Quantifying Glenoid Bone Loss in Anterior Shoulder Instability

Author:

Bois Aaron J.1,Fening Stephen D.23,Polster Josh4,Jones Morgan H.15,Miniaci Anthony15

Affiliation:

1. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Orthopaedic and Rheumatologic Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio

2. Austen BioInnovation Institute, Akron, Ohio

3. Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Summa Health System, Akron, Ohio

4. Department of Diagnostic Radiology, Imaging Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio

5. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Lerner Research Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio

Abstract

Background: Glenoid support is critical for stability of the glenohumeral joint. An accepted noninvasive method of quantifying glenoid bone loss does not exist. Purpose: To perform independent evaluations of the reliability and accuracy of standard 2-dimensional (2-D) and 3-dimensional (3-D) computed tomography (CT) measurements of glenoid bone deficiency. Study Design: Descriptive laboratory study. Methods: Two sawbone models were used; one served as a model for 2 anterior glenoid defects and the other for 2 anteroinferior defects. For each scapular model, predefect and defect data were collected for a total of 6 data sets. Each sample underwent 3-D laser scanning followed by CT scanning. Six physicians measured linear indicators of bone loss (defect length and width-to-length ratio) on both 2-D and 3-D CT and quantified bone loss using the glenoid index method on 2-D CT and using the glenoid index, ratio, and Pico methods on 3-D CT. The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used to assess agreement, and percentage error was used to compare radiographic and true measurements. Results: With use of 2-D CT, the glenoid index and defect length measurements had the least percentage error (−4.13% and 7.68%, respectively); agreement was very good (ICC, .81) for defect length only. With use of 3-D CT, defect length (0.29%) and the Pico1 method (4.93%) had the least percentage error. Agreement was very good for all linear indicators of bone loss (range, .85-.90) and for the ratio linear and Pico surface area methods used to quantify bone loss (range, .84-.98). Overall, 3-D CT results demonstrated better agreement and accuracy compared to 2-D CT. Conclusion: None of the methods assessed in this study using 2-D CT was found to be valid, and therefore, 2-D CT is not recommended for these methods. However, the length of glenoid defects can be reliably and accurately measured on 3-D CT. The Pico and ratio techniques are most reliable; however, the Pico1 method accurately quantifies glenoid bone loss in both the anterior and anteroinferior locations. Future work is required to implement valid imaging techniques of glenoid bone loss into clinical practice. Clinical Relevance: This is one of the only studies to date that has investigated both the reliability and accuracy of multiple indicators and quantification methods that evaluate glenoid bone loss in anterior glenohumeral instability. These data are critical to ensure valid methods are used for preoperative assessment and to determine when a glenoid bone augmentation procedure is indicated.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Physical Therapy, Sports Therapy and Rehabilitation,Orthopedics and Sports Medicine

Cited by 110 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3