title: Bone Grafting the Glenoid Versus Use of Augmented Glenoid Baseplates with Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Large glenoid defects are a difficult reconstructive problem for surgeons performing reverse shoulder arthroplasty (rTSA). Options to address glenoid defects include eccentric reaming, bone grafting, and augmented glenoid baseplates. Augmented glenoid baseplates may provide a simpler, cost-effective, bone-preserving option compared to other techniques. No studies report the use of augmented baseplates to correct glenoid deformity in rTSA relative to the use of glenoid bone graft.
  
  
  METHODS
  We retrospectively reviewed 80 patients that received a primary rTSA and received either a structural bone graft or an augmented glenoid baseplate to address a significant glenoid defect. There were 39 patients in the augmented baseplate cohort and 41 patients in the bone graft cohort. The augmented baseplate cohort contained 24 8° posterior augment implants and 15 10° superior augment baseplates. The bone graft cohort consisted of 36 autograft humeral heads and 5 allograft femoral heads. The average follow-up for rTSA patients with an augmented baseplate was 28.3 ± 5.7 months, and the average follow-up for rTSA patients with glenoid bone graft was 34.1 ± 15.0 months. Each patient was scored preoperatively and at latest follow-up using the SST, UCLA, ASES, Constant, and SPADI metrics. Range of motion data was obtained as well.
  
  
  RESULTS
  All patients demonstrated significant improvements in pain, ROM, and functional scores following treatment with rTSA using either augmented baseplates or glenoid bone graft to correct glenoid defects. The database contained no complications for the augmented glenoid baseplate cohort, and six complications (14.6%) for the glenoid bone graft cohort (including two glenoid loosenings and graft failures). Additionally, the augmented baseplate cohort showed a lower scapular notching rate of 10% as compared to the bone graft cohort which had a notching rate of 18.5%.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The results of this study suggest that either augmented glenoid baseplates or glenoid bone graft can be used to address large glenoid defects during rTSA with significant improvement in outcomes. Augmented glenoid baseplates may achieve a lower complication and scapular notching rate, but additional and longer-term clinical follow-up is required to confirm these results.
authors.forename: Richard B
authors.initials: RB
authors.lastname: Jones
authors.forename: Thomas W
authors.initials: TW
authors.lastname: Wright
authors.forename: Christopher P
authors.initials: CP
authors.lastname: Roche
mesh_terms: D000368:Aged; D064591:Allografts; D019643:Arthroplasty, Replacement / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000379:methods; D064592:Autografts; D001696:Biomechanical Phenomena; D001860:Bone Plates; D016025:Bone Transplantation / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D004867:Equipment Design; D005260:Female; D005270:Femur Head / Q000637:transplantation; D061165:Glenoid Cavity / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D006801:Humans; D058430:Humeral Head / Q000637:transplantation; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000209:etiology; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular; D020127:Recovery of Function; D012042:Registries; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012307:Risk Factors; D012785:Shoulder Joint / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome