Posterior open wedge osteotomy of the scapula neck for the treatment of advanced shoulder osteoarthritis with posterior head migration in young patients

Gender-specific factors influencing the glenoid version and reference values for it

BACKGROUND

Glenoid version is an important factor in the evaluation of shoulder stability and shoulder pathologies. However, there are neither established reference values nor known factors that influence the glenoid version, even though valid reference values are needed for diagnostic and orthopaedic surgery like corrective osteotomy and total or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (TSA/RSA). The aim of our population-based study was to identify factors influencing the glenoid version and to establish reference values from a large-scale population cohort.

RESULTS

Our study explored the glenoid versions in a large sample representing the general adult population. We investigated 3004 participants in the population-based Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP). Glenoid version was measured for both shoulders via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Associations with the glenoid version were calculated for sex, age, body height, body weight and BMI. The reference values for glenoid version in the central European population range between -9° and 7.5°, while multiple factors are associated with the glenoid version.

CONCLUSION

To achieve a reliable interpretation prior to orthopaedic surgery, sex- and age-adjusted reference values are proposed.

Differences in Osseous Shoulder Morphology, Scapulothoracic Orientation, and Muscle Volume in Patients With Constitutional Static Posterior Shoulder Instability (Type C1) Compared With Healthy Controls

BACKGROUND

Constitutional static posterior humeral decentering (type C1 according to ABC Classification) has been recognized as a pre-osteoarthritic deformity that may lead to early-onset posterior decentering osteoarthritis at a young age. Therefore, it is important to identify possible associations of this pathologic shoulder condition to find more effective treatment options.

PURPOSE

To perform a comprehensive analysis of all parameters reported to be associated with a C1 shoulder-including the osseous shoulder morphology, scapulothoracic orientation, and the muscle volume of the shoulder girdle in a single patient cohort.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.

METHODS

A retrospective, comparative study was conducted analyzing 17 C1 shoulders in 10 patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with the complete depiction of the trunk from the base of the skull to the iliac crest, including both humeri. The mean age of the patients was 33.5 years, and all patients were men. To measure and compare the osseous shoulder morphology (glenoid version, glenoid offset, humeral torsion, anterior acromial coverage, posterior acromial coverage, posterior acromial height, and posterior acromial tilt) and scapulothoracic orientation (scapular protraction, scapular internal rotation, scapular upward rotation, scapular translation, scapular tilt, and thoracic kyphosis), these patients were matched 1 to 4 according their age, sex, and affected side with shoulder-healthy patients who had received positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography. To measure and compare the muscle volume of the shoulder girdle (subscapularis, infraspinatus/teres minor, supraspinatus, trapezius, deltoid, latissimus dorsi/teres major, pectoralis major, and pectoralis minor), patients were matched 1 to 2 with patients who had received PET-MRI. Patients with visible pathologies of the upper extremities were excluded.

RESULTS

The C1 group had a significantly higher glenoid retroversion, increased anterior glenoid offset, reduced humeral retrotorsion, increased anterior acromial coverage, reduced posterior acromial coverage, increased posterior acromial height, and increased posterior acromial tilt compared with controls (P < .05). Decreased humeral retrotorsion showed significant correlation with higher glenoid retroversion (r = -0.742; P < .001) and higher anterior glenoid offset (r = -0.757; P < .001). Significant differences were found regarding less scapular upward rotation, less scapular tilt, and less thoracic kyphosis in the C1 group (P < .05). The muscle volume of the trapezius and deltoid was significantly higher in the C1 group (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with C1 shoulders differ from healthy controls regarding osseous scapular and humeral morphology, scapulothoracic orientation, and shoulder girdle muscle distribution. These differences may be crucial in understanding the delicate balance of glenohumeral centering.

Arthroscopic Posterior Glenoid Osteotomy

Management of posterior shoulder instability in patients with excessive glenoid retroversion can be challenging. However, a corrective posterior glenoid osteotomy is an option. Although various open techniques are available, minimally invasive and arthroscopy surgery are the most advantageous. This study describes the feasibility and safety of an arthroscopic posterior open wedge glenoid osteotomy using an autologous scapular spine graft along with additional posterior capsulolabral complex reattachment. This procedure is a viable option for patients with symptomatic posterior shoulder instability.

Posterior stability of the shoulder depends on acromial anatomy: a biomechanical study of 3D surface models

PURPOSE

Primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis is commonly associated with static posterior subluxation of the humeral head. Scapulae with static/dynamic posterior instability feature a superiorly and horizontally oriented acromion. We investigated whether the acromion acts as a restraint to posterior humeral translation.

METHODS

Five three-dimensional (3D) printed scapula models were biomechanically tested. A statistical shape mean model (SSMM) of the normal scapula of 40 asymptomatic shoulders was fabricated. Next, a SSMM of scapular anatomy associated with posterior subluxation was generated using data of 20 scapulae ("B1"). This model was then used to generate three models of surgical correction: glenoid version, acromial orientation, and acromial and glenoid orientation. With the joint axially loaded (100N) and the humerus stabilized, an anterior translation force was applied to the scapula in 35°, 60° and 75° of glenohumeral flexion. Translation (mm) was measured.

RESULTS

In the normal scapula, the humerus translates significantly less to contact with the acromion compared to all other configurations (p < .000 for all comparisons; i.e. 35°: "normal" 8,1 mm (± 0,0) versus "B1" 11,9 mm (± 0,0) versus "B1 Acromion Correction" 12,2 mm (± 0,2) versus "B1 Glenoid Correction" 13,3 mm (± 0,1)). Restoration of normal translation was only achieved with correction of glenoid and acromial anatomy (i.e. 75°: "normal" 11 mm (± 0,8) versus "B1 Acromion Correction" 17,5 mm (± 0,1) versus "B1 Glenoid Correction" 19,7 mm (± 1,3) versus "B1 Glenoid + Acromion Correction" 11,5 mm (± 1,1)).

CONCLUSIONS

Persistence or recurrence of static/dynamic posterior instability after correction of glenoid version alone may be related to incomplete restoration of the intrinsic stability that is conferred by a normal acromial anatomy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V

biomechanical study.

Correction of Static Posterior Shoulder Subluxation by Restoring Normal Scapular Anatomy Using Acromion and Glenoid Osteotomies: A Case Report

CASE

A 40-year-old man presented with progressive shoulder pain, associated with static posterior subluxation and mild eccentric glenohumeral osteoarthritis. Compared with a mean statistical shape model of a normal shoulder, the patient's acromion was abnormally high and horizontal, and the glenoid abnormally inclined inferiorly and minimally retroverted. Restoration of normal scapular anatomy using 3-dimensional planned acromial and glenoid osteotomies led to recentering of the joint and full shoulder function up to 24 months postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

The correction of associated acromial and glenoid malformation can revert early static posterior subluxation of the shoulder. Whether successful recentering prevents progression of osteoarthritis remains to be established.

Patient-specific risk profile associated with early-onset primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder: is it really primary?

INTRODUCTION

Although age is considered to be the major risk factor of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis (GOA), younger population may suffer from degenerative changes of the shoulder joint without evidence of any leading cause. The purpose of this study was to investigate the risk profile in young patients suffering from presumably primary GOA.

METHODS

A consecutive group of 47 patients undergoing primary shoulder arthroplasty for early-onset GOA below the age of 60 years at time of surgery was retrospectively identified and prospectively evaluated. Patients with identifiable cause for GOA (secondary GOA) were excluded. The resulting 32 patients (mean age 52 ± 7 years; 17 male, 15 female) with primary GOA were matched by age (± 3 years) and gender to 32 healthy controls (mean age 53 ± 7 years; 17 male, 15 female). Demographic data and patient-related risk factors were assessed and compared among both groups to identify extrinsic risk factors for primary GOA. Patients were further subdivided into a group with concentric GOA (group A) and a group with eccentric GOA (group B) to perform a subgroup analysis.

RESULTS

Patients had a significantly higher BMI (p = 0.017), were more likely to be smokers (p < 0.001) and to have systematic diseases such as hypertension (p = 0.007) and polyarthritis (p < 0.001) and a higher Shoulder Activity Level (SAL) (p < 0.001) when compared to healthy controls. Furthermore, group B had a significantly higher SAL not only compared to healthy controls but also to group A, including activities such as combat sport (p = 0.048) and weightlifting (p = 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Several patient-specific risk factors are associated with primary GOA in the young population, as well as highly shoulder demanding activities in the development of eccentric GOA. Consequently, a subset of young patients with eccentric primary GOA could in reality be secondary due to a muscular imbalance between internal and external rotators caused by improper weight training.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III, Case-Control study.

Biomechanical Analysis of Posterior Open-Wedge Osteotomy and Glenoid Concavity Reconstruction Using an Implant-Free, J-Shaped Iliac Crest Bone Graft

BACKGROUND

Posterior open-wedge osteotomy and glenoid reconstruction using a J-shaped iliac crest bone graft showed promising clinical results for the treatment of posterior instability with excessive glenoid retroversion and posteroinferior glenoid deficiency.

PURPOSE

To evaluate the biomechanical performance of the posterior J-shaped graft to restore glenoid retroversion and posteroinferior deficiency in a cadaveric shoulder instability model.

STUDY DESIGN

Controlled laboratory study.

METHODS

A posterior glenoid open-wedge osteotomy was performed in 6 fresh-frozen shoulders, allowing the glenoid retroversion to be set at 0°, 10°, and 20°. At each of these 3 preset angles of glenoid retroversion, the following conditions were simulated: (1) intact joint, (2) posterior Bankart lesion, (3) 20% posteroinferior glenoid deficiency, and (4) posterior J-shaped graft (at 0° of retroversion). With the humerus in the Jerk position (60° of glenohumeral anteflexion, 60° of internal rotation), stability was evaluated by measuring posterior humeral head (HH) translation (in mm) and peak translational force (in N) to translate the HH over 25% of the glenoid width. Glenohumeral contact patterns were measured using pressure-sensitive sensors. Fixation of the posterior J-graft was analyzed by recording graft micromovements during 3000 cycles of 5-mm anteroposterior HH translations.

RESULTS

Reconstructing the glenoid with a posterior J-graft to 0° of retroversion significantly increased stability compared with a posterior Bankart lesion and posteroinferior glenoid deficiency in all 3 preset degrees of retroversion (P < .05). There was no significant difference in joint stability comparing the posterior J-graft with an intact joint at 0° of retroversion. The posterior J-graft restored mean contact area and contact pressure comparable with that of the intact condition with 0° of retroversion (222 vs 223 mm2, P = .980; and 0.450 vs 0.550 MPa, P = .203). The mean total graft displacement after 3000 cycles of loading was 43 ± 84 µm, and the mean maximal mediolateral graft bending was 508 ± 488 µm.

CONCLUSION

Biomechanical analysis of the posterior J-graft demonstrated reliable restoration of initial glenohumeral joint stability, normalization of contact patterns comparable with that of an intact shoulder joint with neutral retroversion, and secure initial graft fixation in the cadaveric model.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

This study confirms that the posterior J-graft can restore stability and glenohumeral loading conditions comparable with those of an intact shoulder.

Arthroscopic Posterior Articular Coverage and Shift (PACS) Procedure for Treatment of Preosteoarthritic Constitutional Static Posterior Shoulder Instability (Type C1)

BACKGROUND

Different joint-preserving techniques for treatment of preosteoarthritic, constitutional static (type C1) posterior shoulder instability (PSI) have been proposed, including posterior glenoid open wedge osteotomy and bone graft augmentation. However, the techniques are demanding, the reported complication and reoperation rates are high, and posterior decentering cannot reliably be reversed.

PURPOSE

To assess the clinical and radiological longitudinal outcomes of patients with type C1 PSI after arthroscopic posterior articular coverage and shift (PACS) surgery.

STUDY DESIGN

Case series; Level of evidence, 4.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of a prospective database with longitudinal follow-up including 14 shoulders in 13 patients who underwent an arthroscopic PACS procedure for symptomatic preosteoarthritic constitutional static posterior instability (type C1) with previous failed nonoperative treatment. Patients were clinically evaluated before surgery and at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months postoperatively in terms of satisfaction and pain levels as well as standardized physical examination, Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV), Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index (WOSI) score, Constant score, and Rowe score. Preoperative, postoperative, and follow-up magnetic resonance imaging scans were obtained in all patients. A paired 2-sample t test was used to compare changes in continuous variable parameters over time. Correlation analyses were performed using the Pearson correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

All outcome scores and the pain level improved significantly from preoperatively to postoperatively, and the improvement was sustained over the follow-up period of 2 years (pain level, 6.4 preoperatively vs 3.3 at 2 years, P < .001; SSV, 40 vs 70, P = .001; WOSI, 33 vs 56, P = .001; Constant, 70 vs 79, P = .049; Rowe, 52 vs 76, P < .001). The mean glenohumeral and scapulohumeral subluxation indices were significantly lower in the early postoperative period compared with preoperative measurements (glenohumeral, 52% ± 6% vs 58% ± 10%, P = .02; scapulohumeral, 70% ± 8%; vs 77% ± 9%, P = .002, respectively); however, they returned to baseline values at follow-up (57% ± 7% vs 58% ± 10%, P = .7; 75% ± 6% vs 77% ± 9%, P = .4, respectively). A high scapulohumeral subluxation index, excessive glenoid retroversion, and increased posterior positioning of the humeral head in relation to scapular blade axis and older age were correlated with worse clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Over the follow-up period of 2 years, the PACS procedure significantly improved outcome scores in patients who had preosteoarthritic constitutional static posterior shoulder instability, especially in younger patients with less severe glenoid retroversion and posterior decentering of the humeral head. However, similar to other techniques, the PACS procedure needs to be considered a symptomatic therapy that does not reverse the underlying cause or stop the progressive pathology.

Comprehensive management of posterior shoulder instability: diagnosis, indications, and technique for arthroscopic bone block augmentation

Recurrent posterior glenohumeral instability is an entity that demands a high clinical suspicion and a detailed study for a correct approach and treatment. Its classification must consider its biomechanics, whether it is due to functional muscular imbalance or to structural changes, volition, and intentionality.

Due to its varied clinical presentations and different structural alterations, ranging from capsule-labral lesions and bone defects to glenoid dysplasia and retroversion, the different treatment alternatives available have historically had a high incidence of failure.

A detailed radiographic assessment, with both CT and MRI, with a precise assessment of glenoid and humeral bone defects and of glenoid morphology, is mandatory.

Physiotherapy focused on periscapular muscle reeducation and external rotator strengthening is always the first line of treatment. When conservative treatment fails, surgical treatment must be guided by the structural lesions present, ranging from soft tissue repair to posterior bone block techniques to restore or increase the articular surface.

Bone block procedures are indicated in cases of recurrent posterior instability after the failure of conservative treatment or soft tissue techniques, as well as symptomatic demonstrable nonintentional instability, presence of a posterior glenoid defect >10%, increased glenoid retroversion between 10 and 25°, and posterior rim dysplasia. Bone block fixation techniques that avoid screws and metal allow for satisfactory initial clinical results in a safe and reproducible way.

An algorithm for the approach and treatment of recurrent posterior glenohumeral instability is presented, as well as the author’s preferred surgical technique for arthroscopic posterior bone block.

Long-term results after posterior open glenoid wedge osteotomy for posterior shoulder instability associated with excessive glenoid retroversion

BACKGROUND

Treatment of posterior shoulder instability (PSI) associated with excessive glenoid retroversion is a rare, challenging problem in shoulder surgery. One proposed technique is posterior open wedge glenoid osteotomy to correct excessive glenoid retroversion as described by Scott. However, this operation is rarely performed, and limited long-term outcomes using this approach are available. The goal of this study was to analyze the long-term outcomes of posterior open wedge glenoid osteotomy for PSI associated with excessive glenoid retroversion.

METHODS

Six consecutive patients (7 shoulders) with a mean age of 24 years (range 19-34) were treated with posterior open wedge glenoid osteotomy for PSI associated with a glenoid retroversion greater than 15° and followed up clinically and radiographically at a mean age of 15 years (range 10-19).

RESULTS

Recurrent, symptomatic PSI was observed in 6 of 7 shoulders (86%). One necessitated revision with a posterior (iliac crest) bone block procedure and was rated as a failure and excluded from functional analysis. One patient rated his result as excellent, 3 as good, 1 as fair, and 1 as unsatisfactory. Mean relative Constant Score (CS%) was unchanged from preoperation to final follow-up (CS% = 72%) and pain did not significantly decrease (Constant Score = 7-10 points; P = .969). The mean Subjective Shoulder Value (SSV) improved postoperatively, but with 6 patients the improvement did not reach statistical significance (SSV = 42%-67%, P = .053) and the total Western Ontario Shoulder Instability Index averaged 30% at the final follow-up. Mean glenoid retroversion of all 7 shoulders was corrected from 20° (range 16°-26°) to 3° (range -3° to +8°) (P = .018). In the 5 shoulders with preoperative static posterior subluxation of the humeral head, the humeral head was not recentered. All 7 shoulders showed progression of glenoid arthritic changes.

CONCLUSIONS

Posterior open wedge glenoid osteotomy for PSI associated with excessive glenoid retroversion neither reliably restored shoulder stability nor recentered the joint or prevent progression of osteoarthritis. Alternative treatments for PSI associated with excessive glenoid retroversion have to be developed and evaluated.

Indications and outcomes of glenoid osteotomy for posterior shoulder instability: a systematic review

Background

There is limited evidence examining glenoid osteotomy as a treatment for posterior shoulder instability.

Methods

A search of Medline, Embase, PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials was conducted from the date of origin to 28th November 2019. Nine out of 3,408 retrieved studies met the inclusion criteria and quality was assessed using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies tool.

Results

In 356 shoulders, the main indication for osteotomy was excessive glenoid retroversion (greater than or equal to approximately −10°). The mean preoperative glenoid version was −15° (range, −35° to −5°). Post-operatively, the mean glenoid version was −6° (range, −28° to 13°) and an average correction of 10° (range, −1° to 30°) was observed. Range of motion increased significantly in most studies and all standardized outcome scores (Rowe, Constant–Murley, Oxford instability, Japan Shoulder Society Shoulder Instability Scoring and mean shoulder value) improved significantly with high rates of patient satisfaction (85%). A high complication rate (34%, n = 120) was reported post-surgery, with frequent cases of persistent instability (20%, n = 68) and fractures (e.g., glenoid neck and acromion) (4%, n = 12). However, the revision rate was low (0.6%, n = 2).

Conclusion

Glenoid osteotomy is an appropriate treatment for posterior shoulder instability secondary to excessive glenoid retroversion. However, the high rate of persistent instability should be considered when making treatment decisions. Level of Evidence: Systematic review; Level 4

Subluxation in the Arthritic Shoulder

»

The term "subluxation" means partial separation of the joint surfaces. In the arthritic shoulder, "arthritic glenohumeral subluxation" refers to displacement of the humeral head on the surface of the glenoid.

»

The degree of arthritic glenohumeral subluxation can be measured using radiography with standardized axillary views or computed tomography (CT).

»

Shoulders with a type-B1 or B2 glenoid may show more posterior subluxation on an axillary radiograph that is made with the arm in an elevated position than on a CT scan that is made with the arm at the side.

»

The degree of arthritic glenohumeral subluxation is not closely related to glenoid retroversion.

»

The position of the humeral head with respect to the plane of the scapula is related to glenoid retroversion and is not a measure of glenohumeral subluxation.

»

Studies measuring glenohumeral subluxation before and after arthroplasty should clarify its importance to the clinical outcomes of shoulder reconstruction.

Posterior Open-wedge Osteotomy and Glenoid Concavity Reconstruction Using an Implant-free, J-shaped Iliac Crest Bone Graft in Atraumatic Posterior Instability with Pathologic Glenoid Retroversion and Dysplasia: A Preliminary Report

BACKGROUND

Atraumatic posterior shoulder instability in patients with pathologic glenoid retroversion and dysplasia is an unsolved problem in shoulder surgery.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

In a preliminary study of a small group of patients with atraumatic posterior shoulder instability associated with glenoid retroversion ≥ 15° and glenoid dysplasia who underwent posterior open-wedge osteotomy and glenoid concavity reconstruction using an implant-free, J-shaped iliac crest bone graft, we asked: (1) What proportion of the patients had persistent apprehension? (2) What were the improvements in patient-reported shoulder scores? (3) What were the radiographic findings at short-term follow-up?

METHODS

Between 2016 and 2018, we treated seven patients for atraumatic posterior shoulder instability. We performed this intervention when posterior shoulder instability symptoms were unresponsive to physiotherapy for at least 6 months and when it was associated with glenoid retroversion ≥ 15° and dysplasia of the posteroinferior glenoid. All seven patients had a follow-up examination at a minimum of 2 years. The median (range) age at surgery was 27 years (16 to 45) and the median follow-up was 2.3 years (2 to 3). Apprehension was assessed by a positive posterior apprehension and/or posterior jerk test. Patient-reported shoulder scores were obtained and included the subjective shoulder value, obtained by chart review (and scored with 100% representing a normal shoulder; minimum clinically important difference [MCID] 12%), and the Constant pain scale score (with 15 points representing no pain; MCID 1.5 points). Radiographic measurements included glenohumeral arthropathy and posterior humeral head subluxation, bone graft union, correction of glenoid retroversion and glenoid concavity depth, as well as augmentation of glenoid surface area. All endpoints were assessed by individuals not involved in patient care.

RESULTS

In four of seven patients, posterior apprehension was positive, but none reported resubluxation. The preoperative subjective shoulder value (median [range] 40% [30% to 80%]) and Constant pain scale score (median 7 points [3 to 13]) were improved at latest follow-up (median subjective shoulder value 90% [70% to 100%]; p = 0.02; median Constant pain scale score 15 points [10 to 15]; p = 0.03). Posterior glenoid cartilage erosion was present in four patients (all four had Walch Type B1 glenoids) preoperatively and showed no progression until the final follow-up examination. The median (range) humeral head subluxation index decreased from 69% (54% to 85%) preoperatively to 55% (46% to 67%) postoperatively (p = 0.02), and in two of four patients with preoperative humeral head subluxation (> 65% subluxation), it was reversed to a centered humeral head. CT images showed union in all implant-free, J-shaped iliac crest bone grafts. The median preoperative retroversion was corrected from 16° (15° to 25°) to 0° postoperatively (-5° to 6°; p = 0.02), the median glenoid concavity depth was reconstructed from 0.3 mm (-0.7 to 1.6) preoperatively to 1.2 mm (1.1 to 3.1) postoperatively (p = 0.02), and the median preoperative glenoid surface area was increased by 20% (p = 0.02). No intraoperative or postoperative complications were recorded, and no reoperation was performed or is planned.

CONCLUSION

In this small, retrospective series of patients treated by experienced shoulder surgeons, a posterior J-bone graft procedure was able to reconstruct posterior glenoid morphology, correct glenoid retroversion, and improve posterior shoulder instability associated with pathologic glenoid retroversion and dysplasia, although four of seven patients had persistent posterior apprehension. Although no patients in this small series experienced complications, the size and complexity of this procedure make it likely that as more patients have it, some will develop complications; future studies will need to characterize the frequency and severity of those complications, and we recommend that this procedure be done only by experienced shoulder surgeons. The early results in these seven patients justify further study of this procedure for the proposed indication, but longer term follow-up is necessary to continue to assess whether it is advantageous to combine the reconstruction of posterior glenoid concavity with correction of pathological glenoid retroversion and increasing glenoid surface compared with traditional surgical techniques such as the posterior opening wedge osteotomy or simple posterior bone block procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level IV, therapeutic study.

Muscle volume imbalance may be associated with static posterior humeral head subluxation

BACKGROUND

The transverse force couple (TFC) of the rotator cuff (subscapularis vs. infraspinatus and teres minor muscle) is an important dynamic stabilizer of the shoulder joint in the anterior-posterior direction. In patients with posterior static subluxation of the humeral head (PSSH), decentration of the humeral head posteriorly occurs, which is associated with premature arthritis. We hypothesize that not only pathologic glenoid retroversion but also chronic muscle volume imbalance in the transverse force couple leads to PSSH.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the TFC muscle volumes of 9 patients with symptomatic, atraumatic PSSH, within 8 were treated with glenoid correction osteotomy, was conducted. The imaging data (CT) of 9 patients/10 shoulders of the full scapula and shoulder were analyzed, and the muscle volumes of the subscapularis (SSC), infraspinatus (ISP) and teres minor muscles (TMM) were measured by manually marking the muscle contours on transverse slices and calculating the volume from software. Furthermore, the glenoid retroversion and glenohumeral distance were measured.

RESULTS

The mean glenoid retroversion was - 16° (- 7° to - 31°). The observed mean glenohumeral distance was 4.0 mm (0 to 6.8 mm). Our study population showed a significant muscle volume imbalance between the subscapularis muscle and the infraspinatus and teres minor muscles (192 vs. 170 ml; p = 0.005). There was no significant correlation between the subscapularis muscle volume and the glenohumeral distance (r = 0.068), (p = 0.872).

CONCLUSION

The muscle volume of the SSC in patients with PSSH was significantly higher than the muscle volume of the posterior force couple (ISP and TMM). This novel finding, albeit in a small series of patients, may support the theory that transverse force couple imbalance is associated with PSSH.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 4 - Case series with no comparison group.

Does the posterior glenoid osteotomy reduce the rate of recurrence in patients with posterior shoulder instability - A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Posterior shoulder instability (PSI) is becoming an increasingly recognised condition. A number of different treatment modalities exist to treat PSI including arthroscopic or open surgeries when non-operative treatment has failed. The primary aim of this systematic review was to analyse the rate of recurrent instability after posterior glenoid osteotomy (PGO) for recurrent PSI, while secondary aim was to identify complication rate and the amount of retroversion correction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A review of the online databases MEDLINE and Embase was conducted on 1 November 2019 according to PRISMA guidelines. The review was registered prospectively in the PROSPERO database (Registration No. CRD42020161984). Clinical studies reporting either the recurrence rate, complications or amount of retroversion correction after PGO for PSI were included. The studies were appraised using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies (MINORS) tool.

RESULTS

The search strategy identified 9 studies eligible for inclusion. Of the 9 studies, 4 showed an improvement in retroversion with a mean change in retroversion of 10^o. All 9 studies reported on recurrence rate with an overall rate of 22%. Complications were discussed in only 7 of the studies with overall rate of 18.3%. The most common complication reported in the studies were degenerative changes of the glenohumeral joint (7.3%) and iatrogenic fractures (5.5%).

CONCLUSION

PGO is a viable option in patients with recurrent PSI that have increased retroversion and have failed non-operative or arthroscopic treatment. It does however carry a significant risk of complications.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV; Systematic review.

Postoperative MR Imaging in Shoulder Instability and Intra-articular Damage

MR imaging of the postoperative shoulder after instability surgery is challenging. The radiologist must be familiar with surgical procedures, altered anatomy, and expected postoperative findings for correct interpretation of normal findings versus a true pathology. Artifacts from metallic hardware or abrasions further complicate MR image interpretation, but are reduced with metal artifact reduction techniques. This article focuses on capsulolabral surgery, bone block transfers, and humeral bone loss procedures in patients with shoulder instability and their postoperative imaging evaluation. Surgical procedures and common complications are explained, and normal and pathologic postoperative imaging findings are presented.

Glenoid retroversion is an important factor for humeral head centration and the biomechanics of posterior shoulder stability

PURPOSE

Glenoid retroversion is a known independent risk factor for recurrent posterior instability. The purpose was to investigate progressive angles of glenoid retroversion and their influence on humeral head centration and posterior translation with intact, detached, and repaired posterior labrum in a cadaveric human shoulder model.

METHODS

A total of 10 fresh-frozen human cadaveric shoulders were investigated for this study. After CT- canning, the glenoids were aligned parallel to the floor, with the capsule intact, and the humerus was fixed in 60° of abduction and neutral rotation. Version of the glenoid was created after wedge resection from posterior and fixed with an external fixator throughout the testing. Specimens underwent three conditions: intact, detached, and repaired posterior labrum, while version of the glenoid was set from + 5° anteversion to - 25° retroversion by 5° increments. Within the biomechanical setup, the glenohumeral joint was axially loaded (22 N) to center the joint. At 0° of glenoid version and intact labrum, the initial position was used as baseline and served as point zero of centerization. After cyclic preloading, posterior translation force (20 N) was then applied by a material testing machine, while start and endpoints of the scapula placed on an X-Y table were measured.

RESULTS

The decentralization of the humeral head at glenoid version angles of 5°, 10°, 15°, and 20° of retroversion and 5° of anteversion was significantly different (P < 0.001). Every increment of 5° of retroversion led to an additional decentralization of the humeral head overall by (average ± SD) 2.0 mm ± 0.3 in the intact and 2.0 mm ± 0.7 in the detached labrum condition. The repaired showed significantly lower posterior translation compared to the intact condition at 10° (P = 0.012) and 15° (P < 0.01) of retroversion. In addition, CT measured parameters (depth, diameter, and native version) of the glenoid showed no correlation with angle of dislocation of each specimen.

CONCLUSION

Bony alignment in terms of glenoid retroversion angle plays an important role in joint centration and posterior translation, especially in retroversion angles greater than 10°. Isolated posterior labrum repair has a significant effect on posterior translation in glenoid retroversion angles of 5° and 10°. Bony correction of glenoid version may be considered to address posterior shoulder instability with retroversion > 15°.

Posterior open wedge glenoid osteotomy provides reliable results in young patients with increased glenoid retroversion and posterior shoulder instability

PURPOSE

The relationship between posterior shoulder instability and increased glenoid retroversion has been documented. Posterior open wedge glenoid osteotomy is a possible treatment option for patients with increased glenoid retroversion, but outcomes in the literature are limited. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to report the clinical and radiological outcomes following posterior glenoid osteotomy.

METHODS

Patients that underwent posterior glenoid osteotomy for posterior shoulder instability with a GR angle of more than or equal to 10°, and were at least 12 months out from surgery, were included in the study. General data, medical history, and radiographic data such as the pre- and postoperative glenoid retroversion angle were extracted from the patients' hospital documentation notes. To evaluate the postoperative outcome, the Rowe standard rating scale for shoulder instability and the Oxford shoulder instability score were collected retrospectively.

RESULTS

A total of 12 shoulders (11 patients) could be included. The mean pre-operative glenoid retroversion was 23.3° (range 12°-35°) and this reduced significantly (p = 0.003) to a mean of 13° (range 1°-28°) postoperatively. At a mean follow-up of 19.8 months (range 14-36), the median Rowe score was 90 points (range 45-100 points) and the median Oxford instability score was 44 points (range 21-48 points). There were no postoperative re-dislocations or revision surgeries; however, one patient reported signs of recurrent shoulder instability and four asymptomatic glenoid neck fractures occurred.

CONCLUSION

Open wedge posterior glenoid osteotomy provides reliable clinical results with a low rate of clinical failure in a stringently selected patient cohort at short-term follow-up. However, due to the risk of potentially severe complications, we advocate this procedure for experienced shoulder surgeons only, who are familiar with its anatomical and technical considerations.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV (case series).

Different acromial roof morphology in concentric and eccentric osteoarthritis of the shoulder: a multiplane reconstruction analysis of 105 shoulder computed tomography scans

BACKGROUND

The pathomechanisms of eccentric osteoarthritis of the shoulder remain unclear. Although there is increasing evidence of bony differences between shoulders with rotator cuff tears and osteoarthritis, analogous differences have not been identified for primary concentric and eccentric osteoarthritis. This study examined the shape and orientation of the acromial roof as a potential risk factor for the development of posterior glenoid wear.

METHODS

We analyzed computed tomography images of 105 shoulders with primary osteoarthritis. Based on the classification of Walch, 45 shoulders had concentric osteoarthritis (Walch A) and 60 shoulders were affected by eccentric osteoarthritis (Walch B; EOA). A comparison of acromial morphology was performed in a multiplanar reconstruction analysis of computed tomography scans.

RESULTS

Acromial shape: Acromial length, width, and area were not significantly different. Acromial roof orientation: The acromial roof in EOA was an average of 5° flatter (sagittal tilt; P < .01) and 5° more downward tilted (coronal tilt; P < .01). There was no difference in axial rotation (axial tilt; P = .47). Anteroposterior glenoid coverage: The glenoid in EOA was covered an average of 4° less posteriorly (P = .01) and 4° more anteriorly (P = .04). No differences were shown for overall glenoid coverage.

CONCLUSIONS

The acromial roof could play a role in the pathogenesis of EOA. Less posterior support due to a flatter acromion with less posterior glenoid coverage could contribute to static posterior subluxation of the humeral head and posterior glenoid wear. Further biomechanical investigations are needed to confirm these findings.

The posterior ridge of the greater tuberosity of the humerus: a suitable landmark for the posterior approach to the shoulder joint?

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the posterior ridge of the greater tuberosity, a palpable prominence during surgery, as a landmark for the posterior approach to the glenohumeral joint.

METHODS

Twenty-five human cadaveric shoulders were dissected. In 5 cases, a full-thickness rotator cuff tear was present. The posterior surgical anatomy was defined, and the distance from the ridge to the interval between the infraspinatus (IS) and teres minor (TM) muscle, the distance from the ridge to the inferior border of the glenoid (IBG), and the distance between the IS-TM interval and the IBG were determined.

RESULTS

In all specimens, a prominent ridge on the posterior greater tuberosity lateral to the articular margin could be identified. The IS-TM interval was located, on average, 3 mm proximal to this ridge. The IS-TM interval corresponded to a point 5 mm proximal to the IBG. In all shoulders, the ridge was located, on average, 8 mm proximal to the IBG. The plane of the IS-TM interval showed a vertically oblique direction.

CONCLUSION

The posterior ridge of the greater tuberosity is a suitable landmark to locate the internervous plane between the IS and TM and should not be crossed distally. Unlike other landmarks, the ridge moves with the humeral head, making it is less dependent on the patient's size, sex, and arm position and the quality of the rotator cuff. The ridge is always located proximal to the insertion of the TM and IBG.

Walch B0 glenoid: pre-osteoarthritic posterior subluxation of the humeral head

The management of primary osteoarthritis of the shoulder has been well investigated. However, the etiology and management of posterior humeral head subluxation in the context of primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis remain controversial. The finding of static posterior subluxation of the humeral head before the development of posterior bone erosion of the glenoid in young men with radiographic findings of primary osteoarthritis has been described as arthrogenic posterior subluxation of the humeral head. It demonstrates the earliest form of the osteoarthritic evolution, and an excessive glenoid retroversion is the only probable cause of this static subluxation, although this is controversial. The clinical relevance of these findings is important in allowing the identification of patients at risk for development of glenohumeral osteoarthritis and in developing an early treatment for the subluxation to try to alter the natural course of this disease. The aim of our summary paper was to review the current literature on this matter in an attempt to better understand the pathophysiologic mechanism of this condition, which we named pre-osteoarthritic posterior subluxation of the humeral head, or Walch B-zero (B0) glenoid. It appears that Walch B0 glenoid is a pathologic condition (initially dynamic, eventually evolving into a static condition) that may lead to posterior erosion of the glenoid, taking place once there is asymmetric increased posterior glenohumeral contact forces and possibly associated with increased glenoid retroversion.

Guidelines for humeral subluxation cutoff values: a comparative study between conventional, reoriented, and three-dimensional computed tomography scans of healthy shoulders

BACKGROUND

The humeral subluxation index (HSI) is frequently assessed on computed tomography (CT) scans in conditions of the shoulder characterized by humeral displacement. An arbitrarily set HSI cutoff value of 45% for anterior subluxation and 55% for posterior subluxation has been widely accepted. We studied whether mean values and thresholds of humeral subluxation, in relation to the glenoid and scapula, were influenced by different imaging modalities.

METHODS

The HSIs referenced to the scapula (SHSI) and glenoid (GHSI) were compared between conventional CT scans, CT scans reoriented into the corresponding reference plane (ie, scapular plane for the SHSI and glenoid center plane for the GHSI), and 3-dimensional (3D) CT reconstructions of 120 healthy shoulders. The 95% normal range determined the cutoff values of humeral subluxation.

RESULTS

The SHSI thresholds for conventional, reoriented, and 3D CT scans were 33%-61%, 44%-68%, and 49%-61%, respectively. A different mean SHSI was found for each imaging modality (conventional, 47%; reoriented, 56%; 3D, 55%; P ≤ .014), with the conventional SHSI showing an underestimation in 89% of the cases. GHSI thresholds for conventional, reoriented, and 3D CT scans were 40%-61%, 44%-56%, and 46%-54%, respectively. The mean GHSI did not differ between each imaging modality (conventional, 51%; reoriented, 50%; 3D, 50%; P = .146).

CONCLUSIONS

The SHSI and GHSI are susceptible to different imaging modalities with consequently different cutoff values. The redefined HSI cutoff values guide physicians in the evaluation of humeral subluxation in conditions characterized by humeral displacement, depending on the available image data.