PURPOSE: Our aim was to test a published methodology for arthroscopically quantifying glenoid bone loss for its dependability in a cadaver-based anatomic study with 3-dimensional (3-D) computed tomographic (CT) reconstructions of 20 embalmed glenoids. METHODS: Manual macroscopic measurements were made in a standardized fashion. In addition, we marked the center of the visible bare spot in 20 embalmed glenoids with a titanium pin. The shoulder joints were carefully selected for intact rotator cuff, missing capsule-labral deficiency, and absence of severe cartilage degeneration. 3-D reconstructed CT scans were evaluated for consistency of the bare spot. RESULTS: The mean distance from the bare spot to the anterior margin measured manually was 10.9 mm (CT-based, 13.9 mm), to the posterior margin 13.7 mm (CT-based, 16.4 mm), and to the inferior margin 9.7 mm (CT-based, 15.1 mm). Distances were significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: The bare spot did not prove its consistency in 20 carefully selected specimens. Therefore, we conclude that this methodology is not a reliable way to intraoperatively determine bony glenoid deficiency. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We recommend preoperative bilateral CT scans for evaluation of bony glenoid deficiency for exact quantification of the bone loss.
PURPOSE: Our aim was to test a published methodology for arthroscopically quantifying glenoid bone loss for its dependability in a cadaver-based anatomic study with 3-dimensional (3-D) computed tomographic (CT) reconstructions of 20 embalmed glenoids. METHODS: Manual macroscopic measurements were made in a standardized fashion. In addition, we marked the center of the visible bare spot in 20 embalmed glenoids with a titanium pin. The shoulder joints were carefully selected for intact rotator cuff, missing capsule-labral deficiency, and absence of severe cartilage degeneration. 3-D reconstructed CT scans were evaluated for consistency of the bare spot. RESULTS: The mean distance from the bare spot to the anterior margin measured manually was 10.9 mm (CT-based, 13.9 mm), to the posterior margin 13.7 mm (CT-based, 16.4 mm), and to the inferior margin 9.7 mm (CT-based, 15.1 mm). Distances were significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: The bare spot did not prove its consistency in 20 carefully selected specimens. Therefore, we conclude that this methodology is not a reliable way to intraoperatively determine bony glenoid deficiency. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: We recommend preoperative bilateral CT scans for evaluation of bony glenoid deficiency for exact quantification of the bone loss.
Authors: Tapio Flinkkilä; Pekka Hyvönen; Pasi Ohtonen; Juhana Leppilahti Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2010-03-27 Impact factor: 4.342
Authors: N Magarelli; G Milano; P Baudi; D A Santagada; P Righi; V Spina; A Leone; R Amelia; C Fabbriciani; L Bonomo Journal: Radiol Med Date: 2011-07-09 Impact factor: 3.469
Authors: Soterios Gyftopoulos; Luis S Beltran; Avner Yemin; Eric Strauss; Robert Meislin; Laith Jazrawi; Michael P Recht Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2013-12-07 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Joel Murachovsky; Rogerio S Bueno; Luis Gustavo P Nascimento; Luiz Henrique Oliveira Almeida; Eric Strose; Marcello T Castiglia; Heverton C de Oliveira; Roberto Y Ikemoto Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2012-05-26 Impact factor: 2.199
Authors: Nicola Magarelli; Giuseppe Milano; Pietro Sergio; Domenico A Santagada; Carlo Fabbriciani; Lorenzo Bonomo Journal: Skeletal Radiol Date: 2009-05-24 Impact factor: 2.199