Outcomes following manufacturer-mismatched implants in primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty

In reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), surgeons predominantly use components from the same manufacturer. In certain situations, it may be advantageous to "mismatch" components. There is a lack of literature investigating outcomes following manufacturer-mismatched implants. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes following RSA with manufacturer-mismatched implants. All primary or revision RSAs between 2013 to 2021 with manufacturer-mismatched glenoid and humeral components was performed. Data collected included demographic variables, postoperative function, and complications. Totally 85 patients underwent RSA with manufacturer-mismatched implants. Sixty-three were primary cases (74%) and 22 (26%) were revision cases. The mean age was 70.2 ± 8.8, and 20 (24%) were male. The mean follow-up was 47.8 (range: 24-114 months). In primary cases the mean ASES score was 79.1 ± 21.3, SANE score of 75 ± 25.4, and VAS pain score of 1.8 ± 2.5. For revisions, the mean ASES score was 61.2 ± 25.9, SANE score of 50 ± 31.9, and VAS pain score of 3.2 ± 2.9. These are comparable to historical controls. Fourteen (16.4%) patients sustained a postoperative complication, six (7.1%) underwent a reoperation. Our results demonstrate that manufacturer-mismatching has comparable postoperative function, complications, and reoperation rates to the reported literature. Level of evidence: III.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Shoulder & Elbow
Published
2026-01-12
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1177/17585732251410172
Primary Topic
Shoulder Injury and Treatment
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Outcomes following manufacturer-mismatched implants in primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty

Olawale A. Sogbein, Jennifer Kurowicki, Ryan M. Cox, A. Shen et al.
Shoulder & Elbow
Shoulder Injury and Treatment
article

Outcomes following manufacturer-mismatched implants in primary and revision shoulder arthroplasty

Olawale A. Sogbein, Jennifer Kurowicki, Ryan M. Cox, A. Shen, Colton C. Mowers, Ryan Lopez, Harrison S Fellheimer, Gregory P Nicholson, Surena Namdari, Grant E Garrigues, Gerald R Williams
article en

Abstract

In reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RSA), surgeons predominantly use components from the same manufacturer. In certain situations, it may be advantageous to "mismatch" components. There is a lack of literature investigating outcomes following manufacturer-mismatched implants. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcomes following RSA with manufacturer-mismatched implants. All primary or revision RSAs between 2013 to 2021 with manufacturer-mismatched glenoid and humeral components was performed. Data collected included demographic variables, postoperative function, and complications. Totally 85 patients underwent RSA with manufacturer-mismatched implants. Sixty-three were primary cases (74%) and 22 (26%) were revision cases. The mean age was 70.2 ± 8.8, and 20 (24%) were male. The mean follow-up was 47.8 (range: 24-114 months). In primary cases the mean ASES score was 79.1 ± 21.3, SANE score of 75 ± 25.4, and VAS pain score of 1.8 ± 2.5. For revisions, the mean ASES score was 61.2 ± 25.9, SANE score of 50 ± 31.9, and VAS pain score of 3.2 ± 2.9. These are comparable to historical controls. Fourteen (16.4%) patients sustained a postoperative complication, six (7.1%) underwent a reoperation. Our results demonstrate that manufacturer-mismatching has comparable postoperative function, complications, and reoperation rates to the reported literature. Level of evidence: III.

Shoulder & Elbow
Rush University Medical Center (US), Thomas Jefferson University Hospital (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 90%
Shoulder Injury and Treatment
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.