Literature DB >> 30340151

In vivo dynamic acromiohumeral distance in shoulders with rotator cuff tears.

Naoya Kozono1, Takamitsu Okada2, Naohide Takeuchi1, Satoshi Hamai1, Hidehiko Higaki3, Takeshi Shimoto4, Satoru Ikebe5, Hirotaka Gondo3, Yoshitaka Nakanishi1, Takahiro Senju1, Yasuharu Nakashima1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There are no previous studies on the acromiohumeral distance in shoulders with large-to-massive full-thickness rotator cuff tears. In this study, the acromiohumeral distance in rotator cuff tear and healthy shoulders was measured using 3D-to-2D model-to-image registration techniques.
METHODS: The dynamic glenohumeral kinematics during scapular plane abduction and axial rotation were analyzed in 11 rotator cuff tear patients and 10 healthy control subjects. Periodic radiographic images of scapular plane abduction and axial rotation were taken using a flat-panel radiograph image detector. Movements of the shoulder joint were assessed using radiographic images and computed tomography-derived digitally reconstructed radiographs. The acromiohumeral distance was defined as the shortest 3D distance between the acromion and the proximal humerus.
FINDINGS: For scapular plane abduction, the rotator cuff tear group had significantly smaller acromiohumeral distance than the control group at 15°, 30°, 45°, 60°, 75°, 135°, and 150° of humeral abduction (P < 0.05 at each measured angle). For axial rotation in the adducted position, the rotator cuff tear group had significantly smaller acromiohumeral distance than the control group at each point between -20° and 40° of glenohumeral external rotation (P < 0.05 at each measured angle).
INTERPRETATION: The minimum measured acromiohumeral distance was 0.9 mm in the rotator cuff tear shoulders and 2.1 mm in the healthy shoulders at 90° of scapular plane abduction. The findings are of clinical relevance because quantitative evaluation of the dynamic acromiohumeral distances in rotator cuff tear and healthy shoulders might provide important insight into subacromial impingement.
Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  3D-to-2D model-to-image registration techniques; Impingement; Kinematics; Rotator cuff; Shoulder; Subacromial space

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 30340151     DOI: 10.1016/j.clinbiomech.2018.07.017

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon)        ISSN: 0268-0033            Impact factor:   2.063


  4 in total

Review 1.  Shoulder kinematics impact subacromial proximities: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Rebekah L Lawrence; Jonathan P Braman; Paula M Ludewig
Journal:  Braz J Phys Ther       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 3.377

2.  Comparing in vivo three-dimensional shoulder elevation kinematics between standing and supine postures.

Authors:  Akira Sugi; Keisuke Matsuki; Ryunosuke Fukushi; Takeshi Shimoto; Toshiaki Hirose; Yuji Shibayama; Naoya Nishinaka; Kousuke Iba; Toshihiko Yamashita; Scott A Banks
Journal:  JSES Int       Date:  2021-09-04

3.  Quantitative Analysis of Dynamic Subacromial Ultrasonography: Reliability and Influencing Factors.

Authors:  Che-Yu Lin; Chia-Ching Chou; Lan-Rong Chen; Wei-Ting Wu; Po-Cheng Hsu; Tung-Han Yang; Ke-Vin Chang
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-02-15

4.  Relationship between the progression of posterosuperior rotator cuff tear size and shoulder abduction function: A cadaveric study via dynamic shoulder simulator.

Authors:  Liren Wang; Yuhao Kang; Haocheng Jin; Mingqi Wang; Yiyao Wei; Haihan Gao; Dingyi Shi; Suiran Yu; Guoming Xie; Jia Jiang; Jinzhong Zhao
Journal:  Front Bioeng Biotechnol       Date:  2022-09-27
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.