Study of the variability of scapular inclination and the glenoid version - considerations for preoperative planning: clinical-radiological study
Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie, Anglie Médium electronic
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
PubMed
28088244
PubMed Central
PMC5237552
DOI
10.1186/s12891-016-1381-4
PII: 10.1186/s12891-016-1381-4
Knihovny.cz E-zdroje
- Klíčová slova
- Angle, Arthroplasty, Glenoid, Inclination, Preoperative planning, Scapula, Version,
- MeSH
- anatomická variace MeSH
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- lopatka anatomie a histologie diagnostické zobrazování MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- počítačová rentgenová tomografie MeSH
- předoperační péče MeSH
- ramenní kloub anatomie a histologie diagnostické zobrazování MeSH
- senioři nad 80 let MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- Check Tag
- dospělí MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mladý dospělý MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři nad 80 let MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
BACKGROUND: Preoperative planning with the aid of imaging methods is a principal factor in successful surgery on the shoulder. This work aims to evaluate the variability of glenoid version, spiralling twist and scapular inclination in relation to the frontal axis. Studies focusing on measuring the variability of scapular inclination in the standardised rest position are lacking in the literature. METHODS: We evaluated 104 CT scans of the shoulder. We measured the glenoid version with respect to the scapular axis at three levels. We measured the scapular inclination angle in relation to the sagittal plane and we determined scapular inclination in relation to the frontal axis. Statistical evaluation was performed using the marginal linear model and parameters were estimated using the generalised least squares method, which enables the dependency of measurements performed on the same subject to be taken into consideration. RESULTS: The highest values of retroversion are attained by the glenoid in the cranial section (average -9.96°, range -29.7 to +13.2°). Proof of the spiralling twist is the decline in retroversion at the centre of the glenoid (average -2.09°, range -16.7 to +11.6°). Retroversion decreases further in the inferior direction (average -0.5°, range -20.9 to +17.5°). The average thoracoscapular angle is 45.46°, ranging from 13.1 to 69.0°. The average scapular inclination in relation to the frontal plane is 44.54°, ranging from 21.0 to76.9°. CONCLUSIONS: During preoperative planning, the surgeon should take into consideration not only the glenoid version in relation to the scapular axis, but also the value of the scapular inclination so as to eliminate possible surgical errors, optimise prosthesis implantation and thus decrease the risk of functional restrictions of the joint. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Ethics Committee for Multi-Centric Clinical Trials (EK-554/14,29thApril 2014).
Zobrazit více v PubMed
Churchill RS, Brems JJ, Kotschi H. Glenoid size, inclination, and version: An anatomic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2001;10:327–32. doi: 10.1067/mse.2001.115269. PubMed DOI
Bokor DJ, O’Sullivan MD, Hazan GJ. Variability of measurement of glenoid version on computed tomography scan. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 1999;8:595–8. doi: 10.1016/S1058-2746(99)90096-4. PubMed DOI
Bryce CD, Pennypacker JL, Kulkami N, Paul EM, Hollenbeak CS, Mosher TJ, Armstrong AD. Validation of three-dimensional models of in situ scapulae. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2008;17:825–32. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2008.01.141. PubMed DOI
Kwon YW, Powell KA, Yum JK, Brems JJ, Iannotti JP. Use of three– dimensional computed tomography for the analysis of the glenoid anatomy. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2005;14:85–90. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2004.04.011. PubMed DOI
Maurer A, Fucentese SF, Pfirrmann CWA, Wirth SH, Djahangiri A, Jost B, Gerber C. Assessment of glenoid inclination on routine clinical radiographs and computed tomography examinations of the shoulder. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2012;21:1096–103. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.07.010. PubMed DOI
Huijsmans PE, Haen PS, Kidd M, Dhert WJ, van der Hulst VPM, Willems J. Quantification of a glenoid defect with three-dimensional computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging: A cadaveric study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2007;16:803–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2007.02.115. PubMed DOI
Ganapathi A, McCarron JA, Chen X, Iannotti JP. Predicting normal glenoid version from the pathologic scapula: a comparison of 4 methods in 2- and 3-dimensional models. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011;20:234–44. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.05.024. PubMed DOI
De Wilde L, Defoort S, Verstraten TR, Speeckaert W, Debeer P. A 3D-CT scan study of the humeral and glenoid planes in 150 normal shoulders. Surg Radiol Anat. 2012;34:743–50. doi: 10.1007/s00276-011-0836-4. PubMed DOI
Bouchaib J, Clavert P, Kempf JF, Kahn JL. Morphological analysis of the glenoid version in the axial plane according to age. Surg Radiol Anat. 2014;36:579–85. doi: 10.1007/s00276-013-1238-6. PubMed DOI
Barnett ND, Duncan RDD, Johnson GR. The measurement of three dimensional scapulohumeral kinematics - a study of reliability. Clin Biomech. 1999;14:287–90. doi: 10.1016/S0268-0033(98)00106-5. PubMed DOI
Hierholzer E, Rapp W, Schmidt-Wiethoff R. Automatic measurement of scapula position and movement using rasterstereography. In: Tanguy A, Peuchot B, editors. Research into spinal deformities 3 Book series: Studies in health technology and informatics. Amsterdam: Ios Press; 2002. pp. 182–5. PubMed
Park JY, Hwang JT, Kim KM, Makkar D, Moon SG, Han KJ. How to assess scapular dyskinesis precisely: 3-dimensional wing computer tomography-a new diagnostic modality. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2013;22:1084–91. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2012.10.046. PubMed DOI
Friedman RJ, Hawthorne KB, Genez BM. The Use of Computerized Tomography in the Measurement of Glenoid Version. J Bone Joint Surg. 1992;74-A:1032–7. doi: 10.2106/00004623-199274070-00009. PubMed DOI
Rouleau DM, Kidder JF, Pons-Villanueva J, Dynamidis S, Defranco M, Walch G. Glenoid version: How to measure it? Validity of different methods in two-dimensional computed tomography scans. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19:1230–7. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.01.027. PubMed DOI
Matsumura N, Ogawa K, Kobayashi S, Oki S, Watanabe A, Ikegami H, Toyama Y. Morphologic features of humeral head and glenoid version in the normal glenohumeral joint. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23:1724–30. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.020. PubMed DOI
Beuckelaers E, Jacxsens M, Van Tongel A, De Wilde LF. Three-dimensional computed tomography scan evaluation of the pattern of erosion in type B glenoids. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2014;23:109–16. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2013.04.009. PubMed DOI
Moineau G, Levigne C, Boileau P, Young A, Walch G. Three-dimensional measurement method of arthritic glenoid cavity morphology: Feasibility and reproducibility. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res. 2012;98:139–45. doi: 10.1016/j.otsr.2012.06.007. PubMed DOI
Budge MD, Lewis GS, Schaefer E, Coquia S, Flemming DJ, Armstrong AD. Comparison of standard two-dimensional and three-dimensional corrected glenoid version measurements. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2011;20:577–83. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.11.003. PubMed DOI
Hoenecke HR, Jr, Hermida JC, Flores-Hernandez C, D’Lima DD. Accuracy of CT-based measurements of glenoid version for total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg. 2010;19:166–71. doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.08.009. PubMed DOI
Inui H, Sugamoto K, Miyamoto T, Machid A, Hashimoto J, Nobuhara K. Evaluation of three-dimensional glenoid structure using MRI. J Anat. 2001;199:323–8. doi: 10.1017/S002187820100810X. PubMed DOI PMC
Krivohlavek M, Taller S, Lukas R, Drac P. Anatomy Notes on Minimally Invasive Plate Ostheosynthesis of the Proximal Humerus. A Cadaver Study. Acta Chir Orthop Traum Cech. 2014;81:63–9. PubMed
Herrmann SJ, Izadpanah K, Südkamp NP, Strohm PC. Tears of the Rotator Cuff. Causes – Diagnoses – Treatment. Acta Chir Orthop Traum Cech. 2014;81:256–66. PubMed
Popelka V. Chronic Locked Posterior Shoulder Dislocation Treated by Anatomical Total Shoulder Arthroplasty. Acta Chir Orthop Traum Cech. 2016;83:55–61. PubMed
Polguj M, Sibiński M, Grzegorzewski A, Grzelak P, Majos A, Topol M. Variation in morphology of suprascapular notch as a factor of suprascapular nerve entrapment. Int Orthop. 2013;37:2185–92. doi: 10.1007/s00264-013-2005-3. PubMed DOI PMC
Choplin RH, Buckwalter KA, Rydberg J, Farber JM. CT with 3D rendering of the tendons of the foot and ankle: technique, normal anatomy, and disease. Radiographics. 2004;24(2):343–56. doi: 10.1148/rg.242035131. PubMed DOI