Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

High correlation between inner and outer glenoid circle diameters and its clinical relevance

  • SHOULDER
  • Published:
Knee Surgery, Sports Traumatology, Arthroscopy Aims and scope

Abstract

Purpose

The majority of methods for measuring glenoid bone loss in shoulder instability use the best-fit circle following the inferior glenoid rim. However, there is no precise method on how to draw this circle, particularly in case of a missing rim segment. Defining the radius is a source of substantial error. It was hypothesized that there is a relationship between the best-fit inferior circle (inner circle), defined by Sugaya, and the circle tangent to the supra- and infra-glenoid tubercles (outer circle), defined by Itoi, thus allowing a more consistent appreciation of the paleo-glenoid.

Methods

Ninety-five normal dry scapulae were examined. The specimens were digitally photographed obtaining perpendicular images of the glenoid cavity. Using HOROS® imaging software, a best-fit inferior circle (inner circle) and a second circle fitting the most inferior and superior points of the glenoid (outer circle) were drawn by two investigators. The diameters and areas of the circles were recorded. Two-way random-effects intra-class correlation coefficients (ICC) were used to measure intra- and inter-observer agreement. A Bayesian measurement-error regression model was used to determine the relationship between outer and inner circle measurements.

Results

The mean glenoid height was 35.1 mm and the glenoid width 25.6 mm.

The mean diameter of the outer circle was 35.7 ± 4.2 mm and the mean diameter of the inner circle was 26.8 ± 3.2 mm. ICC showed excellent inter- and intra-observer agreement for both the outer circle diameter (ICC ≥ 0.95) and inner circle diameter (ICC ≥ 0.93). The two diameters demonstrated a very strong significant Pearson correlation (0.92, p < 0.001) and the regression showed excellent model fit R2 = 0.87. The areas of the two circles were also highly and significantly correlated (r = 0.94; p < 0.001). The ratio of inner circle to outer diameters was 0.74.

Conclusion

There is a strong correlation between the inner and outer glenoid circle diameters. This study sets the base for the use the combined outer and inner circle and its ratio to better appreciate the paleo-glenoid morphology and thus obtain a more reliable bone loss estimation. Application of this method aids in a more reliable estimation bone loss with potential benefit in surgical decision-making.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Altan E, Ozbaydar MU, Tonbul M, Yalcin L (2014) Comparison of two different measurement methods to determine glenoid bone defects: area or width? J Shoulder Elbow Surg 23:1215–1222

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Arenas-Miquelez A, Dabirrahmani D, Sharma G, Graham PL, Appleyard R, Bokor DJ, et al (2021) What is the most reliable method of measuring glenoid bone loss in anterior glenohumeral instability? A cadaveric study comparing different measurement techniques for glenoid bone loss. Am J Sports Med https://doi.org/10.1177/03635465211041386

  3. Bakshi NK, Cibulas GA, Sekiya JK, Bedi A (2018) A clinical comparison of linear- and surface area-based methods of measuring glenoid bone loss. Am J Sports Med 46:2472–2477

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Barchilon VS, Kotz E, Barchilon Ben-Av M, Glazer E, Nyska M (2008) A simple method for quantitative evaluation of the missing area of the anterior glenoid in anterior instability of the glenohumeral joint. Skeletal Radiol 37:731–736

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Baudi P, Righi P, Bolognesi D, Rivetta S, Rossi Urtoler E, Guicciardi N et al (2005) How to identify and calculate glenoid bone deficit. Chir Organi Mov 90:145–152

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Boileau P, Villalba M, Hery JY, Balg F, Ahrens P, Neyton L (2006) Risk factors for recurrence of shoulder instability after arthroscopic Bankart repair. J Bone Joint Surg Am 88:1755–1763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Burkhart SS, De Beer JF (2000) Traumatic glenohumeral bone defects and their relationship to failure of arthroscopic Bankart repairs: significance of the inverted-pear glenoid and the humeral engaging Hill-Sachs lesion. Arthroscopy 16:677–694

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Chen AL, Hunt SA, Hawkins RJ, Zuckerman JD (2005) Management of bone loss associated with recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability. Am J Sports Med 33:912–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chuang TY, Adams CR, Burkhart SS (2008) Use of preoperative three-dimensional computed tomography to quantify glenoid bone loss in shoulder instability. Arthroscopy 24:376–382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. De Wilde LF, Berghs BM, Audenaert E, Sys G, Van Maele GO, Barbaix E (2004) About the variability of the shape of the glenoid cavity. Surg Radiol Anat 26:54–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Dekker TJ, Peebles LA, Bernhardson AS, Golijanin P, Di Giacomo G, Hackett TR et al (2021) Limited predictive value of the instability severity index score: evaluation of 217 consecutive cases of recurrent anterior shoulder instability. Arthroscopy 37:1381–1391

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Dekker TJ, Peebles LA, Bernhardson AS, Rosenberg SI, Murphy CP, Golijanin P et al (2020) Risk factors for recurrence after arthroscopic instability repair-the importance of glenoid bone loss >15%, patient age, and duration of symptoms: a matched cohort analysis. Am J Sports Med 48:3036–3041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Delgrande D, Lonjon G, Hardy P, Schoch B, Werthel JD (2021) Long-term results of arthroscopic Bankart repairs for anterior instability of the shoulder in patients aged thirty years or older. Int Orthop 45:1583–1589

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Dickens JF, Owens BD, Cameron KL, DeBerardino TM, Masini BD, Peck KY et al (2017) The effect of subcritical bone loss and exposure on recurrent instability after arthroscopic bankart repair in intercollegiate american football. Am J Sports Med 45:1769–1775

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Edwards TB, Boulahia A, Walch G (2003) Radiographic analysis of bone defects in chronic anterior shoulder instability. Arthroscopy 19:732–739

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gelman AGB, Gabry J, Vehtari A (2019) R-squared for bayesian regression models. Am Stat 73(3):307–309

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Giles JW, Owens BD, Athwal GS (2015) Estimating glenoid width for instability-related bone loss: a CT evaluation of an MRI formula. Am J Sports Med 43:1726–1730

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Green SB (1991) How many subjects does it take to do a regression analysis. Multivariate Behav Res 26:499–510

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Griffith JF, Antonio GE, Tong CW, Ming CK (2003) Anterior shoulder dislocation: quantification of glenoid bone loss with CT. AJR Am J Roentgenol 180:1423–1430

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Griffith JF, Antonio GE, Yung PS, Wong EM, Yu AB, Ahuja AT et al (2008) Prevalence, pattern, and spectrum of glenoid bone loss in anterior shoulder dislocation: CT analysis of 218 patients. AJR Am J Roentgenol 190:1247–1254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Huysmans PE, Haen PS, Kidd M, Dhert WJ, Willems JW (2006) The shape of the inferior part of the glenoid: a cadaveric study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 15:759–763

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Iannotti JP, Gabriel JP, Schneck SL, Evans BG, Misra S (1992) The normal glenohumeral relationships. An anatomical study of one hundred and forty shoulders. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74:491–500

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Itoi E, Lee S-B, Amrami KK, Wenger DE, An K-N (2003) Quantitative assessment of classic anteroinferior bony bankart lesions by radiography and computed tomography. Am J Sports Med 31:112–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Itoi E, Lee SB, Berglund LJ, Berge LL, An KN (2000) The effect of a glenoid defect on anteroinferior stability of the shoulder after Bankart repair: a cadaveric study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 82:35–46

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Jeon YD, Kim HS, Rhee SM, Jeong MG, Oh JH (2021) Clinical outcomes of revision arthroscopic capsulolabral repair for recurrent anterior shoulder instability with moderate glenoid bone defects: a comparison with primary surgery. Orthop J Sports Med 9:23259671211059816

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lacheta L, Herbst E, Voss A, Braun S, Jungmann P, Millett PJ et al (2019) Insufficient consensus regarding circle size and bone loss width using the ratio-"best fit circle"-method even with three-dimensional computed tomography. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27:3222–3229

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Latarjet M (1954) Treatment of recurrent dislocation of the shoulder. Lyon Chir 49:994–997

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Lo IK, Parten PM, Burkhart SS (2004) The inverted pear glenoid: an indicator of significant glenoid bone loss. Arthroscopy 20:169–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Montgomery WH Jr, Wahl M, Hettrich C, Itoi E, Lippitt SB, Matsen FA 3rd (2005) Anteroinferior bone-grafting can restore stability in osseous glenoid defects. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:1972–1977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Moroder P, Damm P, Wierer G, Bohm E, Minkus M, Plachel F et al (2019) Challenging the current concept of critical glenoid bone loss in shoulder instability: does the size measurement really tell it all? Am J Sports Med 47:688–694

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Moroder P, Plachel F, Huettner A, Ernstbrunner L, Minkus M, Boehm E et al (2018) The effect of scapula tilt and best-fit circle placement when measuring glenoid bone loss in shoulder instability patients. Arthroscopy 34:398–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Moroder P, Schulz E, Wierer G, Auffarth A, Habermeyer P, Resch H et al (2019) Neer award 2019: latarjet procedure vs. iliac crest bone graft transfer for treatment of anterior shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss: a prospective randomized trial. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 28:1298–1307

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Owens BD, Burns TC, Campbell SE, Svoboda SJ, Cameron KL (2013) Simple method of glenoid bone loss calculation using ipsilateral magnetic resonance imaging. Am J Sports Med 41:622–624

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Prada C, Al-Mohrej OA, Patel A, Flood B, Leroux T, Khan M (2021) Managing bone loss in shoulder instability-techniques and outcomes: a scoping review. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 14:447–461

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Provencher MT, Ghodadra N, LeClere L, Solomon DJ, Romeo AA (2009) Anatomic osteochondral glenoid reconstruction for recurrent glenohumeral instability with glenoid deficiency using a distal tibia allograft. Arthroscopy 25:446–452

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Rerko MA, Pan X, Donaldson C, Jones GL, Bishop JY (2013) Comparison of various imaging techniques to quantify glenoid bone loss in shoulder instability. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 22:528–534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Shaha JS, Cook JB, Song DJ, Rowles DJ, Bottoni CR, Shaha SH et al (2015) Redefining “Critical” bone loss in shoulder instability: functional outcomes worsen with “subcritical” bone loss. Am J Sports Med 43:1719–1725

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Shin S-J, Kim RG, Jeon YS, Kwon TH (2017) Critical value of anterior glenoid bone loss that leads to recurrent glenohumeral instability after arthroscopic bankart repair. Am J Sports Med 45:1975–1981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Sigrist B, Ferguson S, Boehm E, Jung C, Scheibel M, Moroder P (2020) The biomechanical effect of bone grafting and bone graft remodeling in patients with anterior shoulder instability. Am J Sports Med 48:1857–1864

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sugaya H (2014) Techniques to evaluate glenoid bone loss. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med 7:1–5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Sugaya H, Moriishi J, Dohi M, Kon Y, Tsuchiya A (2003) Glenoid rim morphology in recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability. J Bone Joint Surg Am 85:878–884

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Tahir M, Malik S, Jordan R, Kronberga M, D’Alessandro P, Saithna A (2021) Arthroscopic bone block stabilisation procedures for glenoid bone loss in anterior glenohumeral instability: A systematic review of clinical and radiological outcomes. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 107:102949

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Tauber M, Resch H, Forstner R, Raffl M, Schauer J (2004) Reasons for failure after surgical repair of anterior shoulder instability. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 13:279–285

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Tokish JM, Fitzpatrick K, Cook JB, Mallon WJ (2014) Arthroscopic distal clavicular autograft for treating shoulder instability with glenoid bone loss. Arthrosc Tech 3:e475-481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Ungersbock A, Michel M, Hertel R (1995) Factors influencing the results of a modified Bankart procedure. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 4:365–369

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Verweij LPE, van Spanning SH, Grillo A, Kerkhoffs G, Priester-Vink S, van Deurzen DFP et al (2021) Age, participation in competitive sports, bony lesions, ALPSA lesions, > 1 preoperative dislocations, surgical delay and ISIS score > 3 are risk factors for recurrence following arthroscopic Bankart repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 4584 shoulders. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 29:4004–4014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Warner JJ, Gill TJ, O’Hollerhan JD, Pathare N, Millett PJ (2006) Anatomical glenoid reconstruction for recurrent anterior glenohumeral instability with glenoid deficiency using an autogenous tricortical iliac crest bone graft. Am J Sports Med 34:205–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Xiang M, Yang J, Chen H, Hu X, Zhang Q, Li Y et al (2021) Arthroscopic autologous scapular spine bone graft combined with bankart repair for anterior shoulder instability with subcritical (10–15%) glenoid bone loss. Arthroscopy 37:2065–2074

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Yamamoto N, Kawakami J, Hatta T, Itoi E (2019) Effect of subcritical glenoid bone loss on activities of daily living in patients with anterior shoulder instability. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 105:1467–1470

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Zacchilli MA, Owens BD (2010) Epidemiology of shoulder dislocations presenting to emergency departments in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:542–549

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Zhang M, Liu J, Jia Y, Zhang G, Zhou J, Wu D et al (2022) Risk factors for recurrence after Bankart repair: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Orthop Surg Res 17:113

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

No fundings were received for this study.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Shoulder and Elbow, Orthopaedics, Lindenhofspital, Bremgartenstrasse 117, 3001, Bern, Switzerland

    Antonio Arenas-Miquelez & Ralph Hertel

  2. Campus Stiftung Lindenhof Bern, Swiss Institute for Translational and Entrepreneurial Medicine, Bern, Switzerland

    Ralph Hertel

  3. Henry Dunant Hospital, Athens, Greece

    Orestis Karargyris

  4. School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Macquarie University, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Petra L. Graham

Authors
  1. Antonio Arenas-Miquelez
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Orestis Karargyris
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Petra L. Graham
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ralph Hertel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

AA-M: project development, data collection, manuscript writing. OK: data collection, manuscript editing. PLG: statistical analysis, manuscript editing. RH: project coordinator, manuscript review.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Antonio Arenas-Miquelez.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors, their immediate family, and any research foundation with which they are affiliated have not received any financial payments or other benefits from any commercial entity related to the subject of this article.

Ethical approval

Approval for the study was granted by the Bern Kanton Ethics Committee (File #: 105,912 (Req-2022-00,456).

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Arenas-Miquelez, A., Karargyris, O., Graham, P.L. et al. High correlation between inner and outer glenoid circle diameters and its clinical relevance. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 31, 199–205 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-022-07050-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-022-07050-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation