Andrew P Kraszewski1, Stephanie W Mayer2, Andreas Kontaxis3, Howard J Hillstrom3, Ali Sheikhzadeh4, Russell P Warren5. 1. Department of Rehabilitation, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA. Electronic address: kraszewskia@hss.edu. 2. Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Colorado, Children's Hospital Colorado, Aurora, CO, USA. 3. Department of Rehabilitation, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA. 4. Occupational & Industrial Orthopaedic Center, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY, USA. 5. Sports Medicine & Shoulder Service, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Shoulder capsular plication aims to restore the passive stabilization of the glenohumeral capsule; however, high reported recurrence rates warrant concern. Improving our understanding of the clinical laxity assessment across 2 dimensions, capsular integrity and shoulder position, can help toward the standardization of clinical tools. Our objectives were to test and describe glenohumeral laxity across 5 capsular tension levels and 4 humeral position levels and describe tension-position interplay. METHODS: We tested 14 dissected cadavers for glenohumeral laxity in 5 directions: anterior, posterior, and inferior translation, and internal and external axial rotation. Laxity was recorded across capsule tension (baseline, stretched, 5 mm, 10 mm, and 15 mm of plication) and position (0°, 20°, 40°, 60° of scapular abduction). Repeated-measures analysis of variance with post hoc contrasts tested the effect of tension, position, and composite tension × position on laxity. RESULTS: Capsule tension, position, and composite interplay had a statistically significant, although unequal, effect on laxity in each direction. Laxity was consistently overconstrained in 15-mm plication and was overall greatest in 20° and lowest in 60°. Restoration occurred most in 10 mm, but this depended on the position. The composite effect was significant for external and internal rotation and inferior laxity, but laxity at the middle range (20° or 40°) was different than at the end range (0° or 60°) for all directions. CONCLUSIONS: On average, laxity was restored to baseline tension after 10-mm plication, but this determination varied depending on shoulder position. Middle-range laxity behaved differently than end-range laxity across plication tensions. This information is useful in understanding the unstable shoulder as well as for standardizing clinical laxity assessment.
BACKGROUND: Shoulder capsular plication aims to restore the passive stabilization of the glenohumeral capsule; however, high reported recurrence rates warrant concern. Improving our understanding of the clinical laxity assessment across 2 dimensions, capsular integrity and shoulder position, can help toward the standardization of clinical tools. Our objectives were to test and describe glenohumeral laxity across 5 capsular tension levels and 4 humeral position levels and describe tension-position interplay. METHODS: We tested 14 dissected cadavers for glenohumeral laxity in 5 directions: anterior, posterior, and inferior translation, and internal and external axial rotation. Laxity was recorded across capsule tension (baseline, stretched, 5 mm, 10 mm, and 15 mm of plication) and position (0°, 20°, 40°, 60° of scapular abduction). Repeated-measures analysis of variance with post hoc contrasts tested the effect of tension, position, and composite tension × position on laxity. RESULTS: Capsule tension, position, and composite interplay had a statistically significant, although unequal, effect on laxity in each direction. Laxity was consistently overconstrained in 15-mm plication and was overall greatest in 20° and lowest in 60°. Restoration occurred most in 10 mm, but this depended on the position. The composite effect was significant for external and internal rotation and inferior laxity, but laxity at the middle range (20° or 40°) was different than at the end range (0° or 60°) for all directions. CONCLUSIONS: On average, laxity was restored to baseline tension after 10-mm plication, but this determination varied depending on shoulder position. Middle-range laxity behaved differently than end-range laxity across plication tensions. This information is useful in understanding the unstable shoulder as well as for standardizing clinical laxity assessment.