Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Morphological analysis of the glenoid version in the axial plane according to age

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Total shoulder arthroplasty planning requires a preoperative assessment of the glenoid version. This study aimed to determine the morphologic profile of the glenoid cavity and our null hypothesis was that age may affect the spiraling aspect.

Method

114 CT arthrographies of patients from 15 to 78 years old were included. Four groups were defined according to age: 15–29, 30–44, 45–59 years old, and over 60. The version of the glenoid was measured in the axial plane according to the most common method: a line is drawn between the osseous anterior and posterior margins of the glenoid and the version corresponds to the angle between this line and the transverse axis of the glenoid. The transverse axis of the scapula is determined by a line drawn from the center of the glenoid fossa to the medial border of the scapula. The axial plane (perpendicular to the supero-inferior axis of the glenoid cavity) was defined by multiplanar reconstruction. The measurements were performed at three regions of interest: the level of the coracoid process (region A), the level of the notch on the anterior border of the glenoid (region B), and the region of the greater antero-posterior diameter (region C).

Results

96 % of the glenoid cavities included were retroverted. The mean version in region A was 11.9° (0–24.3, S-D 5.2), in region B 6.85° (−5.2 to 12.1, S-D 4.13) and in region C 4.04° (−7.7 to 11.1, S-D 4.04). The difference between the mean version of region A and region B was 5.02° and the difference between the mean version of the region B and the mean version of the region C was 2.81°. When considering the rate of change of the mean version between two adjacent regions, no difference was observed between the four groups of age.

Discussion

The analysis showed the importance of the axial reconstruction plan chosen to allow interpretable and reproducible measures. A decreasing version of the glenoid superior-to-inferior was observed, presenting a spiraling twist as described in previous studies. The profile of variation does not change in the four groups of patients included. The reconstruction of an articular surface as close to the anatomy as possible would also participate in establishing the muscular balance and the constraints on implants. Up to now, implants do not take into account this cranio-caudal twisting.

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. 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 90:692–699

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Budge MD, Lewis GS, Schaefer E, Coquia S, Flemming DJ, Armstrong AD (2011) Comparison of standard two-dimensional and three-dimensional corrected glenoid version measurement. J Should Elbow Surg 20:577–583

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Rockwood CA Jr (2009) The shoulder, 4th edn. Elsevier, Philadelphia

    Google Scholar 

  4. Clavert P, Millett PJ, Warner JJ (2007) Glenoid resurfacing: what are the limits to asymmetric reaming for posterior erosion? J Should Elbow Surg 16:843–848

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Couteau B, Mansat P, Darmana R, Mansat M, Egan J (2000) Morphological and mechanical analysis of the glenoid by 3D geometric reconstruction using computed tomography. Clin Biomech (Bristol, Avon) 15 Suppl 1:S8–S12

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. De Wilde L, Verstraeten T, Speeckaert W, Karelse A (2010) Reliability of the glenoid plane. J Should Elbow Surg 19:414–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. De Wilde L, Defoort S, Verstraeten TR et al (2012) A 3D-CT scan study of the humeral and the glenoid planes in 150 normal shoulders. Surg Radiol Anat 34(8):743–750

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Farng E, Zingmond D, Krenek L, Soohoo NF (2011) Factors predicting complication rates after primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elbow Surg 20:557–563

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 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

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Hoenecke HR Jr, Hermida JC, Flores-Hernandez C, D’Lima DD (2010) Accuracy of CT-based measurement of glenoid version for total shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elbow Surg 19:166–191

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Iannotti JP, Greeson C, Downing D, Sabesan V, Bryan JA (2012) Effect of glenoid deformity on glenoid component placement in primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elbow Surg 21:48–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Inui H, Sugamoto K, Miyamoto T, Machida A, Hashimoto J, Nobuhara K (2001) Evaluation of three-dimensional glenoid structure using MRI. J Anat 199:23–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jeske HC, Oberthaler M, Klingensmith M et al (2009) Normal glenoid rim anatomy and the reliability of shoulder instability measurements based on intrasite correlation. Surg Radiol Anat 31(8):623–625

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kraljevic M, Zumstein V, Hugli R et al (2013) A comparison of subchondral bone mineralization between the glenoid cavity and the humeral head on 57 cadaverous shoulder joints. Surg Radiol Anat 35(4):295–300

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Lewis GS, Armstrong AD (2011) Glenoid spherical orientation and version. J Should Elbow Surg 20:3–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Monk AP, Berry E, Limb D, Soames RW (2001) Laser analysis of the glenoid fossa of the scapula. Clin Anat 14:320–323

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rouleau DM, Kidder JF, Pons-Villanueva J, Dynamidis S, Defranco M, Walch G (2010) Glenoid version: how to measure it? Validity of different methods in two-dimensional computed tomography scans. J Should Elbow Surg 19:1230–1237

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Shapiro TA, Mc Garry MH, Gupta R, Lee YS, Lee TP (2007) Biomechanical effects of glenoid retroversion in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Should Elbow Surg 16(3 Suppl):90–95

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Schlemmer B, Dosch JC, Gicquel P, Boutemy P, Wolfram R, Kempf JF (2002) Analyze tomodensitométrique de la rétrotorsion humérale et de la retroversion glénoïdienne. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot 88:553–560

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Soslowsky LJ, Flatow EL, Bigliani LU, Pawluk RJ, Ateshian GA, Mow VC (1992) Quantitation of in situ contact areas at the glenohumeral joint: a biomechanical study. J Orthop Res 10:524–534

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sugamoto K, Miyamoto T, Machida A, Hashimoto J, Nobuhara K (2001) Evaluation of the three-dimensional glenoid structure using MRI. J Anat 199:323–328

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. 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 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest concerning this article.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Medicine, Institute of Normal Anatomy, 4 rue Kirschleger, 67085, Strasbourg Cedex, France

    Julia Bouchaib, Philippe Clavert & Jean-Luc Kahn

  2. Shoulder and Elbow Service, CCOM, 10, av Baumann, 67400, Illkirch, France

    Julia Bouchaib, Philippe Clavert & Jean-François Kempf

Authors
  1. Julia Bouchaib
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Philippe Clavert
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jean-François Kempf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Jean-Luc Kahn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julia Bouchaib.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Bouchaib, J., Clavert, P., Kempf, JF. et al. Morphological analysis of the glenoid version in the axial plane according to age. Surg Radiol Anat 36, 579–585 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-013-1238-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-013-1238-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation