Related Experiment Video
Updated: Oct 15, 2025
Reverse Total Shoulder Arthroplasty
Published on: July 5, 2011
Similar optimal distalization and lateralization angles can be achieved with different reverse shoulder arthroplasty
Michael Marsalli1, Juan De Dios Errázuriz2, Marco A Cartaya2
1Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Unit, Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, Clínica Universidad de los Andes, Chile.
Background:
Optimal postoperative distalization (DSA) and lateralization (LSA) shoulder angles have been described as radiological measurements correlated with function after reverse shoulder arthroplasty (RSA). The proposed optimal values are DSA between 40° and 65° and LSA between 75° and 95°; however, whether these values can be reached with different implant designs is unclear.
Aim:
To determine which RSA implant could achieve higher rates of optimal DSA and LSA, to determine any association between each implant and optimal DSA and LSA, and to assess the correlation of the preoperative critical shoulder angle (CSA) and acromial index (AI) with the DSA and LSA.
Methods:
This was a retrospective comparative study of all patients who underwent primary RSA for rotator cuff arthropathy. Three RSA implant designs were included, based on which patients were divided into three groups: group 1 (FH Arrow™; 16 patients) comprised onlay implants with a 135° neck-shaft angle (NSA); group 2 (Biomet Comprehensive™; 20 patients) comprised onlay implants with a 147° NSA; group 3 (Mathys Affinis™; 15 patients) comprised inlay implants with a 155° NSA. The AI and CSA were measured on preoperative radiographs. The DSA and LSA were measured on true AP postoperative radiographs.
Results:
The mean DSAs were 44°, 46°, and 46° (P = 0.671) and the mean LSAs were 92°, 91°, and 82° for groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively (P = 0.003). Group 3 had lower LSA than groups 1 (-10°; P = 0.005) and 2 (-9°; P = 0.002). Optimal DSA and LSA were achieved in 71% and 73% of all arthroplasties, respectively. No association between implant designs and achieving an optimal DSA or LSA was observed. None of the implant designs had DSA >65°. The most common cause of failure to reach an optimal LSA in onlay implants was a combination of LSA >95° and DSA <40°. The most common cause of failure in group 3 was DSA <40°. The DSA was negatively correlated with the AI (-0.384; P = 0.006) and CSA (-0.305; P = 0.033). No correlation was observed between the LSA and AI (P = 0.312) or CSA (P = 0.137).
Conclusion:
The LSA is lower with the Mathys Affinis™ implant than with the Biomet Comprehensive™ and FH Arrow™ implants; however, most LSAs are in the optimal ranges, and no association is observed between different implant designs and optimal DSA and LSA. Implant design, CSA, and AI should be considered during preoperative planning to achieve optimal DSA and LSA.
