F547058c Ec0c 472e 8bc8 789a99d1fcb1

: Pdf F547058C-Ec0C-472E-8Bc8-789A99D1Fcb1 f547058c-ec0c-472e-8bc8-789a99d1fcb1 4 2017 pdf

Open the PDF directly: View PDF .
Page Count: 12

Reaching Higher by Design

Extremity Solutions

TM

Discovery® Elbow

AltiVate™ Anatomic AltiVate Reverse®

Y

E

A

R

S

Y

E

A

R

S

Alians Proximal Humerus AltiVate™ Match Point System®

Reaching higher by design…

SO PATIENTS CAN, TOO.

At DJO Surgical, our end goal is to help patients reach their greatest altitudes. We strive to achieve

this through innovation, proven results, and clinical heritage. Our approach is to partner with surgeon

experts in the field to design systems that ultimately provide extremity solutions. DJO Surgical

Extremity Solutions are anatomic designs engineered to provide optimized function, enhanced fixation,

and flexibility and versatility to manage diering patient needs. Our aim is to reach new elevations by

providing clinicians solutions to help their patients reach higher.

AltiVate™ Reverse® Shoulder

The anatomically-based, data-driven AltiVate Reverse system incorporates enhanced fixation technologies and precision instrumentation for superior

fit in more of your patients.

Anatomic Design with Optimized Function

Elevating the 10-year clinical success of the RSP®, the first reverse shoulder design to successfully incorporate a center of rotation (COR) lateral to the

glenoid, DJO Surgical introduces its latest Extremity Solution. The AltiVate Reverse system incorporates an optimized stem design based on anatomic

studies with CT scans for determination of shell-to-stem position as well as the ability to best match patient anatomy for anatomic total and reverse

total shoulder constructs. An anatomic 135° humeral neck-shaft angle has shown through biomechanical testing to help reduce the potential for

inferior scapular notching.1 The system remains based on a lateralized center of rotation, and the premier oering is a glenosphere with the center of

rotation closest to the anatomic center.

Medial COR

Smaller Range of Motion

A lateral COR maximizes range of

motion while reducing the potential

for inferior scapular notching.

A medial COR reduces range of

motion and creates the potential

for inferior scapular notching.

Inferior scapular notching has

been associated with poor

clinical outcomes.2

Lateral COR

Larger Range of Motion

Lateral COR

135

Enhanced Fixation Design and Technologies

On both the glenoid and humeral side, expect improved short and long term fixation as a result of

stable initial fixation as well as ideal conditions for bony ingrowth.

P2 Porous Coating*

“Porous” porous coating that

aids in the apposition of bone for

superior in-growth results.

2000N of compression

Micromotion < 150µm

e+ Liner

Highly crosslinked vitamin E polyethylene

formulated to maintain strength and

reduce wear rates.*

Bone Graft Window

Increased press-fit and bony integration

Suture Holes

Options for simplified

and enhanced tuberosity

reduction and fixation for

fracture cases.

Fins

For rotational stability and

tuberosity reconstruction.

Instruments

Precision instrumentation caters to diering

surgeon preferences and results in a streamlined

technique. A metaphyseal-referenced approach

dictates stem position based on the fit in the

metaphysis while a diaphyseal-referenced

approach bases the stem position on the fit

in the canal. Osteotome slots and specialized

instrumentation allows for stem removal with

minimal bony disruption in a revision scenario.

Flexibility and Versatility

Implants

A wide variety of intra-operative options help

to manage complex anatomies and to achieve

the best surgical outcomes. Indications include

anatomic total, anatomic hemi, reverse total,

hemi for fracture and reverse for fracture.

Seven glenospheres with a

distinct center of rotation in

each size

Stems available in

three lengths (108mm,

175mm and 220mm) and

diameters of 6mm-18mm.

Standard and +4mm socket

inserts are available in both

conventional polyethylene and

e+™ polyethylene. An 8mm

spacer is also an option.

COR 32N

COR 44+8

COR 32-4

COR 36N

COR 40N

COR 36-4

COR 40-4

4 Peripheral Screws

for resistance to shear and torsional forces.

* The baseplate is also available with 3DMatrix and HA coating

Contoured Surface

matches the shape of the glenoid.

6.5mm Lag Screw

Reaching Higher by Design

The data-driven design of the AltiVate™ Anatomic Shoulder System

features a short P2 coated humeral stem providing superior ingrowth

and a glenoid component with patent pending Drop-and-Go™

technology for immediate fixation. The result is a truly anatomic

reconstruction with fixation you can feel.

AltiVate™ Anatomic Shoulder

Instrumentation

The AltiVate™ Anatomic instrumentation is designed to facilitate

accurate implant placement and increase visibility of the surgical site.

The lateral fins and distal extension of the

humeral broach assist stem implant alignment

Data-Driven Design

A comprehensive  dimensional CT database of humeral and glenoid

specimens was used to optimize implant design resulting in a truly

anatomic reconstruction.

Cannulated instruments provide increased

alignment during drilling and reaming of the glenoid

Innovative low profile designs and translucent materials increase function and visibility

Lateral

Fins

Distal

Extension

e+ Glenoid

Moderately crosslinked

vitamin E polyethylene

formulated to maintain

strength and reduce

wear rates.*

Drop-and-Go™

Technology

Patent pending trilobe

design provides

enhanced fixation on

the peripheral pegs.*

P2 Porous Coating

Aids in the apposition of bone

for superior in-growth results.*

Surface Finish

Optimized layout for

bone in-growth above

the metaphyseal-

diaphyseal junction and

smooth finish below

to discourage bone

on-growth.

Proximal Fins

Impart initial stability,

facilitate stem

alignment and include

suture hole options

for enhanced soft

tissue fixation.

Turon®

Keeled Glenoid

Turon

Pegged Glenoid

AltiVate Anatomic™

Pegged Glenoid

AltiVate Anatomic Neutral Humeral Heads

AltiVate Anatomic Oset Humeral Heads

Turon Neutral Humeral Heads

Turon Oset Humeral Heads

Turon Humeral

Neck Neutral

Turon Humeral Stems

(standard and long lengths).

Turon Conversion Shell Converts the

Turon stem to a Reverse® Prosthesis

RSP® Monoblock

Hemi-Adapter

RSP Monoblock Humeral Stems (standard and long lengths)

AltiVate Reverse® Humeral Stems (standard and long lengths)

AltiVate Anatomic

Humeral Neck, Neutral

AltiVate Anatomic

Short Humeral Stems

Putting It All Together

DJO shoulder systems are designed to provide a complete and seamless

shoulder solutions platform. Conversion Modules minimize the potential

challenges of removing a well-fixed humeral stem by allowing conversion

of a primary total shoulder to a reverse shoulder and a reverse shoulder

to a hemi-arthroplasty prosthesis.

AltiVate™ Match Point System®

Enabling surgeons to preoperatively and intraoperatively tailor shoulder arthroplasty to the patient’s unique anatomy, AltiVate Match Point System,

in conjunction with the AltiVate Reverse or Turon Anatomic shoulder implant system, allows surgeons to Aim at enhancing patient outcomes and Set

patients’ goals to Reach Higher by ensuring the surgical plan is Matched to the patient’s specific anatomy.

Aim

- at enhancing patient outcomes

• CT based 3D model

• Visualize unique anatomy

• Prepares surgeons preoperatively

Set

- patient goals to reach higher

• Virtually planned surgery

• Optimized implant position

• Based on entirety of anatomy not

visible in surgery

Matched

- to the patient’s specific anatomy

• Guide and model delivered to surgery

• Accurately reproduces plan intra operatively

• Reduces variability of conventional methods

Push Handle - gentle pressure

applied to the push handle

further stabilizes the guide while

drilling the pilot hole

Drill Cylinder - designed to replicate

the planned trajectory determined

by the surgeon through the pre-

operative planning process

Coracoid Clip - unique coracoid clip

securely attaches to the patient’s coracoid,

providing a stable and reproducible fit of the

guide to the patient‘s anatomy

Patient Identifier – unique

identification code specific for

each patient case links the guide

to the patient

Version Inclination Position

Standard Inst

3D Plan + Standard Inst

3D Plan + Transfer Device

Match Point System

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Deviation from Plan3 (mean°)

Anatomic Design

The Discovery Elbow System is designed to reproduce the anatomy and restore the mechanics of the elbow.

With its user-friendly instrumentation and intra-operative assembly options, this implant is suitable for

surgeons of all experience levels.

Flexibility and Versatility

Any size ulnar component can be paired with any size humeral component. The size  humeral component,

however, can only be paired with the size 2.5 ulnar component.

Posterior Hinge Assembly

Allows for intraoperative assembly

23° Anterior Neck Angle

Recreates the anatomic center of rotation

Functional Laxity

7° of varus/valgus laxity

recreates trochlear function Anterior Flange

Provides torsional stability and

removes need for bone graft

Lateral Bow

Follows the anatomy

of the ulna

Hemispheric Condyles

Spread the stress out through the entire

surface area of the poly, which reduces wear

Anatomic Bow

5° of internal rotation reduces the

stresses on the collateral ligaments

AltiVate™ Discovery® Elbow System

Anatomical

Contoured plate design

Anatomic Design Flexibility and Versatility

Asymmetrical

Left and right designs

Spaded tip

Assists in preservation

of deltoid insertion

Straight edge lines up

with bicipital groove

Easy plate positioning

Sits 1.5cm below

greater tuberosity

Minimizes conflict

with acromion

Patented Dualtec System I®

polyaxial locking fixation

• Variable angle technology for

25° (±12.5°)

• Allows for repeated insertion

and re-angulations of screw

without sacrificing its strength

Optimized proximal screw hole placement

Divergent fixed angled screws placed in

inferior half of humeral head

• Targets location of most robust bone

• Blunt-tipped screws limit protrusion

through articular surface

Five unique suture holes

for soft tissue fixation

• Accessible even after plate

attachment, so pre-loading

sutures is not required

Simple and streamlined instrumentation

• 1 tray, 1 screw size, 1 drill bit, 1 driver

25°

Alians Proximal Humerus

The Alians Proximal Humerus provides another fracture management option to the AltiVate™ Extremity

Solutions Portfolio. This fracture plate system features an anatomically contoured design with patented

polyaxial locking screw options and is paired with simple, streamlined instrumentation.

ALIANS AND DUALTEC SYSTEM I ARE

TRADEMARKS OF NEWCLIP USA.

Proven Results

The Turon shoulder is benchmarked o of the design and principles of the Charles Neer shoulder prosthesis; and RSP is one of the most, well-published

reverse shoulders on the market with over fifty peer reviewed journal publications.

References

. Gutierrez S, Comiskey C, Lou Z,

Pupello D, Frankle M. Range of

Impingement-Free Abduction

and Adduction Deficit After

Reverse Shoulder Arthroplasty.

Hierarchy of Surgical and

Implant-Design-Related Factors.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 

Dec;:.

. Simovitch RW, Zumstein MA,

Lohri E, Helmy N, Gerber C.

Predictors of scapular notching

in patients managed with the

Delta III reverse total shoulder

replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am.

 Mar;:.

. Levy JC, Everding NG, Frankle

MA, Keppler LJ. Accuracy of

patient-specific guided glenoid

baseplate positioning for reverse

shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder

Elbow Surg. 2014 Jan;23:1563-

1567.

Stephens BC, Simon P, Clark RE,

Christmas KN, Stone GP, Lorenzetti

AJ, Frankle MA. Revision for a

failed reverse: a 12-year review of a

lateralized implant. J Shoulder Elbow

Surg 2016. 25:e115-e124.

Levy JC, Ashukem MT, Formaini NT.

Factors predicting postoperative

range of motion for anatomic total

shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder

Elbow Surg 2016;25:55-60.

Levy JC. Observation of initial

postoperative radiolucent lines using

a modern pegged glenoid design. Int J

Shoulder Surg 2016;10(2) 67-71.

Formaini NT, Everding NG, Levy JC,

Rosas S. Tuberosity healing after

reverse shoulder arthroplasty for

acute proximal humerus fractures:

the ‘‘black and tan’’ technique. J

Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015; 1-8.

Formaini NT, Everding NG, Levy JC,

Santoni BG, Nayak AN, Wilson C,

Cabezas AF. The eect of glenoid

bone loss on reverse shoulder

arthroplasty baseplate fixation. J

Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015.

Triplet JJ, Everding NG, Levy JC, Moor

MA. Functional internal rotation after

shoulder arthroplasty: a comparison

of anatomic and reverse shoulder

arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.

2015; 24:867-874.

Cusick MC, Hussey MM, Steen

BM, Hartzler RU, Clark RE, Cu DJ,

Cabezas AF, Santoni BG, Frankle MA.

Glenosphere dissociation after reverse

shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder

Elbow Surg. 2015 July; 24(7): 1061-

1068.

Hussey MM, Steen BM, Cusick MC,

Cox JL, Marberry ST, Simon P, Cottrell

BJ, Santoni BG, Frankle MA. The

eects of glenoid wear patterns on

patients with osteoarthritis in total

shoulder arthroplasty: an assessment

of outcomes and value. J Shoulder

Elbow Surg. 2015 May; 24(5):682-690.

Teusink MJ, Pappou IP, Schwartz

DG, Cottrell BJ, Frankle MA. Results

of closed management of acute

dislocation after reverse shoulder

arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.

2015 Apr; 24(4):621-627.

Simon P, Gupta A, Pappou I, Hussey

MM, Santoni BG, Inoue N, Frankle,

MA. Glenoid subchondral bone

density distribution in male total

shoulder arthroplasty subjects with

eccentric and concentric wear. J

Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015 Mar;

24(3):416-424.

Steen BM, Cabezas AS, Santoni BG,

Hussey MM, Cusick MC, Kumer AG,

Frankle MA. Outcome and value

of reverse shoulder arthroplasty

for treatment of glenohumeral

osteoarthritis: a matched cohort. J

Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2015 Mar.

Levy JC, Everding NG, Frankle MA,

Keppler LJ. Accuracy of patient-

specific guided glenoid baseplate

positioning for reverse shoulder

arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.

2014; 23:1563-1567.

Schwarts DG, Cottrell BJ, Teusink MJ,

Clark RE, Downes KL, Tammembaum

RS, Frankle MA. Factors that predict

postoperative motion in patients

treated with reverse shoulder

arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.

2014 23:1289-1295.

Levy JC, Everding NG, Gil CC Jr,

Stephens S, Giveans R. Speed of

recovery after shoulder arthroplasty:

a comparison of reverse and anatomic

total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder

Elbow Surg. 2014; 23:1872-1881.

Teusink M, Otto R, Cottrell B,

Frankle, MA. What is the eect of

postoperative scapular fracture

on outcomes of reverse shoulder

arthroplasty? J Shoulder Elbow Surg.

2014 June; 23(6):782-790.

Cu DJ, Pupello DR. Comparison

of hemiarthroplasty and reverse

shoulder arthroplasty for the

treatment of proximal humeral

fractures in elderly patients. J Bone

Joint Surg. 2013; 95:2050-5.

Kwon YW, Pinto VJ, Yoon J, Frankle

MA, Dunning PE, Sheikhzadeh A.

Kinematic analysis of dynamic

shoulder motion in patients with

reverse total shoulder arthroplasty.

J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012 Sep;

21(9):1184-90.

Willis M, Min W, Brooks JP, Mulieri

P, Walker M, Pupello D, Frankle M.

Proximal humeral malunion treated

with reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012 Apr;

21(4):507-13.

Walker M, Willis MP, Brooks JP,

Pupello D, Mulieri PJ, Frankle MA.

The use of the reverse shoulder

arthroplasty for treatment of failed

total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder

Elbow Surg. 2012 Apr; 21(4):514-22.

Clark JC, Ritchie J, Song FS,

Kissenberth MJ, Tolan SJ, Hart ND,

Hawkins RJ. Complication rates,

dislocation, pain, and postoperative

range of motion after reverse

shoulder arthroplasty in patients

with and without repair of the

subscapularis. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.

2012 Jan; 21(1):36-41.

Levy JC, Badman, B. Reverse shoulder

prosthesis for acute four-part

fracture: tuberosity fixation using a

horseshoe graft. J Orthop Trauma

2011; 25:318–324.

Walker M, Brooks J, Willis M, Frankle

M. How reverse shoulder arthroplasty

works. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011

Sep; 469(9):2440-51.

Cheung E, Willis M, Walker M, Clark R,

Frankle MA. Complications in reverse

total shoulder arthroplasty. J Am Acad

Orthop Surg. 2011 Jul; 19(7):439-49.

Gutiérrez S, Walker M, Willis M,

Pupello DR, Frankle MA. Eects of

tilt and glenosphere eccentricity on

baseplate/bone interface forces in a

computational model, validated by a

mechanical model, of reverse shoulder

arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.

2011 Jul; 20(5):732-9.

Hart ND, Clark JC, Krause W,

Kissenberth MJ, Bragg WE, Hawkins

RJ. Glenoid screw position in the

Encore reverse shoulder prosthesis:

an anatomic dissection study of

screw relationship to surrounding

structures. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.

2013; 22:814-820.

Levy JC. Avoiding cement bone

necrosis eect on tuberosity healing:

the “black-and-tan” technique. Tech

Should Surg. 2013 Sep; 14(3):81-84.

Virani NA, Cabezas A, Gutiérrez

S, Santoni BG, Otto R, Frankle M.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty

components and surgical techniques

that restore glenohumeral motion.

J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013 Feb;

22(2):179-87.

Puskas B, Harreld K, Clark R, Downes

K, Virani NA, Frankle M. Isometric

strength, range of motion, and

impairment before and after total

and reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J

Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013 Jan.

Andersen JR, Williams CD, Cain R,

Mighell M, Frankle M. Surgically

treated humeral shaft fractures

following shoulder arthroplasty. J

Bone Joint Surg Am. 2013 Jan; 95(1):9-

18.

Aonso J, Nicholson GP, Frankle MA,

Walch G, Gerber C, Garzon-Muvdi J,

McFarland EG. Complications of the

reverse prosthesis: prevention and

treatment. Instr Course Lect. 2012;

61:157-68.

Cu D, Clark R, Pupello D, Frankle M.

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty for the

treatment of rotator cu deficiency:

a concise follow-up, at a minimum of

five years, of a previous report. J Bone

Joint Surg Am. 2012 Nov; 94(21):1996-

2000.

Zavala JA, Clark JC, Kissenberth MJ,

Tolan SJ, Hawkins RJ. Management

of deep infection after reverse total

shoulder arthroplasty: a case series.

J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012 Oct;

21(10):1310-5.

Proven Results - continued

Cu D, Levy JC, Gutiérrez S, Frankle

MA. Torsional stability of modular

and non-modular reverse shoulder

humeral components in a proximal

humeral bone loss model. J Shoulder

Elbow Surg. 2011 Jun; 20(4):646-51.

Harreld KL, Puskas BL, Frankle M.

Massive rotator cu tears without

arthropathy: when to consider

reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J

Bone Joint Surg Am. 2011 May 18;

93(10):973-84.

Mulieri P, Dunning P, Klein S, Pupello

D, Frankle M. Reverse shoulder

arthroplasty for the treatment of

irreparable rotator cu tear without

glenohumeral arthritis. J Bone Joint

Surg Am. 2010 Nov; 92(15):2544-56.

Holcomb JO, Hebert DJ, Mighell

MA, Dunning PE, Pupello DR, Pliner

MD, Frankle MA. Reverse shoulder

arthroplasty in patients with

rheumatoid arthritis. J Shoulder Elbow

Surg. 2010 Oct; 19(7):1076-84.

Harreld KL, Puskas BL, Andersen

J, Frankle, MA. Reverse shoulder

arthroplasty in the management of

irreparable rotator cu tears without

arthritis. JBJS Essential Surgical

Techniques, 2010 Sep; 1(2):e12 1-15.

Klein SM, Dunning P, Mulieri P,

Pupello D, Downes K, Frankle MA.

Eects of acquired glenoid bone

defects on surgical technique and

clinical outcomes in reverse shoulder

arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am.

2010 May; 92(5):1144-54.

Frankle MA, Teramoto A, Luo ZP, Levy

JC, Pupello D. Glenoid morphology

in reverse shoulder arthroplasty:

classification and surgical

implications. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.

2009 Nov-Dec; 18(6):874-85.

Holcomb JO, Cu D, Petersen SA,

Pupello DR, Frankle MA. Revision

reverse shoulder arthroplasty for

glenoid baseplate failure after primary

reverse shoulder arthroplasty. J

Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2009 Sep-Oct;

18(5):717-23.

Gutiérrez S, Luo ZP, Levy J, Frankle

MA. Arc of motion and socket depth

in reverse shoulder implants. Clin

Biomech. 2009 Jul; 24(6):473-9.

Chacon A, Virani N, Shannon R, Levy

JC, Pupello D, Frankle M. Revision

arthroplasty with use of a reverse

shoulder prosthesis-allograft

composite. J Bone Joint Surg Am.

2009 Jan; 91(1):119-27.

Gutierrez S, Levy JC, Lee WE 3rd, Luo

ZP. Hierarchy of stability factors in

reverse shoulder arthroplasty. Clin

Orthop Relat Res. 2008 466:670-676.

Cu D, Pupello D, Virani N, Levy

J, Frankle M. Reverse shoulder

arthroplasty for the treatment of

rotator cu deficiency. J Bone Joint

Surg. 2008; 90:1244-1251.

Gutiérrez S, Comiskey CA 4th, Luo

ZP, Pupello DR, Frankle MA. Range

of impingement-free abduction

and adduction deficit after reverse

shoulder arthroplasty. Hierarchy of

surgical and implant-design-related

factors. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008

Dec; 90(12):2606-15.

Gutiérrez S, Levy JC, Frankle MA,

Cu D, Keller TS, Pupello DR, Lee WE

3rd. Evaluation of abduction range

of motion and avoidance of inferior

scapular impingement in a reverse

shoulder model. J Shoulder Elbow

Surg. 2008 Jul-Aug; 17(4):608-15.

Virani NA, Harman M, Li K, Levy J,

Pupello DR, Frankle MA. In vitro and

finite element analysis of glenoid

bone/baseplate interaction in the

reverse shoulder design. J Shoulder

Elbow Surg. 2008 May-Jun; 17(3):509-

21.

Cu DJ, Virani NA, Levy J, Frankle

MA, Derasari A, Hines B, Pupello

DR, Cancio M, Mighell M. The

treatment of deep shoulder infection

and glenohumeral instability with

debridement, reverse shoulder

arthroplasty and postoperative

antibiotics. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2008

Mar; 90(3):336-42.

Gutiérrez S, Levy JC, Frankle MA,

Lee WE 3rd, Keller TS, Maitland ME.

Center of rotation aects abduction

range of motion of reverse shoulder

arthroplasty. Clin Orthop and Relat

Res. 2007.

Gutiérrez S, Greiwe RM, Frankle MA,

Siegal S, Lee WE 3rd. Biomechanical

comparison of component position

and hardware failure in the reverse

shoulder prosthesis. J Shoulder

Elbow Surg. 2007 May-Jun; 16(3

Suppl):S9-S12.

Levy JC, Virani N, Pupello D, Frankle

M. Use of the reverse shoulder

prosthesis for the treatment of failed

hemiarthroplasty in patients with

glenohumeral arthritis and rotator

cu deficiency. J Bone Joint Surg Br.

2007 Feb; 89(2):189-95.

Levy J, Frankle M, Mighell M, Pupello

D. The use of the reverse shoulder

prosthesis for the treatment of

failed hemiarthroplasty for proximal

humeral fracture. J Bone Joint Surg

Am. 2007 Feb; 89(2):292-300.

Frankle M, Levy JC, Pupello D, Siegal

S, Saleem A, Mighell M, Vasey M.

The reverse shoulder prosthesis for

glenohumeral arthritis associated

with severe rotator cu deficiency. a

minimum two-year follow-up study

of sixty patients surgical technique.

J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006 Sep; 88

Suppl 1 Pt 2:178-90.

Frankle M, Siegal S, Pupello D, Saleem

A, Mighell M, Vasey M. The Reverse

Shoulder Prosthesis for glenohumeral

arthritis associated with severe

rotator cu deficiency. A minimum

two-year follow-up study of sixty

patients. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005

Aug; 87(8):1697-705.

Harman M, Frankle M, Vasey M,

Banks S. Initial glenoid component

fixation in “reverse” total shoulder

arthroplasty: a biomechanical

evaluation. J Shoulder Elbow Surg.

2005 Jan-Feb; 14(1 Suppl S):162S-167S.

Copyright © 2016 by DJO, LLC

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, distributed, or transmitted

in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or other electronic or

mechanical methods, without the prior written permission of the publisher, except in the

case of brief quotations embodied in critical reviews and certain other noncommercial uses

permitted by copyright law. For permission requests, write to the publisher, addressed

“Attention: IP Counsel,” at the address 1430 Decision St, Vista, CA 92081.

CAUTION: Federal Law (USA) restricts this device to

sale by or on the order of a physician.

See package insert for a complete listing of indications,

contraindications, warnings, and precautions.

 REV D /

* Data on file at DJO Surgical DJO Surgical I A DJO Global Company

T 800.456.8696 D 512.832.9500 F 512.834.6300

9800 Metric Blvd. I Austin, TX 78758 I U.S.A.

djosurgical.com DJO Surgical™ is a manufacturer of orthopedic implants

and does not practice medicine. Only an orthopedic

surgeon can determine what treatment is appropriate.

Individual results of total joint replacement may vary.

The life of any implant will depend on the patient’s

weight, age, activity level, and other factors.