DePuy CTA Hemiarthroplasty versus Traditional Hemiarthroplasty

More documents

Recommendations

Info

To Date: • Complications: • Five postop arthrofibrosis • Tx’d with arthroscopic debredment • One acromial fracture after fall • Two subscap ruptures after falls • No progressive glenoid/acromial wear • Two revisions to Delta (subscap ruptures) • 1.5% revision rate
Failed <strong>CTA</strong> after Fall – increased superior migration due to subscap rupture Before After
Page 1 and 2: DePuy CTA Hemiarthroplasty versus T
Page 3 and 4: Humeral head replacement for massiv
Page 5: Bipolar Results Study Number of pat
Page 10 and 11: Surgical Technique
Page 14 and 15: Case Example 62 y.o. Rhd male, pain
Page 16 and 17: Attaching the CTA cutting jig
Page 18 and 19: Before and After
Page 20 and 21: Drill holes
Page 22 and 23: Subscapularis Repair
Page 24 and 25: Subscapularis Deficiency • Consid
Page 26 and 27: 1 Year Postop
Page 28 and 29: Postop Care • Majority of surgeri
Page 30 and 31: Results • 132 primaries, w/ ≥ 2
Page 34 and 35: Increased anterior translation on a
Page 36 and 37: Two years postop • 82 year old fe
Page 38 and 39: Observations • Keys to a good CTA
Page 41 and 42: Non-anatomic sizing
Page 43 and 44: Who Gets What??? • If the patient
Page 45 and 46: Defect type and recommended type of
Page 47 and 48: CTA versus Reverse Arthroplasty •
Page 49: CTA or Delta?
Page 52: Thank you!

DePuy CTA Hemiarthroplasty versus Traditional Hemiarthroplasty

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?