Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 2, 2026

Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty
Published on: July 5, 2011
Influence of Glenosphere and baseplate parameters on Glenoid bone strains in reverse shoulder Arthroplasty
Leo Pauzenberger1,2, Cory Dwyer3, Elifho Obopilwe3
1Vienna Shoulder & Sports Clinic, Vienna, Austria.
Background:
Little is known about the strains at the glenoid near the bone-implant interface in reverse shoulder arthroplasty. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the strains on the glenoid bone under a compressive load after implantation of three different sizes of metal-backed baseplates in either inferior or superior position in combination with three different sizes of glenospheres and three different glenosphere designs.
Methods:
Three sizes of baseplates (small, medium, large) were implanted in thirty-six paired human cadaveric scapulae either inferior, flush with the glenoid neck, or with a 5 mm superior offset. Glenospheres were available in three sizes (36 mm, 39 mm, 42 mm) and designs (standard, 4 mm lateralized, 2.5 mm inferiorized). Specimens were mounted in a servo-hydraulic testing apparatus at a 60° angle between the glenoid and actuator holding the humeral component. Four strain-gauge rosettes were placed around the glenoid rim to measure strains transferred to the scapular bone under a compressive load (750 N) relative to the various baseplate-glenosphere combinations. Following repeated compression, a load-to-failure test was performed.
Results:
Mean overall registered strains were 161με (range: - 1165 to 2347) at the inferior sensor, -2με (range: - 213 to 90) at the superior sensor, -95με (range: - 381 to 254) at the anterior sensor, and 13με (range: - 298 to 128) at the posterior sensor. Measured bone strains did not show any significant differences across tested baseplate and glenosphere design, size, or positioning combinations (p > 0.05 for all sensors). Furthermore, linear regression analysis did not identify any of the evaluated parameters as an independent influential factor for strains (p > 0.05 for all sensors). Mean load-at-failure was significantly higher in the group of inferior (3347.0 N ± 704.4 N) compared to superior (2763.8 N ± 927.8 N) positioned baseplates (p = 0.046).
Conclusion:
Different baseplate positions, baseplate sizes, glenosphere sizes, and glenosphere design or various combinations of these parameters did not significantly influence the measured bone strains at the glenoid near the bone-implant interface in a contemporary reverse shoulder arthroplasty system.
Level Of Evidence:
Basic Science Study, Biomechanical Study.

