Differences in Osseous Shoulder Morphology, Scapulothoracic Orientation, and Muscle Volume in Patients With Constitutional Static Posterior Shoulder Instability (Type C1) Compared With Healthy Controls.

constitutional posterior decentering constitutional static posterior humeral decentering muscle volume preosteoarthritic deformity static posterior shoulder instability

Journal

The American journal of sports medicine
ISSN: 1552-3365
Titre abrégé: Am J Sports Med
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7609541

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
15 Mar 2024
Historique:
medline: 15 3 2024
pubmed: 15 3 2024
entrez: 15 3 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Constitutional static posterior humeral decentering (type C1 according to ABC Classification) has been recognized as a pre-osteoarthritic deformity that may lead to early-onset posterior decentering osteoarthritis at a young age. Therefore, it is important to identify possible associations of this pathologic shoulder condition to find more effective treatment options. To perform a comprehensive analysis of all parameters reported to be associated with a C1 shoulder-including the osseous shoulder morphology, scapulothoracic orientation, and the muscle volume of the shoulder girdle in a single patient cohort. Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3. A retrospective, comparative study was conducted analyzing 17 C1 shoulders in 10 patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with the complete depiction of the trunk from the base of the skull to the iliac crest, including both humeri. The mean age of the patients was 33.5 years, and all patients were men. To measure and compare the osseous shoulder morphology (glenoid version, glenoid offset, humeral torsion, anterior acromial coverage, posterior acromial coverage, posterior acromial height, and posterior acromial tilt) and scapulothoracic orientation (scapular protraction, scapular internal rotation, scapular upward rotation, scapular translation, scapular tilt, and thoracic kyphosis), these patients were matched 1 to 4 according their age, sex, and affected side with shoulder-healthy patients who had received positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography. To measure and compare the muscle volume of the shoulder girdle (subscapularis, infraspinatus/teres minor, supraspinatus, trapezius, deltoid, latissimus dorsi/teres major, pectoralis major, and pectoralis minor), patients were matched 1 to 2 with patients who had received PET-MRI. Patients with visible pathologies of the upper extremities were excluded. The C1 group had a significantly higher glenoid retroversion, increased anterior glenoid offset, reduced humeral retrotorsion, increased anterior acromial coverage, reduced posterior acromial coverage, increased posterior acromial height, and increased posterior acromial tilt compared with controls ( Patients with C1 shoulders differ from healthy controls regarding osseous scapular and humeral morphology, scapulothoracic orientation, and shoulder girdle muscle distribution. These differences may be crucial in understanding the delicate balance of glenohumeral centering.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND UNASSIGNED
Constitutional static posterior humeral decentering (type C1 according to ABC Classification) has been recognized as a pre-osteoarthritic deformity that may lead to early-onset posterior decentering osteoarthritis at a young age. Therefore, it is important to identify possible associations of this pathologic shoulder condition to find more effective treatment options.
PURPOSE UNASSIGNED
To perform a comprehensive analysis of all parameters reported to be associated with a C1 shoulder-including the osseous shoulder morphology, scapulothoracic orientation, and the muscle volume of the shoulder girdle in a single patient cohort.
STUDY DESIGN UNASSIGNED
Cross-sectional study; Level of evidence, 3.
METHODS UNASSIGNED
A retrospective, comparative study was conducted analyzing 17 C1 shoulders in 10 patients who underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with the complete depiction of the trunk from the base of the skull to the iliac crest, including both humeri. The mean age of the patients was 33.5 years, and all patients were men. To measure and compare the osseous shoulder morphology (glenoid version, glenoid offset, humeral torsion, anterior acromial coverage, posterior acromial coverage, posterior acromial height, and posterior acromial tilt) and scapulothoracic orientation (scapular protraction, scapular internal rotation, scapular upward rotation, scapular translation, scapular tilt, and thoracic kyphosis), these patients were matched 1 to 4 according their age, sex, and affected side with shoulder-healthy patients who had received positron emission tomography (PET)-computed tomography. To measure and compare the muscle volume of the shoulder girdle (subscapularis, infraspinatus/teres minor, supraspinatus, trapezius, deltoid, latissimus dorsi/teres major, pectoralis major, and pectoralis minor), patients were matched 1 to 2 with patients who had received PET-MRI. Patients with visible pathologies of the upper extremities were excluded.
RESULTS UNASSIGNED
The C1 group had a significantly higher glenoid retroversion, increased anterior glenoid offset, reduced humeral retrotorsion, increased anterior acromial coverage, reduced posterior acromial coverage, increased posterior acromial height, and increased posterior acromial tilt compared with controls (
CONCLUSION UNASSIGNED
Patients with C1 shoulders differ from healthy controls regarding osseous scapular and humeral morphology, scapulothoracic orientation, and shoulder girdle muscle distribution. These differences may be crucial in understanding the delicate balance of glenohumeral centering.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38488401
doi: 10.1177/03635465241233706
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

3635465241233706

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

One or more of the authors has declared the following potential conflict of interest or source of funding: P.M. has received consulting fees from Alyve Medical, Arthrex, and Medacta. D.A. has received consulting fees from Medacta and Arthrex. AOSSM checks author disclosures against the Open Payments Database (OPD). AOSSM has not conducted an independent investigation on the OPD and disclaims any liability or responsibility relating thereto.

Auteurs

Doruk Akgün (D)

Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Henry Gebauer (H)

Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Alp Paksoy (A)

Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Frederik Schafer (F)

Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Eva Herbst (E)

Schulthess Klinik, Zurich, Switzerland.

Daniel Karczewski (D)

Center for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.

Marc-Frederic Pastor (MF)

Klinikum Braunschweig, Braunschweig, Germany.

Philipp Moroder (P)

Schulthess Klinik, Zurich, Switzerland.

Classifications MeSH