Aims. This study aimed to quantify the shoulder kinematics during an apprehension-relocation test in patients with anterior shoulder instability (ASI) and glenoid bone loss using the radiostereometric analysis (RSA) method. Kinematics were compared with the patient’s contralateral healthy shoulder. Methods. A total of 20 patients with ASI and > 10% glenoid bone loss and a healthy contralateral shoulder were included. RSA imaging of the patient’s shoulders was performed during a repeated apprehension-relocation test. Bone volume models were generated from CT scans, marked with anatomical coordinate systems, and aligned with the digitally reconstructed bone projections on the RSA images. The glenohumeral joint (GHJ) kinematics were evaluated in the anteroposterior and superoinferior direction of: the humeral head centre location relative to the glenoid centre; and the humeral head contact point location on the glenoid. Results. During the apprehension test, the centre of the humeral head was 1.0 mm (95% CI 0.0 to 2.0) more inferior on the glenoid for the ASI shoulder compared with the healthy shoulder. Furthermore, the contact point of the ASI shoulder was 1.4 mm (95% CI 0.3 to 2.5) more anterior and 2.0 mm (95% CI 0.8 to 3.1) more inferior on the glenoid compared with the healthy shoulder. The contact point of the ASI shoulder was 1.2 mm (95% CI 0.2 to 2.6) more anterior during the apprehension test compared to the relocation test. Conclusion. The humeral head centre was located more inferior, and the GHJ contact point was located both more anterior and inferior during the apprehension test for the ASI shoulders than the healthy shoulders. Furthermore, the contact point displacement between the apprehension and relocation test revealed increased joint laxity for the ASI shoulder than the healthy shoulders. These results contribute to existing knowledge that ASI shoulders with glenoid bone loss may also suffer from inferior shoulder instability. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2024;106-B(10):1133–1140

Purpose: This in-vitro study was conducted to assess the effect of a computer-assisted method of performing shoulder hemiarthroplasty, in comparison to traditional techniques, on passive glenohumeral joint kinematics during abduction. Methods: Seven pairs of fresh-frozen cadaveric shoulders were tested. One specimen from each pair was randomized to the computer-assisted technique, while the contralateral shoulder underwent a traditional hemiar-throplasty using standard surgical guides by an experienced shoulder surgeon. A simulated four-part proximal humerus fracture was created in each shoulder and was reconstructed using a modular shoulder hemiarthroplasty system (Anatomical Shoulder Hemiarthroplasty System, Centrepulse Orthopaedics Inc, Austin, TX). CT data and computerized simulations of anatomical characteristics were used in the computer-assisted technique. An electromagnetic tracking device (Flock of Birds, Ascension Technologies, Burlington, VT) in conjunction with custom-written software (LabVIEW, National Instruments, Austin, TX) enabled real-time intra-operative feedback.||Passive abduction of the glenohumeral joint was conducted and the resulting motion was quantified using the aforementioned tracking device. Coordinate systems, created on both the humerus and scapula from digitized anatomical landmarks, were used to transform the kinematic data into clinically relevant parameters. Statistical analyses were performed using one-way Analyses of Variance (ANOVAs) followed by post-hoc Student-Newman-Keuls multiple comparisons (p< 0.05). Results: In the superior-inferior direction, a significant difference in joint kinematics (p=0.011) was found between the computer-assisted and the traditional technique, with the traditional technique resulting in a more inferiorly positioned humeral head at all angles of elevation. There was no difference in translation between the native shoulders and the computer-assisted hemiarthroplasty (p> 0.05). In the anterior-posterior direction there was no difference measured in the position of the humeral head between the two surgical techniques, which were both similar to the native shoulder (p> 0.05). Conclusions: This is the first known study to examine the effects of a computer-assisted method for performing shoulder hemiarthroplasty. Our results show that the computer-assisted approach should allow improved restoration of glenohumeral joint kinematics relative to conventional techniques, potentially resulting in improved patient outcomes and implant durability

This in-vitro study was conducted to determine the effect of rotator cuff tears on joint kinematics. A shoulder simulator produced unconstrained active abduction of the humerus. Three sequential 1cm lesions were created, the first two in the supraspinatus tendon and the third in the subscapularis tendon. The plane of abduction moved posteriorly and became more abnormal throughout abduction as the size of the tear increased. It is concluded that in order to generate the same motions achieved by the intact joint other muscle groups must be employed, inevitably resulting in altered joint loading. This in-vitro study was conducted to determine the effect of simulated progressive tears of the rotator cuff on active glenohumeral joint kinematics. Five cadaveric shoulders were tested using a shoulder simulator designed to produce unconstrained active motion of the humerus. Forces were applied to simulate loading of the supraspinatus, subscapularis, infraspinatus/teres minor, anterior, middle, and posterior deltoid muscles based upon variable ratios of electromyographic data and average physiological cross-sectional area of the muscles. Three sequential 1cm lesions were created, the first two in the supraspinatus tendon and the third in the subscapularis tendon. Simulated active glenohumeral abduction was performed following the creation of each lesion. Five successive tests were performed to quantify repeatability. The plane of abduction moved posteriorly and became more abnormal throughout abduction as the size of the lesion increased (p=0.01) (Figure 1). In order to generate the same motions achieved with an intact rotator cuff other muscle groups must be employed, inevitably resulting in altered joint loading. A better understanding of the effects that rotator cuff tears have on the kinematics of the glenohumeral joint may result in the development of innovative rehabilitation strategies to compensate for this change in muscle balance and improve the clinical outcomes. Please contact author for diagram and/or graph

INTRODUCTION. Total shoulder arthroplasty (TSA) implants are used to restore function to individuals whose shoulder motions are impaired by osteoarthritis. To improve TSA implant designs, it is crucial to understand the kinematics of healthy, osteoarthritic (OA), and post-TSA shoulders. Hence, this study will determine in vivo kinematic trends of the glenohumeral joints of healthy, OA, and post-TSA shoulders. Methods. In vivo shoulder kinematics were determined pre and post-operatively for five unilateral TSA subjects with one healthy and a contralateral OA glenohumeral joint. Fluoroscopic examinations were performed for all three shoulder categories (healthy, OA, and post-TSA) for each subject shoulder abduction and external rotation. Then, three-dimensional (3D) models of the left and right scapula and humerus were constructed using CT scans. For post-operative shoulders, 3D computer-aided design models of the implants were obtained. Next, the 3D glenohumeral joint kinematics were determined using a previously published 3D to 2D registration technique. After determining kinematics, relative Euler rotation angles between the humerus and scapula were calculated in MATLAB® to determine range of motion (ROM) and kinematic profiles for all three shoulder categories. The ROMs for each category were compared using paired t-tests for each exercise. Also, the location of the contact point of the humerus on the glenoid was found. This allowed the vertical translation from the most superior to most inferior contact point (SI contact range) to be calculated as well as the horizontal translation from the most anterior to most posterior contact point (AP contact range). The SI and AP contact ranges for all shoulder categories were compared using paired t-tests for each exercise. Results. Abduction. According to preliminary results, the averages range of abduction for healthy, OA, and post-TSA shoulders was 51.5 °, 19.4°, and 56.7°, respectively. The average SI contact range of abduction for healthy, OA, and post-TSA shoulders was 14.1 mm, 16.4 mm, and 14.1 mm, respectively while the AP contact range was 10.0, 14., and 14.3, respectively. The ranges of abduction between healthy and OA and between OA and post-TSA shoulders, and the AP contact range for healthy and OA shoulders displayed statistically significant differences at the α=0.05 level. External Rotation. The averages range of External Rotation for healthy, OA, and post-TSA shoulders was 63.6°, 31.1°, and 44.5°, respectively. The averages SI contact range of External Rotation for healthy, OA, and post-TSA shoulders was 20.7, 12.7, and 15.9 mm, respectively while the averages AP contact range was 8.5,12.9 mm, and 13.8 mm, respectively. The ranges of abduction for healthy and OA as well as AP contact range for healthy and OA shoulders were statistically different at the α=0.05 level. Conclusions. This study's preliminary results indicate that healthy, OA, and post-TSA shoulders show statistically significant difference in kinematic trends including ROM and contact point translation. These differences may result from the varying geometries of each condition or from subjects altering kinematic trends to reduce pain in OA shoulders. In addition, this study may provide a reference for future studies analyzing the kinematics of post TSA shoulders