Abstract
Glenoid concavity is a crucial factor for glenohumeral stability. However, the distribution of this stability-related parameter has not been focused on in anatomical studies. In this retrospective study, computed tomography (CT) data and tactile measurements of n = 27 human cadaveric glenoids were analyzed with respect to concavity. For this purpose, the bony and osteochondral shoulder stability ratio (BSSR/OSSR) were determined based on the radius and depth of the glenoid shape in eight directions. Various statistical tests were performed for the comparison of directional concavity and analysis of the relationship between superoinferior and anteroposterior concavity. The results proved that glenoid concavity is the least distinctive in anterior, posterior, and anterosuperior direction but increases significantly toward the superior, anteroinferior, and posteroinferior glenoid. The OSSR showed significantly higher concavity than the BSSR for most of the directions considered. Moreover, the anteroposterior concavity is linearly correlated with superoinferior concavity. The nonuniform distribution of concavity indicates directions with higher stability provided by the anatomy. The linear relationship between anteroposterior and superoinferior concavity may motivate future research using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data to optimize clinical decision-making toward more personalized treatment of glenoid bone loss.
Highlights
The glenohumeral morphology enables the shoulder to be the most mobile joint in the human body
osteochondral shoulder stability ratio (OSSR) showed a significant increase from P to PS (p = 0.02), from PI to I (p < 0.001) as well as from AI to I (p = 0.04)
No significant differences were found between AS and A for bony shoulder stability ratio (BSSR) and OSSR, and for BSSR measurements between AI and I, as well as between P and PS
Summary
The glenohumeral morphology enables the shoulder to be the most mobile joint in the human body. Moroder et al concluded that the biomechanical effect of a bony defect depends on intraindividual differences in concavity [5] They challenged the current concept of a one- or two-dimensional defect size measurement for decision making in the treatment of bony glenoid defects. Instead, they proposed that the choice of surgical treatment should be optimized in the future by taking the three-dimensional concavity into account. They proposed that the choice of surgical treatment should be optimized in the future by taking the three-dimensional concavity into account In this way, evaluation of the patient-specific concavity may provide a more precise assessment of glenohumeral stability than is intended with the defect size measurement in the treatment of bony glenoid defects
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
