Skip to main content
Log in

Computed tomography morphological analysis of the scapula and its implications in shoulder arthroplasty

  • Original Article • SHOULDER - ANATOMY
  • Published:
European Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery & Traumatology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Healthy shoulder morphology is still unclear. Since bone morphology influences prosthetic features, this is relevant for glenohumeral joint reconstruction. The objective of this study was to assess the normal values of glenoid version, maximum width, base width and vault depth on computed tomography scans.

Methods

Axial cut CT scans of 1072 healthy glenoids were retrospectively reviewed. Values of glenoid version, maximum glenoid width, glenoid base width and glenoid vault depth were measured by two different observers. Differences were determined between genders, and reproducibility and interrater reliability assessed.

Results

Glenoid version was 37.71° ± 10.75°, range −6.20° to 71.30°; maximum glenoid width was 26.06 ± 3.27 mm, range 15.40–36.90 mm; glenoid base width was 16.59 ± 2.61 mm, range 8.90–25.40 mm; glenoid vault depth was 9.72 ± 1.62 mm, range 4.70–15.90 mm. All measurements except for glenoid version were significantly higher in males than in females. Reproducibility was good for every measurement, except glenoid vault depth.

Conclusion

We found differences in maximum glenoid width, base width and vault depth by gender in a large sample. Glenoid components’ maximum width was defined, as was reaming extension and orientation, the space available for implantation of the glenoid component, placement of pegs or keels in anatomic prostheses and the target for glenoid screws in inverted prostheses.

Level of evidence

II.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gregory T, Hansen U, Emery RJ, Augereau B, Amis AA (2007) Developments in shoulder arthroplasty. Proc Inst Mech Eng H 221(1):87–96

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Hoenecke HR Jr, Hermida JC, Flores-Hernandez C, D’Lima DD (2010) Accuracy of CT-based measurements of glenoid version for total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 19(2):166–171

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Hoenecke HR Jr, Tibor LM, D’Lima DD (2012) Glenoid morphology rather than version predicts humeral subluxation: a different perspective on the glenoid in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21(9):1136–1141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Strauss EJ, Roche C, Flurin PH, Wright T, Zuckerman JD (2009) The glenoid in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 18(5):819–833

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Williams GR, Abboud JA (2005) Total shoulder arthroplasty: glenoid component design. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(1 Suppl S):122S–128S

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Sharma GB, McMahon PJ, Robertson DD (2014) Structure modeling of the glenoid: relevance to shoulder arthroplasty. J Orthop Res 32(11):1471–1478

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Singh JA, Sperling JW, Cofield RH (2011) Revision surgery following total shoulder arthroplasty: analysis of 2588 shoulders over three decades (1976 to 2008). J Bone Joint Surg Br 93(11):1513–1517

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Churchill RS, Brems JJ, Kotschi H (2001) Glenoid size, inclination, and version: an anatomic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 10(4):327–332. doi:10.1067/mse.2001.115269

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Matsumura N, Ogawa K, Kobayashi S, Oki S, Watanabe A, Ikegami H, Toyama Y (2014) Morphologic features of humeral head and glenoid version in the normal glenohumeral joint. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23(11):1724–1730. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kwon YW, Powell KA, Yum JK, Brems JJ, Iannotti JP (2005) Use of three-dimensional computed tomography for the analysis of the glenoid anatomy. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 14(1):85–90. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2004.04.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Walch G, Badet R, Boulahia A, Khoury A (1999) Morphologic study of the glenoid in primary glenohumeral osteoarthritis. J Arthroplasty 14(6):756–760

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Catarina N. Damas.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding this paper.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Informed consent

Informed consent from patients was not necessary since this was a retrospective study of 1000 examinations, in which patient personal data were not used/accessed in any way, as is usual in this kind of studies.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Damas, C.N., Silva, J., Sá, M.C. et al. Computed tomography morphological analysis of the scapula and its implications in shoulder arthroplasty. Eur J Orthop Surg Traumatol 26, 127–132 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-015-1721-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00590-015-1721-3

Keywords

Navigation