissue-ingrowth glenoid component. J Shoulder Elb Surg 1:77–85

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. Driessnack RP, Ferlic DC, Wiedel JD (1990) Dissociation of the glenoid component in the Macnab/English total shoulder arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 5:15–18

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiology, Orthopedic University Hospital Balgrist, Forchstrasse 340, 8008, Zurich, Switzerland

    Florian M. Buck & Juerg Hodler

  2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Orthopedic University Hospital Balgrist, Zurich, Switzerland

    Bernhard Jost

Authors
  1. Florian M. Buck
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bernhard Jost
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Juerg Hodler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Florian M. Buck.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Buck, F.M., Jost, B. & Hodler, J. Shoulder arthroplasty. Eur Radiol 18, 2937–2948 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1093-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-008-1093-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation