title: Radiographic comparison of pegged and keeled glenoid components using modern cementing techniques: a prospective randomized study.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Modern cementing techniques have improved glenoid fixation, reduced glenoid lucency seen with keeled components, and may eliminate differences attributable to glenoid design. The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of glenoid design on immediate and follow-up radiographic lucency of pegged and keeled glenoid components, using modern cementing techniques.
  
  
  METHODS
  Fifty-three total shoulder arthroplasties were performed in patients with primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Patients were randomized prospectively to receive either a pegged or keeled glenoid component. Three raters graded radiographic glenoid lucencies.
  
  
  RESULTS
  On immediate radiographs, there was no significant difference in the rate of glenoid lucency between pegged (0%) and keeled (15%) glenoid components (P = .128). However, after an average of 26 months, the rate of glenoid lucency was significantly higher in patients with keeled components (46%) compared to patients with pegged components (15%) (P = .003).
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Even with modern cementing techniques, pegged glenoid components remain radiographically superior to keeled glenoid components.
authors.affiliation: Fondren Orthopedic Group, Texas Orthopedic Hospital, Houston, TX 77030, USA. bemd@fondren.com
authors.forename: T Bradley
authors.initials: TB
authors.lastname: Edwards
authors.forename: Joanne E
authors.initials: JE
authors.lastname: Labriola
authors.forename: Rodney J
authors.initials: RJ
authors.lastname: Stanley
authors.forename: Daniel P
authors.initials: DP
authors.lastname: O'Connor
authors.forename: Hussein A
authors.initials: HA
authors.lastname: Elkousy
authors.forename: Gary M
authors.initials: GM
authors.lastname: Gartsman
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D019643:Arthroplasty, Replacement / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D001843:Bone Cements; D002484:Cementation / Q000379:methods*; D016009:Chi-Square Distribution; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D007593:Joint Instability / Q000453:epidemiology / Q000503:physiopathology; D007595:Joint Prosthesis; D008297:Male; D010003:Osteoarthritis / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000601:surgery*; D011336:Probability; D011446:Prospective Studies; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D011475:Prosthesis Failure; D011859:Radiography; D018570:Risk Assessment; D012785:Shoulder Joint / Q000000981:diagnostic imaging / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D016896:Treatment Outcome
chemical_list: D001843:Bone Cements