Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Description and reproducibility assessment of a new computerised tomography scan index to measure the glenoid orientation in relation to the anterior glenoid surface

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To propose and to assess the reproducibility of a new method (GO [glenoid orientation] index) for the estimation of the glenoid orientation in relation to the anterior surface of the glenoid.

Methods

This is a retrospective study on computed tomography (CT) scan. The GO index was defined as the angle formed by a line perpendicular to the tangent to the anterior surface of the scapula and the glenoid line (which is defined as the line connecting the anterior and the posterior rim of the glenoid). The measurements were performed at the level of the glenoid where its diameter is the greatest. Two independent observers performed each measurement twice. The intra- and inter-observer reproducibility was evaluated by the Pearson coefficient (r) and the intra-class correlation coefficient (ρ, ICC). The correlation between GO index and glenoid version as described by Friedman was also studied.

Results

Seventy-eight CT scans were analysed, 38 shoulders with glenohumeral arthritis and 40 healthy shoulders, 32 females/46 males, mean age 53.9 ± 22.7 years. The measures were all highly correlated (r > 0.50, p = 0.00001). The intra- and inter-observer reproducibility was good to excellent (0.71 < ρ < 0.84, p = 0.00001). GO index was 26.9 ± 6.3°, 28.4 ± 6° in the group with glenohumeral osteoarthritis and 25.5 ± 6.4° in the healthy group, p = 0.04. The glenoid version was −0.8 ± 7.9° in the group with glenohumeral osteoarthritis and −3.9 ± 6° in the healthy group, p = 0.05. No agreement was found between the glenoid version and GO index.

Conclusions

GO index is simple and reproducible. It could be very useful for the pre-operative planning and intra-operative positioning of the implants in total shoulder arthroplasty.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Farron A, Terrier A, Büchler P (2006) Risks of loosening of a prosthetic glenoid implanted in retroversion. J Shoulder Elb Surg 5215:521–526. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2005.10.003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Nyffeler RW, Sheikh R, Atkinson TS, Jacob HA, Favre P, Gerber C (2006) Effects of glenoid component version on humeral head displacement and joint reaction forces: an experimental study. J Shoulder Elb Surg 15:625–629. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2005.09.016

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Shapiro TA, McGarry MH, Gupta R, Lee YS, Lee TQ (2007) Biomechanical effects of glenoid retroversion in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 16:S90–S95. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2006.07.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Terrier A, Büchler P, Farron A (2006) Influence of glenohumeral conformity on glenoid stresses after total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 15:515–520. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2005.09.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Friedman RJ, Hawthorne KB, Genez BM (1992) The use of computerized tomography in the measurement of glenoid version. J Bone Joint Surg Am 74:1032–1037

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Poon PC, Ting FS (2012) A 2-dimensional glenoid vault method for measuring glenoid version on computed tomography. J Shoulder Elb Surg 21:329–335. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2011.04.006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Andrin J, Macaron C, Pottecher P, Martz P, Baulot E, Trouilloud P, Viard B (2015) Determination of a new computed tomography method for measuring the glenoid version and comparing with a reference method. Radio-anatomical and retrospective study. Int Orthop 40:525–529. doi:10.1007/s00264-015-2867-7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. 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 Elb Surg 19:166–171. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2009.08.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. van de Bunt F, Pearl ML, Lee EK, Peng L, Didomenico P (2015) Glenoid version by CT scan: an analysis of clinical measurement error and introduction of a protocol to reduce variability. Skelet Radiol 44:1627–1635. doi:10.1007/s00256-015-2207-4

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Iannotti JP, Weiner S, Rodriguez E, Subhas N, Patterson TE, Jun BJ, Ricchetti ET (2015) Three-dimensional imaging and templating improve glenoid implant positioning. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:651–658. doi:10.2106/JBJS.N.00493

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lewis GS, Stevens NM, Armstrong AD (2015) Testing of a novel pin array guide for accurate three-dimensional glenoid component positioning. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24:1939–1947. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2015.06.022

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Kircher J, Wiedemann M, Magosch P, Lichtenberg S, Habermeyer P (2009) Improved accuracy of glenoid positioning in total shoulder arthroplasty with intraoperative navigation: a prospective-randomized clinical study. J Shoulder Elb Surg 18:515–520. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2009.03.014

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bland JM, Altman DG (1986) Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1:307–310

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Shieh G (2014) Sample size requirements for the design of reliability studies: precision consideration. Behav Res Methods 46:808–822

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

    Google Scholar 

  16. Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC (2003) Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Wiley, Hoboken

    Book  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Mallon WJ, Brown HR, Vogler JB 3rd, Martinez S (1992) Radiographic and geometric anatomy of the scapula. Clin Orthop Relat Res 277:142–154

    Google Scholar 

  19. von Schroeder HP, Kuiper SD, Botte MJ (2001) Osseous anatomy of the scapula. Clin Orthop Relat Res 383:131–139

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Inui H, Sugamoto K, Miyamoto T, Machida A, Hashimoto J, Nobuhara K (2001) Evaluation of three-dimensional glenoid structure using MRI. J Anat 199:323–328. doi:10.1046/j.1469-7580.2001.19930323.x

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. Lewis GS, Armstrong AD (2011) Glenoid spherical orientation and version. J Shoulder Elb Surg 20:3–11. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2010.05.012

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Bryce CD, Davison AC, Lewis GS, Wang L, Flemming DJ, Armstrong AD (2010) Two-dimensional glenoid version measurements vary with coronal and sagittal scapular rotation. J Bone Joint Surg Am 92:692–699. doi:10.2106/JBJS.I.00177

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Matsumura N, Ogawa K, Ikegami H, Collin P, Walch G, Toyama Y (2014) Computed tomography measurement of glenoid vault version as an alternative measuring method for glenoid version. J Orthop Surg Res 9:17. doi:10.1186/1749-799X-9-17

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. De Wilde L, Berghs B, VandeVyver F, Schepens A, Verdonk R (2003) Glenihumeral relationship in the transverse plane of the body. J Shoulder Elb Surg 12:260–267. doi:10.1016/S1058-2746(02)86884-7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Ganapathi A, McCarron J, Chen X, Iannotti J (2011) Predicting normal glenoid version from pathologic scapula: a comparison of 4 methods in 2- and 3-dimensional models. J Shoulder Elb Surg 20:234–244. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2010.05.024

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Walch G, Vezeridis PS, Boileau P, Deransart P, Chaoui J (2015) Three-dimensional planning and use of patient-specific guides improve glenoid component position: an in vitro study. Shoulder Elb Surg 24:302–309. doi:10.1016/j.jse.2014.05.029

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Ambroise Paré Hospital, 9, avenue Charles De Gaulle, 92104, Boulogne-Billancourt, France

    Constantina Moraiti, Shahnaz Klouche, Jean David Werthel, Thomas Bauer & Philippe Hardy

Authors
  1. Constantina Moraiti
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shahnaz Klouche
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jean David Werthel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Thomas Bauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Philippe Hardy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Constantina Moraiti.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

T. Bauer is consultant for Arthrex. P. Hardy is consultant for Arthrex and Zimmer. The other authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest concerning this article.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Moraiti, C., Klouche, S., Werthel, J.D. et al. Description and reproducibility assessment of a new computerised tomography scan index to measure the glenoid orientation in relation to the anterior glenoid surface. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 41, 1017–1022 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3290-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3290-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation