Gender-specific factors influencing the glenoid version and reference values for it.
Age
Associated factors
Glenoid version
Population-based
Reference values
Sex
Shoulder MRI
Journal
Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
ISSN: 1590-9999
Titre abrégé: J Orthop Traumatol
Pays: Italy
ID NLM: 101090931
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
16 Aug 2024
16 Aug 2024
Historique:
received:
12
06
2023
accepted:
08
07
2024
medline:
17
8
2024
pubmed:
17
8
2024
entrez:
16
8
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Glenoid version is an important factor in the evaluation of shoulder stability and shoulder pathologies. However, there are neither established reference values nor known factors that influence the glenoid version, even though valid reference values are needed for diagnostic and orthopaedic surgery like corrective osteotomy and total or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (TSA/RSA). The aim of our population-based study was to identify factors influencing the glenoid version and to establish reference values from a large-scale population cohort. Our study explored the glenoid versions in a large sample representing the general adult population. We investigated 3004 participants in the population-based Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP). Glenoid version was measured for both shoulders via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Associations with the glenoid version were calculated for sex, age, body height, body weight and BMI. The reference values for glenoid version in the central European population range between -9° and 7.5°, while multiple factors are associated with the glenoid version. To achieve a reliable interpretation prior to orthopaedic surgery, sex- and age-adjusted reference values are proposed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Glenoid version is an important factor in the evaluation of shoulder stability and shoulder pathologies. However, there are neither established reference values nor known factors that influence the glenoid version, even though valid reference values are needed for diagnostic and orthopaedic surgery like corrective osteotomy and total or reverse shoulder arthroplasty (TSA/RSA). The aim of our population-based study was to identify factors influencing the glenoid version and to establish reference values from a large-scale population cohort.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Our study explored the glenoid versions in a large sample representing the general adult population. We investigated 3004 participants in the population-based Study of Health in Pomerania (SHIP). Glenoid version was measured for both shoulders via magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Associations with the glenoid version were calculated for sex, age, body height, body weight and BMI. The reference values for glenoid version in the central European population range between -9° and 7.5°, while multiple factors are associated with the glenoid version.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
To achieve a reliable interpretation prior to orthopaedic surgery, sex- and age-adjusted reference values are proposed.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39152298
doi: 10.1186/s10195-024-00778-y
pii: 10.1186/s10195-024-00778-y
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
39Subventions
Organisme : Bundesministerium für Bildung, Wissenschaft, Forschung und Technologie
ID : 03ZIK012
Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Aygün Ü, Çalik Y, Işik C, Şahin H, Şahin R, Aygün DÖ (2016) The importance of glenoid version in patients with anterior dislocation of the shoulder. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 25:1930–1936. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2016.09.018
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.09.018
pubmed: 27855874
Hohmann E, Tetsworth K (2015) Glenoid version and inclination are risk factors for anterior shoulder dislocation. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 24:1268–1273. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2015.03.032
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.03.032
pubmed: 25958217
Galvin JW, Parada SA, Li X, Eichinger JK (2016) Critical findings on magnetic resonance arthrograms in posterior shoulder instability compared with an age-matched controlled cohort. Am J Sports Med 44:3222–3229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546516660076
doi: 10.1177/0363546516660076
pubmed: 27528612
Imhoff FB, Camenzind RS, Obopilwe E, Cote MP, Mehl J, Beitzel K, Imhoff AB, Mazzocca AD, Arciero RA, Dyrna FGE (2019) Glenoid retroversion is an important factor for humeral head centration and the biomechanics of posterior shoulder stability. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27:3952–3961. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-019-05573-5
doi: 10.1007/s00167-019-05573-5
pubmed: 31254026
Eichinger JK, Massimini DF, Kim J, Higgins LD (2016) Biomechanical evaluation of glenoid version and dislocation direction on the influence of anterior shoulder instability and development of Hill-Sachs lesions. Am J Sports Med 44:2792–2799. https://doi.org/10.1177/0363546516659281
Bockmann B, Soschynski S, Lechler P, Schwarting T, Debus F, Soca B, Ruchholtz S, Frink M (2016) The osseous morphology of nondegenerated shoulders shows no side-related differences in elderly patients: an analysis of 102 computed tomography scans. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 25:1297–1302. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2015.12.024
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2015.12.024
pubmed: 27131576
Farron A, Terrier A, Büchler P (2006) Risks of loosening of a prosthetic glenoid implanted in retroversion. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 15:521–526. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2005.10.003
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2005.10.003
pubmed: 16831661
Churchill RS, Brems JJ, Kotschi H (2001) Glenoid size, inclination, and version: an anatomic study. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 10:327–332. https://doi.org/10.1067/mse.2001.115269
doi: 10.1067/mse.2001.115269
pubmed: 11517362
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 23:1724–1730. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.020
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2014.02.020
pubmed: 24862249
Piponov HI, Savin D, Shah N, Esposito D, Schwartz B, Moretti V, Goldberg B (2016) Glenoid version and size: does gender, ethnicity, or body size play a role? Int Orthop 40:2347–2353. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-016-3201-8
doi: 10.1007/s00264-016-3201-8
pubmed: 27106214
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
doi: 10.2106/00004623-199274070-00009
pubmed: 1522089
de Wilde LF, Verstraeten T, Speeckaert W, Karelse A (2010) Reliability of the glenoid plane. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 19:414–422. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2009.10.005
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2009.10.005
pubmed: 20137978
Matsuki K, Sugaya H, Hoshika S, Ueda Y, Takahashi N, Tokai M, Banks SA (2019) Three-dimensional measurement of glenoid dimensions and orientations. J Orthop Sci 24:624–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jos.2018.11.019
doi: 10.1016/j.jos.2018.11.019
pubmed: 30579647
Tackett JJ, Ablove RH (2011) Magnetic resonance imaging study of glenohumeral relationships between genders. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20:1335–1339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.03.018
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.03.018
pubmed: 21723749
Bouchaib J, Clavert P, Kempf J-F, Kahn J-L (2014) Morphological analysis of the glenoid version in the axial plane according to age. Surg Radiol Anat 36:579–585. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-013-1238-6
doi: 10.1007/s00276-013-1238-6
pubmed: 24292498
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. https://doi.org/10.1186/1749-799X-9-17
doi: 10.1186/1749-799X-9-17
pubmed: 24618285
pmcid: 3995775
Völzke H, Alte D, Schmidt CO, Radke D, Lorbeer R, Friedrich N, Aumann N, Lau K, Piontek M, Born G, Havemann C, Ittermann T, Schipf S, Haring R, Baumeister SE, Wallaschofski H, Nauck M, Frick S, Arnold A, Jünger M, Mayerle J, Kraft M, Lerch MM, Dörr M, Reffelmann T, Empen K, Felix SB, Obst A, Koch B, Gläser S, Ewert R, Fietze I, Penzel T, Dören M, Rathmann W, Haerting J, Hannemann M, Röpcke J, Schminke U, Jürgens C, Tost F, Rettig R, Kors JA, Ungerer S, Hegenscheid K, Kühn J-P, Kühn J, Hosten N, Puls R, Henke J, Gloger O, Teumer A, Homuth G, Völker U, Schwahn C, Holtfreter B, Polzer I, Kohlmann T, Grabe HJ, Rosskopf D, Kroemer HK, Kocher T, Biffar R, John U, Hoffmann W (2011) Cohort profile: the study of health in Pomerania. Int J Epidemiol 40:294–307. https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyp394
doi: 10.1093/ije/dyp394
pubmed: 20167617
Hegenscheid K, Kühn JP, Völzke H, Biffar R, Hosten N, Puls R (2009) Whole-body magnetic resonance imaging of healthy volunteers: pilot study results from the population-based SHIP study. RoFo 181:748–759. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0028-1109510
doi: 10.1055/s-0028-1109510
pubmed: 19598074
Terrier A, Büchler P, Farron A (2006) Influence of glenohumeral conformity on glenoid stresses after total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 15:515–520. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2005.09.021
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2005.09.021
pubmed: 16831660
Shapiro TA, McGarry MH, Gupta R, Lee YS, Lee TQ (2007) Biomechanical effects of glenoid retroversion in total shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 16:S90–S95. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2006.07.010
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2006.07.010
pubmed: 17169588
Brewer BJ, Wubben RC, Carrera GF (1986) Excessive retroversion of the glenoid cavity. a cause of non-traumatic posterior instability of the shoulder. J Bone Joint Surg Am 68:724–731
doi: 10.2106/00004623-198668050-00013
pubmed: 3722229
Graichen H, Koydl P, Zichner L (1999) Effectiveness of glenoid osteotomy in atraumatic posterior instability of the shoulder associated with excessive retroversion and flatness of the glenoid. Int Orthop 23:95–99. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002640050316
doi: 10.1007/s002640050316
pubmed: 10422024
pmcid: 3619788
Pogorzelski J, Braun S, Imhoff AB, Beitzel K (2016) Open-wedge-glenoidosteotomie als therapie bei posteriorer schulterinstabilität aufgrund vermehrter glenoidretroversion (Open-wedge osteotomy of the glenoid for treatment of posterior shoulder instability with increased glenoid retroversion). Oper Orthop Traumatol 28:438–448. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00064-016-0457-5
doi: 10.1007/s00064-016-0457-5
pubmed: 27357960
Ortmaier R, Moroder P, Hirzinger C, Resch H (2017) Posterior open wedge osteotomy of the scapula neck for the treatment of advanced shoulder osteoarthritis with posterior head migration in young patients. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 26:1278–1286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2016.11.005
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2016.11.005
pubmed: 28162883
Lacheta L, Singh TSP, Hovsepian JM, Braun S, Imhoff AB, Pogorzelski J (2019) Posterior open wedge glenoid osteotomy provides reliable results in young patients with increased glenoid retroversion and posterior shoulder instability. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 27:299–304. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00167-018-5223-9
doi: 10.1007/s00167-018-5223-9
pubmed: 30374569
Iannotti JP, Greeson C, Downing D, Sabesan V, Bryan JA (2012) Effect of glenoid deformity on glenoid component placement in primary shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21:48–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2011.02.011
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2011.02.011
pubmed: 21600787
Hsu JE, Ricchetti ET, Huffman GR, Iannotti JP, Glaser DL (2013) Addressing glenoid bone deficiency and asymmetric posterior erosion in shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 22:1298–1308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2013.04.014
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2013.04.014
pubmed: 23796384
Welsch G, Mamisch TC, Kikinis R, Schmidt R, Lang P, Forst R, Fitz W (2003) CT-based preoperative analysis of scapula morphology and glenohumeral joint geometry. Comput Aided Surg 8:264–268. https://doi.org/10.3109/10929080309146062
doi: 10.3109/10929080309146062
pubmed: 15529956
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 14:85–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2004.04.011
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2004.04.011
pubmed: 15723018
Matsen FA, Whitson A, Hsu JE, Stankovic NK, Neradilek MB, Somerson JS (2019) Prearthroplasty glenohumeral pathoanatomy and its relationship to patient’s sex, age, diagnosis, and self-assessed shoulder comfort and function. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 28:2290–2300. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2019.04.043
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2019.04.043
pubmed: 31311749
Budge MD, Lewis GS, Schaefer E, Coquia S, Flemming DJ, Armstrong AD (2011) Comparison of standard two-dimensional and three-dimensional corrected glenoid version measurements. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 20:577–583. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.11.003
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.11.003
pubmed: 21324716
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 Shoulder Elbow Surg 19:1230–1237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2010.01.027
doi: 10.1016/j.jse.2010.01.027
pubmed: 20452247
Cagle PJ, Werner B, Shukla DR, London DA, Parsons BO, Millar NL (2019) Interobserver and intraobserver comparison of imaging glenoid morphology, glenoid version and humeral head subluxation. Shoulder Elbow 11:204–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1758573218768507
doi: 10.1177/1758573218768507
pubmed: 31210792
Parada SA, Shaw KA, Antosh IJ, Eichinger JK, Li X, Curry EJ, Provencher MT (2020) Magnetic resonance imaging correlates with computed tomography for glenoid version calculation despite lack of visibility of medial scapula. Arthroscopy 36:99–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.arthro.2019.07.030
doi: 10.1016/j.arthro.2019.07.030
pubmed: 31864608