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

Influence of Critical Shoulder Angle and Rotator Cuff Tear Type on Load-Induced Glenohumeral Biomechanics: A Sawbone Simulator Study

Glenohumeral (GH) biomechanics after rotator cuff (RC) tears are not fully understood. The purpose of our study was to determine if the critical shoulder angle (CSA), type of RC tears, and level of weight bearing increase GH translation, instability based on the instability ratio, muscle forces and joint reaction force (JRF), and shifts the center of force (CoF) superiorly. A GH simulator with muscle-mimicking cable systems was used to simulate 30° abduction in the scapular plane. A Sawbone humerus and five specimen-specific scapular anthropometries were used to test six types of RC tears, three weight-bearing loads, and the native and adjusted (to different CSAs) deltoid origin sites. Linear mixed effects models (CSA, RC tear type, and weight bearing) with random effects (specimen and sex) were used to assess differences in GH biomechanics. With increasing CSA, GH translation increased, JRF decreased, and the CoF position was more inferior. RC tears did not significantly alter GH translation but shifted the CoF position superiorly, close to where glenoid erosion occurs in patients with RC tears with secondary osteoarthritis. Weight bearing significantly increased GH translation and JRF. RC and deltoid muscle forces increased with the presence of RC tears and increased weight bearing. The remaining RC muscles of intact tendons compensated for the torn RC tendons but not for the altered CoF position. GH translation remained comparable to shoulders with intact RC. These findings highlight the importance of early detection, clinical management, and targeted rehabilitation strategies for patients with RC tears.

A Posterior Acromial Bone Block Augmentation Is Biomechanically Effective at Restoring the Force Required To Translate the Humeral Head Posteriorly in a Cadaveric, Posterior Glenohumeral Instability Model

PURPOSE

To assess the biomechanical utility of a posterior acromial bone block (PABB) for the treatment of posterior glenohumeral instability.

METHODS

Ten fresh-frozen cadaveric specimens were obtained based upon an a priori power analysis. A 2.5-cm scapular spine autograft was harvested from all shoulders. A custom robot device was used to apply a 50-N compressive force to the glenohumeral joint. The humeral head was translated 10 mm posteroinferiorly at 30 degrees from the center of the glenoid at a rate of 1.0 mm/s in 6 consecutive conditions: (1) intact specimen, (2) intact with PABB, (3) posterior capsulolabral tear, (4) addition of the PABB, (5) removal of the PABB and repair of the capsulolabral tear (LR), and (6) addition of the PABB with LR. The maximum force required to obtain this translation was recorded. Paired t tests were performed to compare relevant testing conditions.

RESULTS

Ten cadavers with a mean ± SD age of 54.4 ± 13.1 years and mean ± SD glenoid retroversion of 6.5 ± 1.0 degrees were studied. The PABB provided greater resistance force to humeral head translation compared to the instability state (instability, 29.3 ± 15.3 N vs PABB, 47.6 ± 21.0 N; P = .001; 95% confidence interval [CI], -27.6 to -10.0). When comparing PABB to LR, the PABB produced higher resistance force than LR alone (PABB, 47.6 ± 21.0 N; LR, 34.2 ± 20.5 N; P = .012; 95% CI, -23.4 to -4.1). An instability lesion treated with the PABB, with LR (P = .056; 95% CI, -0.30 to 20.4) or without LR (P = .351; 95% CI, -6.8 to 15.7), produced resistance forces similar to the intact specimen.

CONCLUSIONS

A PABB is biomechanically effective at restoring the force required to translate the humeral head posteriorly in a cadaveric, posterior glenohumeral instability model. A posterior acromial bone block is a biomechanically feasible option to consider in patients with recurrent posterior instability.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Augmentation of the posterior acromion may be a biomechanically feasible option to treat posterior shoulder instability.

Are glenoid retroversion, humeral subluxation, and Walch classification associated with a muscle imbalance?

BACKGROUND

The etiology of humeral posterior subluxation remains unknown, and it has been hypothesized that horizontal muscle imbalance could cause this condition. The objective of this study was to compare the ratio of anterior-to-posterior rotator cuff and deltoid muscle volume as a function of humeral subluxation and glenoid morphology when analyzed as a continuous variable in arthritic shoulders.

METHODS

In total, 333 computed tomography scans of shoulders (273 arthritic shoulders and 60 healthy controls) were included in this study and were segmented automatically. For each muscle, the volume of muscle fibers without intramuscular fat was measured. The ratio between the volume of the subscapularis and the volume of the infraspinatus plus teres minor (AP ratio) and the ratio between the anterior and posterior deltoids (APdeltoid) were calculated. Statistical analyses were performed to determine whether a correlation could be found between these ratios and glenoid version, humeral subluxation, and/or glenoid type per the Walch classification.

RESULTS

Within the arthritic cohort, no statistically significant difference in the AP ratio was found between type A glenoids (1.09 ± 0.22) and type B glenoids (1.03 ± 0.16, P = .09), type D glenoids (1.12 ± 0.27, P = .77), or type C glenoids (1.10 ± 0.19, P > .999). No correlation was found between the AP ratio and glenoid version (ρ = -0.0360, P = .55) or humeral subluxation (ρ = 0.076, P = .21). The APdeltoid ratio of type A glenoids (0.48 ± 0.15) was significantly greater than that of type B glenoids (0.35 ± 0.16, P < .01) and type C glenoids (0.21 ± 0.10, P < .01) but was not significantly different from that of type D glenoids (0.64 ± 0.34, P > .999). When evaluating both healthy control and arthritic shoulders, moderate correlations were found between the APdeltoid ratio and both glenoid version (ρ = 0.55, P < .01) and humeral subluxation (ρ = -0.61, P < .01).

CONCLUSION

This in vitro study supports the use of software for fully automated 3-dimensional reconstruction of the 4 rotator cuff muscles and the deltoid. Compared with previous 2-dimensional computed tomography scan studies, our study did not find any correlation between the anteroposterior muscle volume ratio and glenoid parameters in arthritic shoulders. However, once deformity occurred, the observed APdeltoid ratio was lower with type B and C glenoids. These findings suggest that rotator cuff muscle imbalance may not be the precipitating etiology for the posterior humeral subluxation and secondary posterior glenoid erosion characteristic of Walch type B glenoids.