How to Measure Glenoid Bone Stock and Version and Why It Is Important: A Practical Guide

Osteotomies: Indications, Imaging Appearance, Surgical Techniques, and Complications

Osteotomies can be performed on almost every bone and are commonly encountered indications for imaging studies. These procedures are employed to correct congenital, degenerative, and traumatic osseous deformities, ultimately improving both function and cosmetic appearance. It is crucial for radiologists to be aware of the wide range of surgical osteotomies and to be familiar with reporting clinically relevant imaging findings during surgical planning and post-operative follow-up. In this review, we discuss the indications, techniques, post-operative imaging appearance, and key reporting elements of commonly performed osteotomies, supported by comprehensive illustrative cases.

Inconsistencies in measuring glenoid version in shoulder arthroplasty: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Glenoid version is a critical anatomic parameter relied upon by many surgeons to inform preoperative planning for shoulder arthroplasty. Advancements in imaging technology have prompted measurements of glenoid version on various imaging modalities with different techniques. However, discrepancies in how glenoid version is measured within the literature have not been well characterized.

METHODS

A literature search was performed by querying PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Cochrane computerized databases from their inception through December 2023 to identify studies that assessed the relationship between preoperative glenoid version and at least one clinical or radiologic outcome following shoulder arthroplasty. Study quality was assessed via the Methodologic Index for Nonrandomized Studies criteria. Imaging modalities and techniques for measuring glenoid version, along with their association with clinical outcomes, were aggregated.

RESULTS

Among 61 studies encompassing 17,070 shoulder arthroplasties, 27 studies (44.3%) described explicitly how glenoid version was measured. The most common imaging modality to assess preoperative glenoid version was computed tomography (CT) (63.9%), followed by radiography (23%); 11.5% of studies used a combination of imaging modalities within their study cohort. Among the studies using CT, 56.5% utilized two-dimensional (2D) CT, 41.3% utilized three-dimensional (3D) CT, and 2.2% used a combination of 2D and 3D CT. The use of 3D CT increased from 12.5% of studies in 2012-2014 to 25% of studies in 2018-2020 to 52% of studies in 2021-2023 (ptrend = 0.02). Forty-three (70.5%) studies measured postoperative version, most commonly on axillary radiograph (22 [51.2%]); 34.9% of these studies used different imaging modalities to assess pre- and postoperative version.

CONCLUSIONS

This systematic review revealed marked discrepancies in how glenoid version was measured and reported in studies pertaining to shoulder arthroplasty. A temporal trend of increased utilization of 3D CT scans and commercial preoperative planning software was identified. Improved standardization of the imaging modality and technique for measuring glenoid version will enable more rigorous evaluation of its impact on clinical outcomes.

Shoulder Arthroplasty: Preoperative Evaluation and Postoperative Imaging

Shoulder arthroplasty procedures have increased over the past few years. Several different arthroplasty options are available for varying indications, such as humeral head resurfacing, hemiarthroplasty, anatomical total shoulder arthroplasty, and reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, with ongoing modifications of prosthesis components and surgical techniques. Arthroplasty complications are encountered from the acute postoperative period to several years postoperatively. This article reviews the more common types of shoulder arthroplasties: their imaging appearances, multimodality imaging assessments for preoperative planning, and complications.

Posterior shoulder instability

Posterior shoulder instability (PSI) is defined by dynamic, recurrent and symptomatic partial or total loss of posterior joint contact. Anatomic risk factors comprise ligament hyperlaxity, glenoid retroversion or dysplasia, and high horizontal acromial morphology. Associated anatomic lesions comprise labrum lesions, posterior glenoid erosion and/or fracture, and anterior humeral head notching. We distinguish two subcategories of PSI: functional and structural, respectively without and with anatomic lesions. In both categories, there may be anatomic risk factors. Clinically, functional PSI involves reproducible asymptomatic voluntary subluxation or sometimes reproducible involuntary subluxation. Functional PSI implicates impaired external-rotation rotator cuff and scapular stabilizer muscle activity. Treatment is non-operative, by rehabilitation and shoulder pace maker. Structural shoulder instability involves anatomic lesions, often due to iterative microtrauma; pain is the most frequent symptom. It usually concerns young athletic subjects, but the clinical forms of structural and of anterior shoulder instability are not superimposable. Treatment may be surgical; arthroscopic labrum repair is effective in the absence of significant bone lesions, whereas otherwise posterior bone block is the treatment of choice. Surgical treatment of scapular features underlying structural PSI is improved by 3D preoperative planning, cutting guides and dedicated internal fixation systems. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: expert opinion.

Retrospective MRI analysis of 418 adult shoulder joints to assess the physiological morphology of the glenoid in a low-grade osteoarthritic population

BACKGROUND

Due to the difference in size between the humeral head and the glenoid, the shoulder joint is prone to instability. Therefore, the reconstruction of the physiological joint morphology is of great importance in shoulder joint preservation and replacement surgery. The aim of this study was to describe physiological reference parameters for the morphology of the glenoid for the first time.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

MRI images of the shoulder joints of 418 patients (mean age: 50.6 years [± 16.3]) were retrospectively analysed in a low-grade osteoarthritic population. The glenoid distance in coronal (GDc) and axial view (GDa), glenoid inclination (GI) and version (GV) as well as scapula neck length (SNL) were measured. Parameters were studied in association for age, gender, side and degeneration grade.

RESULTS

Mean GDc was 33.4 mm (± 3.6), mean GDa 26.8 mm (± 3.2), mean GI 10.5° (± 6.4), mean GV -0.4 mm (± 5.4) and mean SNL was 33.4 mm (± 4.7). GDa was significant higher in right shoulders (p < 0.001). GDc and GDa showed significant higher mean values in older patients (p < 0.001) and in shoulders with more severe degenerative changes (p < 0.05). While GDc, GDa and SNL were significant larger in male patients (p < 0.001), GI had a higher mean value in female shoulders (p = 0.021).

CONCLUSION

Age, gender and shoulder joint degeneration influence changes in the morphological parameters of the glenoid. These findings have to be considered in shoulder diagnostics and surgery.

CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER

Not applicable.

Open Bankart repair plus inferior capsular shift versus isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair in collision athletes with recurrent anterior shoulder instability: a prospective study

BACKGROUND

Open Bankart repair plus inferior capsular shift and isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair have never been prospectively compared under the concept of glenoid track in collision athletes with recurrent anterior shoulder instability. The aim of this study was to compare the functional outcomes, range of motion, and recurrence rate between these 2 surgical techniques. We hypothesized that open Bankart repair plus inferior capsular shift would provide similar functional outcomes to isolated arthroscopic Bankart repair but with a lower recurrence rate.

METHODS

A prospective cohort study was conducted with 86 collision athletes divided into 2 groups of 43 patients each. All patients had a subcritical glenoid bone loss ≤13.5% and an on-track Hill Sachs lesion. The average follow-up was 66 (60-93) months for the open group and 68 (60-97) months for the arthroscopic group. The primary functional outcomes of each group were evaluated at baseline, 6 months, 1 year and for a minimum of 5 years after surgery. The functional outcomes were also compared between the 2 groups. The assessment tools included the Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) score and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scale (ASES) score. In addition, recurrent instability and range of motion were also evaluated.

RESULTS

In each group, there were significant differences in Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index score and American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons scale score between the pre and postoperative periods. There were no differences between the groups at the end of follow-up (P = .47 and .22). Three dislocations (6.9%) in the open group and 10 dislocations (23.2%) in the arthroscopic group were reported showing significant differences (P = .012). In addition, there were no differences in range of motion between pre and postoperative periods for each group as well as between them.

CONCLUSION

We found no differences in functional outcomes and range of motion between the 2 groups. The recurrence rate was significantly higher in the arthroscopic group. We recommend performing open Bankart repair plus inferior capsular shift as a treatment alternative in collision athletes with recurrent anterior shoulder instability.

Case Report: Custom made 3D implants for glenoid tumor reconstruction should be designed as reverse total shoulder arthroplasty

Background and objectives

Isolated bone tumors of the glenoid are exceedingly rare occurrence and pose a substantial surgical challenge. 3D printing technology has been proved to be a reliable tool to reconstruct complex anatomical part of the skeleton. We initially used this technology to reconstruct the glenoid component of the shoulder in a hemiarthroplasty configuration. We subsequently changed to a reverse shoulder arthroplasty.

Methods

Two patients were reconstructed with a hemiarthroplasty and 2 with a reverse configuration. Patients files were reviewed for radiographic analysis, pain and function scores.

Results

Mean follow-up was 36.44 ± 16.27 months. All patients are alive and disease free. The two patients who benefitted from a hemiarthroplasty demonstrated a rapid deterioration of the proximal humeral articular surface. Given their pain and function scores, they subsequently required revision towards a total shoulder arthroplasty. Following this conversion, one patient presented a shoulder dislocation requiring surgical reintervention. We did not observe any loosening or infection in this short series.

Conclusions

Custom made glenoid reconstruction should be designed as a reverse shoulder arthroplasty given the mechanical constrains on the proximal humerus and the extent of the surgery invariably damaging the suprascapular neurovascular bundle.

Automatic quantification of scapular and glenoid morphology from CT scans using deep learning

OBJECTIVES

To develop and validate an open-source deep learning model for automatically quantifying scapular and glenoid morphology using CT images of normal subjects and patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

First, we used deep learning to segment the scapula from CT images and then to identify the location of 13 landmarks on the scapula, 9 of them to establish a coordinate system unaffected by osteoarthritis-related changes, and the remaining 4 landmarks on the glenoid cavity to determine the glenoid size and orientation in this scapular coordinate system. The glenoid version, glenoid inclination, critical shoulder angle, glenopolar angle, glenoid height, and glenoid width were subsequently measured in this coordinate system. A 5-fold cross-validation was performed to evaluate the performance of this approach on 60 normal/non-osteoarthritic and 56 pathological/osteoarthritic scapulae.

RESULTS

The Dice similarity coefficient between manual and automatic scapular segmentations exceeded 0.97 in both normal and pathological cases. The average error in automatic scapular and glenoid landmark positioning ranged between 1 and 2.5 mm and was comparable between the automatic method and human raters. The automatic method provided acceptable estimates of glenoid version (R2 = 0.95), glenoid inclination (R2 = 0.93), critical shoulder angle (R2 = 0.95), glenopolar angle (R2 = 0.90), glenoid height (R2 = 0.88) and width (R2 = 0.94). However, a significant difference was found for glenoid inclination between manual and automatic measurements (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This open-source deep learning model enables the automatic quantification of scapular and glenoid morphology from CT scans of patients with glenohumeral osteoarthritis, with sufficient accuracy for clinical use.

Shoulder MRI parameters in anticipating anterior shoulder dislocation: Are they a reliable and reproducible tool in clinical practice?

BACKGROUND

Anterior shoulder dislocation (ASD) is a frequently observed musculoskeletal injury that is often encountered in the context of sports activities or as a result of trauma. Several magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) parameters have been previously investigated for the purpose of characterizing the anatomical features, which could potentially be responsible for the episodes of instability. These measurements have the potential to identify patients who are susceptible to dislocation. Consequently, ensuring the reliability and consistency of these measurements is crucial in the diagnosis and the management of athletic or traumatic shoulder injuries.

METHODS

A group of four students, who had no previous experience in reading MRI series, were selected to perform radiographic measurements on specific parameters of MRI scans. These parameters were glenoid version, glenoid depth, glenoid width, humeral head diameter, humeral containing angle, and the ratio of humeral head diameter to glenoid diameter. The four participants conducted two distinct readings on a total of 28 sets of shoulder MRI scans. Simultaneously, the aforementioned measures were assessed by a consultant shoulder surgeon.

RESULTS

A total of 1512 measurements were categorized into nine sets: eight from students' measurements (two per student) and one from the consultant. Intra-rater reliability assessed by the intra-class correlation (ICC) test indicated excellent or good reliability for all parameters (p < 0.05), with glenoid depth showing the highest (0.925) and humeral-containing angles the lowest (0.675) ICC value. Inter-rater correlation, also evaluated using ICC, demonstrated strong correlation (p < 0.05), with glenoid diameter having the highest ICC score (0.935) and glenoid depth the lowest (0.849). Agreement analysis, expressed by Cohen's Kappa test, revealed substantial agreement (p < 0.05) for all parameters, with humeral head diameter having the highest agreement (0.90) and humeral-containing angle the lowest (0.73).

CONCLUSION

In this study, intra- and inter-rater MRI parameters are substantially concordant. Credibility comes from these reliability and agreement analyses' statistical significance. Glenoid diameter and depth are the most reliable intrarater and interrater, respectively. Best agreement was with the humeral-containing angle. These data demonstrate repeatability and clinical relevance.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV.

Patient-specific implants in reverse shoulder arthroplasty

Reverse total shoulder arthroplasty (RTSA) is widely popular among shoulder surgeons and patients, and its prevalence has increased dramatically in recent years. With this increased use, the indicated pathologies associated with RTSA are more likely to be encountered, and challenging patient presentations are more likely to be seen. One prominent challenging presentation is RTSA patients with severe glenoid bone loss. Several techniques with varying degrees of invasiveness, including excessive reaming, alternate centerline, bone grafting, and patient-specific implants (PSIs), have been developed to treat patients with this presentation. PSI treatment uses a three-dimensional reconstruction of a computed tomography scan to design a prosthetic implant or component customized to the patient's glenoid morphology, allowing compensation for any significant bone loss. The novelty of this technology implies a paucity of available literature, and although many studies show that PSIs have good potential for solving challenging shoulder problems, some studies have reported questionable and equivocal outcomes. Additional research is needed to explore the indications, outcomes, techniques, and cost-efficiency of this technology to help establish its role in current treatment guidelines and strategies.

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis: what the surgeon needs from the radiologist

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GHOA) is a widely prevalent disease with increasing frequency due to population aging. Both clinical manifestations and radiography play key roles in the initial diagnosis, staging, and management decisions. Radiographic disease progression evaluation is performed using validated staging systems, such as Kellgren and Lawrence, Samilson, and Hamada. For young patients with mild to moderate GHOA and failed conservative treatment, arthroscopic preservation surgery (APS) is usually considered. Older patients and those with severe GHOA benefit from different types of arthroplasties. Preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is essential for APS surgical planning, as it maps repairable labral, cartilage, and rotator cuff lesions. For arthroplasty planning, the status of glenoid cartilage and intactness of rotator cuff as well as glenoid morphology represent key factors guiding the decision regarding the most suitable hardware design, whether resurfacing, partial, total, or reverse joint replacement. Pre-surgical MRI or alternatively computed tomography arthrogram is employed to evaluate the cartilage and rotator cuff. Finally, three-dimensional computed tomography (3D CT) is indicated to optimally assess the glenoid morphology (to determine Walch classification, version, inclination, and bone loss) and analyze the necessity for glenoid osteotomy or graft augmentation to correct the glenoid structural abnormalities for future success and longevity of the shoulder implants or chosen constructs. Understanding the purpose of each imaging and treatment modality allows more efficient image interpretation. This article reviews the above concepts and details what a surgeon needs from a radiologist and could benefit from accurate reporting of preoperative imaging studies.

Comparing bone shape models from deep learning processing of magnetic resonance imaging to computed tomography-based models

Background

The purpose of this study was to develop a deep learning approach to automatically segment the scapular bone on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) images and to compare the accuracy of these three-dimensional (3D) models with that of 3D computed tomography (CT).

Methods

Fifty-five patients with high-resolution 3D fat-saturated T2 MRI were retrospectively identified. The underlying pathology included rotator cuff tendinopathy and tears, shoulder instability, and impingement. Two experienced musculoskeletal researchers manually segmented the scapular bone. Five cross-validation training and validation splits were generated to independently train two-dimensional (2D) and 3D models using a convolutional neural network approach. Model performance was evaluated using the Dice similarity coefficient (DSC). All models with DSC > 0.70 were ensembled and used for the test set, which consisted of four patients with matching high-resolution MRI and CT scans. Clinically relevant glenoid measurements, including glenoid height, width, and retroversion, were calculated for two of the patients. Paired t-tests and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests were used to compare the DSC of the models.

Results

The 2D and 3D models achieved a best DSC of 0.86 and 0.82, respectively, with no significant difference observed. Augmentation of imaging data significantly improved 3D but not 2D model performance. In comparing clinical measurements of 3D MRI and CT, there was a mean difference ranging from 1.29 mm to 3.46 mm and 0.05° to 7.47°.

Conclusion

We have presented a fully automatic, deep learning-based strategy for extracting scapular shape from a high-resolution MRI scan. Further developments of this technology have the potential to allow for surgeons to obtain all clinically relevant information from MRI scans and reduce the need for multiple imaging studies for patients with shoulder pathology.

Current Concepts in the Measurement of Glenohumeral Bone Loss

PURPOSE

The extent of glenohumeral bone loss seen in anterior shoulder dislocations plays a major role in guiding surgical management of these patients. The need for accurate and reliable preoperative assessment of bone loss on imaging studies is therefore of paramount importance to orthopedic surgeons. This article will focus on the tools that are available to clinicians for quantifying glenoid bone loss with a focus on emerging trends and research in order to describe current practices.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent evidence supports the use of 3D CT as the most optimal method for quantifying bone loss on the glenoid and humerus. New trends in the use of 3D and ZTE MRI represent exciting alternatives to CT imaging, although they are not widely used and require further investigation. Contemporary thinking surrounding the glenoid track concept and the symbiotic relationship between glenoid and humeral bone loss on shoulder stability has transformed our understanding of these lesions and has inspired a new focus of study for radiologists and orthopedist alike. Although a number of different advanced imaging modalities are utilized to detect and quantify glenohumeral bone loss in practice, the current literature supports 3D CT imaging to provide the most reliable and accurate assessments. The emergence of the glenoid track concept for glenoid and humeral head bone loss has inspired a new area of study for researchers that presents exciting opportunities for the development of a deeper understanding of glenohumeral instability in the future. Ultimately, however, the heterogeneity of literature, which speaks to the diverse practices that exist across the world, limits any firm conclusions from being drawn.

Update on Shoulder Arthroplasties with Emphasis on Imaging

Shoulder pain and dysfunction may significantly impact quality of life. If conservative measures fail, advanced disease is frequently treated with shoulder arthroplasty, which is currently the third most common joint replacement surgery following the hip and knee. The main indications for shoulder arthroplasty include primary osteoarthritis, post-traumatic arthritis, inflammatory arthritis, osteonecrosis, proximal humeral fracture sequelae, severely dislocated proximal humeral fractures, and advanced rotator cuff disease. Several types of anatomic arthroplasties are available, such as humeral head resurfacing and hemiarthroplasties, as well as total anatomic arthroplasties. Reverse total shoulder arthroplasties, which reverse the normal ball-and-socket geometry of the shoulder, are also available. Each of these arthroplasty types has specific indications and unique complications in addition to general hardware-related or surgery-related complications. Imaging-including radiography, ultrasonography, computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging, and, occasionally, nuclear medicine imaging-has a key role in the initial pre-operative evaluation for shoulder arthroplasty, as well as in post-surgical follow-up. This review paper aims to discuss important pre-operative imaging considerations, including rotator cuff evaluation, glenoid morphology, and glenoid version, as well as to review post-operative imaging of the various types of shoulder arthroplasties, to include normal post-operative appearances as well as imaging findings of complications.

Imaging Posterior Instability of the Shoulder

Posterior instability of the shoulder is much less common than anterior instability with a clinical presentation that is often less obvious, making the diagnosis more challenging and more easily missed. We describe the imaging findings of posterior instability so the radiologist can make the diagnosis and provide a detailed description, enabling the surgeon to make more informed decisions regarding management and surgery.

Glenoid Bone Loss Determination: Validity and Reliability of the Constellation Technique Versus the Sagittal Best Fit Circle Technique

OBJECTIVE

To propose a new method for glenoid bone loss measurement, the constellation technique (CST); determine its reliability and accuracy; and compare the validity of CST with that of the conventional technique (CVT) and standard measurements for ratio calculation.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty shoulders with intact glenoids and no glenohumeral instability and arthritis underwent CT scans. Simulated osteotomies were conducted on the 3D models of glenoids at two cutting locations, expressed as clock face times (2:30-4:20; 1:30-5:00). Two experienced surgeons compared three methods for glenoid bone loss measurement; CVT (best-fit circle), CST ('5S' steps), and standard measurement. Eight undergraduates remeasured five randomly chosen shoulders with moderate to severe bone loss. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated for raters.

RESULTS

With a defect range between 2:30 and 4:20, all 60 glenoids demonstrated minimal bone loss (< 15%); while between 1:30 and 5:00, 42 shoulders were with moderate bone loss (15-20%), and 18 shoulders with severe bone loss (≥ 20%). For experienced raters, no significant differences were noted between protocos for all categories of bone loss (p ≥ 0.051), with good inter- and intraobserver reliability indicated by ICC. For novice raters, post hoc Tukey analysis found that CST was more accurate in one patient with a standard mean bone loss of 23.2% ± 1.9% compared with CVT.

CONCLUSION

The CST turned the key step of glenoid defect evaluation from deciding an en face view to determining the glenoid inferior rim. The protocol is simple, accurate, and reproducible, especially for novice raters.

Cystic lesions of the humeral head on magnetic resonance imaging: a pictorial review

Cystic lesions of the humeral head are commonly encountered on routine shoulder magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Differential diagnoses include degenerative lesions, calcific tendinitis with osseous involvement, perianchor cysts, abscesses and less often, tumours. Degenerative lesions, including subcortical and subchondral cysts, are the most commonly encountered. These may be associated with rotator cuff disease and degenerative joint diseases or considered part of ageing depending on the location of the cystic lesions. For instance, cysts of the bare area of the humeral head are considered benign age-related entities, whereas cysts of the greater or lesser tuberosity may herald rotator cuff disease. Infectious lesions, particularly osteomyelitis and intraosseous (Brodie’s) abscesses, are intramedullary in location and should be suspected in the context of clinical features such as fever and radiological features such as the penumbra sign. Perianchor cysts are postoperative lesions associated with the use of suture anchors in surgeries such as rotator cuff tear repairs. They generally self-resolve over 18 to 24 months. On MRI, the distribution, morphology, and signal characteristics can help point towards a specific diagnosis. The patient’s demographic, clinical presentation, and past surgical history can be discriminatory. Knowledge of different cystic lesions in the humeral head and underlying aetiology can be useful in helping the radiologist develop a more thorough search pattern for associated conditions. Determining the underlying cause of cysts can have important implications on management, such as when differentiating perianchor cysts from infection. This pictorial review outlines the differential diagnoses of humeral head cysts on MRI and provides a diagnostic approach for the radiologist.

Shoulder Osteoarthritis

Glenohumeral osteoarthritis has proven to be a major contributor to shoulder joint pain and dysfunction in the elderly. There are several conditions about the shoulder that contribute to the development of glenohumeral osteoarthritis, which includes traumatic injuries, rotator cuff pathology, glenohumeral instability, glenoid dysplasia, and osteonecrosis. When glenohumeral osteoarthritis pain is refractory to conservative treatment, intra-articular injections and surgery can be performed. The radiologist should be aware of the varying types of shoulder arthroplasties, what preoperative findings influence that decision and the expected postoperative appearance of the differing components.

Glenoid Version Assessment When the CT Field of View Does Not Permit the Friedman Method: The Robertson Method

Background:

To improve spatial resolution, current clinical shoulder cross-sectional imaging studies reduce the field of view of the shoulder, excluding the medial scapula border and preventing glenoid version measurement according to the Friedman method.

Purpose:

To evaluate a method to accurately and reliably measure glenoid version on cross-sectional shoulder images when the medial scapula border is not included in the field of view, and to establish measurements equivalent to the Friedman method.

Study Design:

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods:

Sixty-five scapulae underwent computed tomography (CT) scanning with an optimal shoulder CT-positioning protocol. Glenoid version was measured on CT images of the full scapula using the Friedman method. We developed a measurement method (named the Robertson method) based on the glenoid vault version from partial scapula images, with a correction angle subtracted from the articular-surface-glenoid vault measurement. Comparison with the Friedman method defined the accuracy of the Robertson method. Three observers tested inter- and intraobserver reliability of the Robertson method. Accuracy was statistically evaluated with t tests and reliability with the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC).

Results:

The statistical distribution of glenoid version was similar to published data,–0.5° ± 3° [mean ± SD]. The initial measurement using the Robertson method resulted in a more retroverted angle compared with the Friedman method, and a correction angle of 7° was then applied. After this adjustment, the difference between the 2 methods was nonsignificant (0.1° ± 4°; P > .65). Reliability of the Robertson method was excellent, as the interrater ICC was 0.77, the standard error of measurement (SEM) was 1.1° with P < .001. The intrarater ICC ranged between 0.84 and 0.92, the SEM ranged between 0.9° and 1.2° with P < .01.

Conclusion:

A validated glenoid version measurement method is now available for current clinical shoulder CT protocols that reliably create Friedman-equivalent values.

Clinical Relevance:

Friedman-equivalent values may be made from common clinical CTs of the shoulder and compared with prior and future Friedman measurements of the scapula.

Posterior Glenoid Osteotomy With Capsulolabral Repair Improves Resistance Forces in a Critical Glenoid Bone Loss Model

Background:

There is no widespread consensus on the surgical treatment of posterior shoulder instability with critical posterior glenoid bone loss.

Hypothesis:

That opening posterior glenoid wedge osteotomy with soft tissue repair would improve the resistance forces of instability when compared with soft tissue repair alone in the setting of 20% critical bone lose.

Study Design:

Controlled laboratory study.

Methods:

Native glenoid retroversion was measured on 9 shoulders using computed tomography (CT) scans. The humerus was potted in 90° of forward flexion and 30° of internal rotation relative to the scapula, and a posterior dislocation was performed to create a posterior capsulolabral injury model. The specimens were each taken through a fixed sequence of testing: (1) posteroinferior capsulolabral tear, (2) no glenoid bone loss with posteroinferior capsulolabral repair, (3) 20% posterior glenoid bone loss with posteroinferior capsulolabral repair, and (4) 20% glenoid bone loss with posterior glenoid opening wedge osteotomy and posteroinferior capsulolabral repair. Bone loss was created using a sagittal saw. The resultant peak forces with 1 cm of posterior translation were measured. A 1-way repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to compare mean force values.

Results:

After the initial dislocation event, all shoulders had a resultant posterior capsulolabral injury. The resulting labral injury was extended from 6- to 9-o’clock in all specimens to homogenize the extent of injury. Repairing the capsulolabral complex in the 20% posterior glenoid bone loss group did not result in a statistically significant increase in resistance force compared with the labral deficient group (34.1 vs 22.2 N; P = .068). When 20% posterior bone loss was created, the posterior glenoid osteotomy with capsulolabral repair was significantly stronger (43.8 N) than the posterior repair alone both with (34.1 N) and without (31.8 N) bone loss (P = .008 and .045, respectively).

Conclusion:

In the setting of critical posterior glenoid bone loss, an opening wedge posterior glenoid osteotomy with capsulolabral repair improved resistance to posterior humeral translation significantly compared with capsulolabral repair alone.

Clinical Relevance:

The results of this biomechanical cadaveric study may aid in surgical planning for this complex patient population.

Magnetic resonance arthrography in patients with multidirectional instability: could inferior capsulsar width be considered the cornerstone in the diagnosis of non-traumatic shoulder instability?

OBJECTIVES

To provide quantitative anatomical parameters in patients with and without non-traumatic multidirectional instability using MR arthrography (MR-a).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and seventy-six MR-a performed from January 2020 to March 2021 were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were divided according to the presence of clinically diagnosed multidirectional shoulder instability (MDI). Each MR-a was performed immediately after intra-articular injection of 20 ml of gadolinium using the anterior approach. The width of the axillary recess, the width of the rotator interval, and the circumference of the glenoid were measured by three independent radiologists, choosing the average value of the measurements. The difference between the mean values of each of the three parameters between the two study groups was then assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were included in the study (20 in the MDI group, 17 in the control group). The mean axillary recess width in the MDI group was significantly greater than in the control group (t(33) = 3.15, p = .003); rotator interval width and glenoid circumference measurements were not significantly different (t(35) = 1.75, p = .08 and t(30) = 0,51, p = .6, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Inferior capsular redundancy may be an important predisposing factor in MDI, while glenoid circumference is not related to MDI. The relationship between the width of the rotator interval and shoulder instability remains debated.

3D MRI of the Shoulder

Magnetic resonance imaging provides a comprehensive evaluation of the shoulder including the rotator cuff muscles and tendons, glenoid labrum, long head biceps tendon, and glenohumeral and acromioclavicular joint articulations. Most institutions use two-dimensional sequences acquired in all three imaging planes to accurately evaluate the many important structures of the shoulder. Recently, the addition of three-dimensional (3D) acquisitions with 3D reconstructions has become clinically feasible and helped improve our understanding of several important pathologic conditions, allowing us to provide added value for referring clinicians. This article briefly describes techniques used in 3D imaging of the shoulder and discusses applications of these techniques including measuring glenoid bone loss in anterior glenohumeral instability. We also review the literature on routine 3D imaging for the evaluation of common shoulder abnormalities as 3D imaging will likely become more common as imaging software continues to improve.