Predicting normal glenoid version from the pathologic scapula: a comparison of 4 methods in 2- and 3-dimensional models

Ganapathi, Asvin M.; McCarron, Jesse A.; Chen, Xi; Iannotti, Joseph P.

doi:10.1016/j.jse.2010.05.024

Cited by 119 publications

(97 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This explains the relatively high version obtained for normal scapulae. 19 As expected, the version was higher in B2 and C scapulae compared with normal. The orientation of version was mainly in the postero-superior sector for normal scapulae, and extended, in the main, posteriorly for OA scapulae.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

“…A 3D assessment of the glenoid orientation was achieved by measuring the inclination of the glenoid, or the location of maximum erosion. 15,18 Various other alternatives were proposed to define the glenoid surface in 3D, either by fitting a plane 19,20 or a sphere. 21,22 In order to characterise the morphology of eroded glenoid surfaces in 3D, we looked for a set of morphological parameters for TSR planning and evaluated their potential on a series of normal and osteoarthritic shoulders.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measurements of three-dimensional glenoid erosion when planning the prosthetic replacement of osteoarthritic shoulders

Terrier

Ston

Larrea

et al. 2014

The Bone & Joint Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The three-dimensional (3D) correction of glenoid erosion is critical to the long-term success of total shoulder replacement (TSR). In order to characterise the 3D morphology of eroded glenoid surfaces, we looked for a set of morphological parameters useful for TSR planning. We defined a scapular coordinates system based on non-eroded bony landmarks. The maximum glenoid version was measured and specified in 3D by its orientation angle. Medialisation was considered relative to the spino-glenoid notch. We analysed regular CT scans of 19 normal (N) and 86 osteoarthritic (OA) scapulae. When the maximum version of OA shoulders was higher than 10°, the orientation was not only posterior, but extended in postero-superior (35%), postero-inferior (6%) and anterior sectors (4%). The medialisation of the glenoid was higher in OA than normal shoulders. The orientation angle of maximum version appeared as a critical parameter to specify the glenoid shape in 3D. It will be very useful in planning the best position for the glenoid in TSR. Osteoarthritis (OA) of the gleno-humeral joint is often associated with an erosion of the glenoid.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 69%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Measurements of three-dimensional glenoid erosion when planning the prosthetic replacement of osteoarthritic shoulders

Terrier

Ston

Larrea

et al. 2014

The Bone & Joint Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Scalise et al showed that three-dimensional reconstructions of shoulder CT scans improved inter-rater reliability of glenoid bone loss and improved surgeons' ability to identify the zone of glenoid bone loss, make surgical decisions regarding glenoid preparation and component placement, and assess glenoid component fit [37]. A further study identified three-dimensional imaging methods along with regression equations that predict pre-osteoarthritic glenoid morphology using patient-matched contralateral non-diseased scapulae [38]. In addition, it was determined that a patient's physiologic glenoid version could be accurately determined by three-dimensional imaging of their osteoarthritic shoulder [39].…”

Section: Computer Planning For Shoulder Arthroplastymentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning software and patient-specific instruments in shoulder arthroplasty

Wylie

Tashjian

2016

Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Computer planning software and patient-specific instrumentation have been investigated in multiple subspecialties of orthopedics with mixed results. Shoulder arthroplasty has evolved over the last decade with improvements in implant design and surgical instrumentation. Despite these advances, glenoid positioning in shoulder arthroplasty continues to be a difficult problem. Recent advances in threedimensional imaging techniques and the use of computer planning software may potentially address some of the common difficulties encountered by surgeons. The addition of patient-specific instrumentation and guides provide an option for patients with significant glenoid deformity that may allow improved accuracy of glenoid component implantation compared to using standard instrumentation. Studies have reported improved positioning of the glenoid component in both anatomic and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty with patientspecific instrumentation and guides. More research is needed to determine whether these improvements lead to better patient-reported outcomes or implant survival. In addition, further studies will be needed to address whether this technology is cost effective for large-scale implementation in the orthopedic community.

show abstract

“…This information can be used to assist the surgeon in placing the central guide pin in the location and orientation that best restores native glenoid version and ig. 4 Preoperative glenohumeral alignment of a B2 glenoid. The humeral scapular alignment (HSA) is measured between the line bisecting the scapular axis and the center of rotation of the humeral head according to a best-fit sphere.…”

Section: Preoperative Planning and Intraoperative Techniquesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Surgical management of the biconcave (B2) glenoid

Donohue

Ricchetti

Iannotti

2016

Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis produces a wide spectrum of glenoid pathology. The B2 glenoid is defined by asymmetric posterior bone loss with the development of a biconcavity and posterior translation of the humeral head. Progressive bone loss results in increasing glenoid retroversion, which must be corrected during anatomic shoulder arthroplasty. The goals of arthroplasty should also include centering the humeral head and restoring the normal glenoid joint line. When there is minimal bone loss, this may be accomplished with a standard glenoid component and asymmetric reaming. More significant bone loss requires bone grafting or the use of an augmented glenoid component. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty is also an option for older patients or patients with severe bone loss.

show abstract

Predicting normal glenoid version from the pathologic scapula: a comparison of 4 methods in 2- and 3-dimensional models

Cited by 119 publications

References 25 publications

Measurements of three-dimensional glenoid erosion when planning the prosthetic replacement of osteoarthritic shoulders

Measurements of three-dimensional glenoid erosion when planning the prosthetic replacement of osteoarthritic shoulders

Planning software and patient-specific instruments in shoulder arthroplasty

Surgical management of the biconcave (B2) glenoid

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About