A novel method for localization of the maximum glenoid bone defect during reverse shoulder arthroplasty

JSES International

Aaron J. Bois, MD, MSc, FRCSC¹  Graeme T. Harding, MASc, MD, FRCSC²  Martin J. Bouliane, MD, FRCSC³ 

[1] Corresponding author: Graeme T. Harding, MASc, MD, FRCSC, CORe Main Office, 6-110 Clinical Sciences Building, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G3, Canada.;Division of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, Canada;Section of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada;

关键词: Reverse shoulder arthroplasty;    Glenoid bone defect;    Glenoid deformity;    Glenohumeral osteoarthritis;    Rotator cuff arthropathy;    Maximum glenoid defect;   

DOI  :  

来源: DOAJ

【 摘 要 】

Background: Management of glenoid bone defects during reverse shoulder arthroplasty remains a challenge. The aim of our study was to preoperatively localize the maximal depth of glenoid bone defects in relation to glenoid reaming. Methods: Thirty preoperative shoulder computed tomography scans were collected. Three assessors created standardized surgical plans, using 3-dimensional (3D) computed tomography–based Blueprint planning software in which the reaming axis was held constant at zero degrees of version and inclination. Each plan resulted in a 2-dimensional (2D) image of the reamer’s contact on the glenoid and a corresponding 3D representation of the glenoid bone defect. The position of the maximum glenoid defect was localized on both the 2D and 3D images. Descriptive statistics were calculated. The correlation between angles from 2D and 3D images was assessed, and intraclass correlation was used to assess inter-rater and intrarater reliability. Results: Twenty-eight patients were included. The overall mean difference between 2D and 3D angles was 5.4° (standard deviation 5.2°). The correlation between 2D and 3D angles was almost perfect. Intraclass correlation results demonstrated near-perfect agreement. The maximal glenoid defect was within 5% of a circle (or +/- 9°) from perpendicular to the high-side ream line in 85.1% of comparisons and was within 10% of a circle in 97.6% of comparisons. Conclusion: Using Blueprint planning software, we have demonstrated with almost perfect agreement among 3 assessors that when the reaming axis is held constant, the maximum glenoid bone defect is reliably located perpendicular to the glenoid ream line.

【 授权许可】

Unknown