Effects of glenoid inclination and acromion index on humeral head translation and glenoid articular cartilage strain.
- Engelhardt C Laboratory of Biomechanical Orthopedics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
- Farron A Service of Orthopedics and Traumatology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
- Becce F Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
- Place N Institute of Sports Sciences, Faculty of Biology Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland; Department of Physiology, Faculty of Biology Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
- Pioletti DP Laboratory of Biomechanical Orthopedics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
- Terrier A Laboratory of Biomechanical Orthopedics, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland. Electronic address: alexandre.terrier@epfl.ch.
- 2016-08-15
Published in:
- Journal of shoulder and elbow surgery. - 2017
Glenoid inclination
acromion index
critical shoulder angle
glenohumeral osteoarthritis
humeral head translation
musculoskeletal model
Adult
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biomechanical Phenomena
Body Weights and Measures
Cartilage, Articular
Female
Humans
Humeral Head
Male
Middle Aged
Osteoarthritis
Patient-Specific Modeling
Range of Motion, Articular
Reference Values
Rotator Cuff Injuries
Scapula
Shoulder Joint
Stress, Mechanical
Young Adult
English
BACKGROUND
Previous clinical studies have reported associations between glenoid inclination (GI), the acromion index (AI), and the critical shoulder angle (CSA) on the one hand and the occurrence of glenohumeral osteoarthritis and supraspinatus tendon tears on the other hand. The objective of this work was to analyze the correlations and relative importance of these different anatomic parameters.
METHODS
Using a musculoskeletal shoulder model developed from magnetic resonance imaging scans of 1 healthy volunteer, we varied independently GI from 0° to 15° and AI from 0.5 to 0.8. The corresponding CSA varied from 20.9° to 44.1°. We then evaluated humeral head translation and critical strain volume in the glenoid articular cartilage at 60° of abduction in the scapular plane. These values were correlated with GI, AI, and CSA.
RESULTS
Humeral head translation was positively correlated with GI (R = 0.828, P < .0001), AI (R = 0.539, P < .0001), and CSA (R = 0.964, P < .0001). Glenoid articular cartilage strain was also positively correlated with GI (R = 0.489, P = .0004) but negatively with AI (R = -0.860, P < .0001) and CSA (R = -0.285, P < .0473).
CONCLUSIONS
The biomechanical shoulder model is consistent with clinical observations. The prediction strength of CSA is confirmed for humeral head translation and thus presumably for rotator cuff tendon tears, whereas the AI seems more appropriate to evaluate the risk of glenohumeral osteoarthritis caused by excessive articular cartilage strain. As a next step, we should corroborate these theoretical findings with clinical data.
Previous clinical studies have reported associations between glenoid inclination (GI), the acromion index (AI), and the critical shoulder angle (CSA) on the one hand and the occurrence of glenohumeral osteoarthritis and supraspinatus tendon tears on the other hand. The objective of this work was to analyze the correlations and relative importance of these different anatomic parameters.
METHODS
Using a musculoskeletal shoulder model developed from magnetic resonance imaging scans of 1 healthy volunteer, we varied independently GI from 0° to 15° and AI from 0.5 to 0.8. The corresponding CSA varied from 20.9° to 44.1°. We then evaluated humeral head translation and critical strain volume in the glenoid articular cartilage at 60° of abduction in the scapular plane. These values were correlated with GI, AI, and CSA.
RESULTS
Humeral head translation was positively correlated with GI (R = 0.828, P < .0001), AI (R = 0.539, P < .0001), and CSA (R = 0.964, P < .0001). Glenoid articular cartilage strain was also positively correlated with GI (R = 0.489, P = .0004) but negatively with AI (R = -0.860, P < .0001) and CSA (R = -0.285, P < .0473).
CONCLUSIONS
The biomechanical shoulder model is consistent with clinical observations. The prediction strength of CSA is confirmed for humeral head translation and thus presumably for rotator cuff tendon tears, whereas the AI seems more appropriate to evaluate the risk of glenohumeral osteoarthritis caused by excessive articular cartilage strain. As a next step, we should corroborate these theoretical findings with clinical data.
- Language
-
- English
- Open access status
- bronze
- Identifiers
-
- DOI 10.1016/j.jse.2016.05.031
- PMID 27522337
- Persistent URL
- https://sonar.ch/global/documents/181600
Statistics
Document views: 23
File downloads:
- fulltext.pdf: 0