Background. Virtual planning of shoulder arthroplasty has gained recent popularity. Combined with patients specific instrumentation, several systems have been developed that allow the surgeon to accurately appreciate and correct glenoid deformities in version and inclination. While each virtual software platform utilizes a consistent algorithm for calculating these measurements, it is imperative for the surgeon to recognize any differences that may exist amongst software platforms and characterize any variability. Methods. A case-control study of all CT scans of patients previously pre-operatively planned using MatchPoint SurgiCase® software were uploaded into the BluePrint software. The cohort represents surgical planning for total shoulder arthroplasty and reverse shoulder arthroplasty with varying degrees of glenoid deformity. Glenoid version and inclination will be recorded for each CT scan using both software platforms. Results. A total of 38 patient CT scans previously planned using MatchPoint Surgicase® software were uploaded into the BluePrint software. The mean difference for glenoid version between the two software programs was 2.497° (±1.724°) with no significant differences in measured glenoid version readings between BluePrint and SurgiCase software (p=0.8127). No significant differences were seen in the measured glenoid inclination between the two software programs (p=0.733), with a mean difference for glenoid inclination between the two software programs at 5.150° ± 3.733° (figure 1). A Bland-Altman plot determined the 95% limits of agreement between the two programs at −5.879 to 6.116 degrees of glenoid version and −12.05 to 12.75 degrees of glenoid inclination. There was a significant statistical agreement between the two software programs measuring glenoid version and inclination in relation to glenoid wear position for the centered (p=0.004), posterior (p<0.001, p=0.003), posterior-superior (p<0.001, p<0.001), and superior (p=0.027, p=0.034) positions, respectively. Conclusions. Both BluePrint and SurgiCase software platforms yield similar measurements for glenoid version and glenoid inclination. In the setting of glenoid wear in the posterior, posterior-superior or superior position, measurements of between two surgical platforms are in agreement

Background. Degeneration of the shoulder joint is a frequent problem. There are two main types of shoulder degeneration: Osteoarthritis and cuff tear arthropathy (CTA) which is characterized by a large rotator cuff tear and progressive articular damage. It is largely unknown why only some patients with large rotator cuff tears develop CTA. In this project, we investigated CT data from ‘healthy’ persons and patients with CTA with the help of 3D imaging technology and statistical shape models (SSM). We tried to define a native scapular anatomy that predesignate patients to develop CTA. Methods. Statistical shape modeling and reconstruction:. A collection of 110 CT images from patients without glenohumeral arthropathy or large cuff tears was segmented and meshed uniformly to construct a SSM. Point-to-point correspondence between the shapes in the dataset was obtained using non-rigid template registration. Principal component analysis was used to obtain the mean shape and shape variation of the scapula model. Bias towards the template shape was minimized by repeating the non-rigid template registration with the resulting mean shape of the first iteration. Eighty-six CT images from patients with different severities of CTA were analyzed by an experienced shoulder surgeon and classified. CT images were segmented and inspected for signs of glenoid erosion. Remaining healthy parts of the eroded scapulae were partitioned and used as input of the iterative reconstruction algorithm. During an iteration of this algorithm, 30 shape components of the shape model are optimized and the reconstructed shape is aligned with the healthy parts. The algorithm stops when convergence is reached. Measurements. Automatic 3D measurements were performed for both the healthy and reconstructed shapes, including glenoid version, inclination, offset and critical shoulder angle. These measurements were manually performed on the mean shape of the shape model by a surgeon, after which the point-to-point correspondence was used to transfer the measurements to each shape. Results. The critical shoulder angle was found to be significantly larger for the CTA scapulae compared to the references (P<0.01). When analyzing the classified scapulae significant differences were found for the version angle in the scapulae of group 4a/4b and the critical shoulder angle of group 3 when compared to the references (P<0.05). Conclusion. Patients with CTA have a larger critical shoulder angle compared with reference patients. Some significant differences are found between the scapulae from patients in different stages of CTA and healthy references, however the differences are smaller than the accuracy of the SSM reconstruction. Therefore, we are unable to conclude that there is a predisposing anatomy in terms of glenoid version, inclination or offset for CTA

Introduction. The Walch Type B2 glenoid has the hallmark features of posteroinferior glenoid erosion, retroversion, and posterior humeral head subluxation. Although our understanding of the pathoanatomy of bone loss and its evolution in Type B's has improved, the etiology remains unclear. Furthermore, the morphology of the humerus in Walch B types has not been studied. The purpose of this imaging based anthropometric study was to examine the humeral torsion in Walch Type B2 shoulders. We hypothesized that there would be a compensatory decrease in humeral retroversion in Walch B2 glenoids. Methods. Three-dimensional models of the full length humerus were generated from computed tomography data of normal cadaveric (n = 59) and Walch Type B shoulders (n = 59). An anatomical coordinate system referencing the medial and lateral epicondyles was created for each model. A simulated humeral head osteotomy plane was created and used to determine humeral version relative to the epicondylar axis and the head-neck angle. Measurements were repeated by two experienced fellowship-trained shoulder surgeons to determine inter-rater reliability. Glenoid parameters (version, inclination and 2D critical shoulder angle) and posterior humeral head subluxation were calculated in the Type B group to determine the pathologic glenohumeral relationship. Two-way ANOVAs compared group and sex within humeral version and head-neck angle, and intra-class correlation coefficients (ICCs) with a 2-way random effects model and absolute agreement were used for inter-rater reliability. Results. There were statistically significant differences in humeral version between normal and Type B shoulders (p < .001) and between males and females within the normal group (p = .043). Normal shoulders had a humeral retroversion of 36±12°, while the Walch Type B group had a humeral retroversion of 14±9° relative to the epicondylar axis. For head-neck angle, there were no significant differences between sexes (p = .854), or between normal and Type B shoulders when grouped by sex (p = .433). In the Type B group, the mean glenoid version was 22±7°, glenoid inclination was 8±6°, 2D critical shoulder angle was 30±5° and humeral head subluxation was 80±9%. Inter-rater reliability showed fair agreement between the two experienced observers for head-neck angle (ICC = .562; 95% CI: -.28 to .809) and excellent agreement for humeral version (ICC = .962;.913 to .983). Although only fair agreement was found between observers in head-neck angle ICC, the difference in mean angle was only 2°. Discussion. Although much time and effort has been spent understanding and managing Type B2 glenoids, little attention has been paid to investigating associated humeral contributions to the Type B shoulder. Our results indicate that the humeral retroversion in Type B shoulders is significantly lower than in normals. These findings have several implications, including, helping to understanding the etiology of the B2, the unknown effects of arbitrarily selecting higher version angles for the humeral component, and the unknown effects of altered version on glenohumeral joint stability, loading and implant survivorship post-arthroplasty. Our results also raise an important question, whether it is best to reconstruct Type B humeral component version to pathologic version or to non-pathologic population means

BACKGROUND. Abnormal glenoid version positioning has been recognized as a cause of glenoid component failure caused by the rocking horse phenomenon. In contrast, the importance of the glenoid inclination has not been investigated. MATERIALS AND METHODS. The computed tomography scans of 152 healthy shoulders were evaluated. A virtual glenoid component was positioned in 2 different planes: the maximum circular plane (MCP) and the inferior circle plane (ICP). The MCP was defined by the best fitting circle of the most superior point of the glenoid and 2 points at the lower glenoid rim. The ICP was defined by the best fitting circle on the rim of the inferior quadrants. The inclination of both planes was measured as the intersection with the scapular plane. We defined the force vector of the rotator force couple and calculated the magnitude of the shear force vector on a virtual glenoid component in both planes during glenohumeral abduction. RESULTS. The inclination of the component positioned in the MCP averaged 95° (range, 84°–108°) and for the ICP averaged 111° (range, 94°–126°). A significant reduction in shear forces was calculated for the glenoid component in the ICP vs the MCP: 98% reduction in 60° of abduction to 49% reduction in 90° of abduction. CONCLUSION. Shear forces are significantly higher when the glenoid component is positioned in the MCP compared with the ICP, and this is more pronounced in early abduction. Positioning the glenoid component in the inferior circle might reduce the risk of a rocking horse phenomenon. Copyright © 2015 Journal of Shoulder and Elbow Surgery Board of Trustees. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved

Reverse shoulder arthroplasty has a high complication rate related to glenoid implant instability and screw loosening. Better radiographic post-operative evaluation may help in understanding complications causes. Medical radiographic imaging is the conventional technique for post-operative component placement analysis. Studies suggest that volumetric CT is better than use of CT slices or conventional radiographs. Currently, post-operative CT use is limited by metal-artifacts in images. This study evaluated inter-observer reliability of pre-operative and post-operative CT images registration to conventional approaches using radiographs and CT slices in measuring reverse shoulder arthroplasty glenoid implant and screw percentage in bone. Pre-operative and post-operative CT scans, and post-operative radiographs were obtained from six patients that had reverse shoulder arthroplasty. CT scans images were imported into a medical imaging processing software and each scapula, glenoid implant and inferior screw were reconstructed as 3D models. Post-operative 3D models were imported into the pre-operative reference frame and matched to the pre-operative scapula model using a paired-point and a surface registration. Measurements on registered CT models were done in reference to the pre-operative scapula model coordinate frame defined by a computer-assisted designed triad positioned in respect to the center of the glenoid fossa and trigonum scapulae (medial-lateral, z axis) and superior and inferior glenoid tubercle (superior-inferior, y axis). The orthogonal triad third axis defined the anterior-posterior axis (x axis). A duplicate triad was positioned along the central axis of the glenoid implant model. Using a virtual protractor, the glenoid implant inclination was measured from its central axis and the scapula transverse plane (x - z axes) and version from the coronal plane (y - z axes). Inferior screw percentage in bone was measured from a Boolean intersection operation between the pre-operative scapula model and the inferior screw model. For CT slices and radiographic measurements, a first 90-degree Cobb angle, from medical records software, was positioned from the trigonum scapulae to the centre of the central peg. Using the 90-degree line as reference, a second Cobb angle was drawn from the most superior to the most inferior point of the glenoid implant for inclination and from of the most anterior to the most posterior point for version. Version can only be measured using CT slices. Screw percentage in bone was calculated from screw length measures collected with a distance-measuring tool from the software. For testing the inter-observer reliability of the three methods, measures taken by three qualified observers were analysed using an intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) method. The 3D registration method showed excellent reliability (ICC > 0.75) in glenoid implant inclination (0.97), version (0.98) and screw volume in bone (0.99). Conventional methods showed poor reliability (ICC < 0.4); CT-slice inclination (0.02), version (0.07), percentage of screw in bone (0.02) and for radiographic inclination (0.05) and percentage screw in bone (0.05). This CT registration of post-operative to pre-operative novel method for quantitatively assessing reverse shoulder arthroplasty glenoid implant positioning and screw percentage in bone, showed excellent inter-observer reliability compared to conventional 2D approaches. It overcomes metal-artifact limitations of post-operative CT evaluation

Severe glenoid bone loss in patients with osteoarthritis with intact rotator cuff is associated with posterior glenoid bone loss and posterior humeral subluxation. Management of severe glenoid bone loss during shoulder arthroplasty is controversial and technically challenging and options range from humeral hemiarthroplasty, anatomic shoulder replacement with glenoid bone grafting or augmented glenoid component implantation, to reverse replacement with reaming to correct version or structural bone grafting or metallic augmentation of the bone deficiency. Shoulder replacement with severe glenoid bone loss is technically challenging and characterised by higher rates of complications and revisions. Hemiarthroplasty has limited benefit for pain relief and function especially if eccentric glenoid wear exists. Bone loss with >15 degrees of retroversion likely requires version correction include bone-grafting, augmented glenoid components, or reverse total shoulder replacement. Asymmetric reaming may improve version but is limited to 15 degrees of version correction in order to preserve subchondral bone and glenoid bone vault depth. Bone-grafting of glenoid wear and defects has had mixed results with graft-related complications, periprosthetic radiolucent lines, and glenoid component failure of fixation. Implantation of an augmented wedge or step polyethylene glenoid component improves joint version while preserving subchondral bone, but is technically demanding and with minimal short term clinical follow-up. A Mayo study demonstrated roughly 50% of patients with posteriorly augmented polyethylene had radiolucent lines and 1/3 had posterior subluxation. Another wedge polyethylene design had 66% with bone ingrowth around polyethylene fins at 3 years. Long term outcomes are unknown for these new wedge augmented glenoid components. Reverse shoulder arthroplasty avoids many risks of anatomic replacement glenoid component fixation and stability but is associated with a high complication rate (15%) including neurologic and baseplate loosening and often requires structural bone grafting behind the baseplate with suboptimal outcomes or metallic augmented baseplates with limited evidence and short term outcomes. Reverse replacement with baseplate bone grafting or metal augmentation is technically challenging due to limited native glenoid bone stock available for baseplate component ingrowth and long term fixation. Failure to correct glenoid superior inclination and restore neutral version within 10 degrees increases the risks of reverse baseplate failure of fixation, pull out, and failure of reverse replacement. Reverse baseplate failure rates in patients with severe glenoid bone loss and concomitant glenoid bone grafting range from 5–11%. The minimum native glenoid bony contact with the baseplate is unknown but likely is approximately 1cm of native bone contacting a central ingrowth post and a minority (∼15–25%) of native glenoid contacting the backside of the baseplate. Failure to correct posterior bone loss can lead to retroversion of the baseplate, reduced external rotation, posterior scapular notching, and posteromedial polyethylene wear. In summary, shoulder replacement with severe glenoid bone loss is technically challenging and characterised by higher rates of complication and revision

For any image guided surgery, independently of the technique which is used (navigation, templates, robotics), it is necessary to get a 3D bone surface model from CT or MR images. Such model is used for planning, registration and visualization. We report that graphical representation of patient bony structure and the surgical tools, inter-connectively with the tracking device and patient-to-image registration, are crucial components in such system. For Total Shoulder Arthroplasty (TSA), there are many challenges. The most of cases that we are working with are pathological cases such as rheumatoid arthritis, osteoarthritis disease. The CT images of these cases often show a fusion area between the glenoid cavity and the humeral head. They also show severe deformations of the humeral head surface that result in a loss of contours. These fusion area and image quality problems are also amplified by well-known CT-scan artefacts like beam-hardening or partial volume effects. The state of the art shows that several segmentation techniques, applied to CT-Scans of the shoulder, have already been disclosed. Unfortunately, their performances, when used on pathological data, are quite poor. In severe cases, bone-on-bone arthritis may lead to erosion-wearing away of the bone. Shoulder replacement surgery, also called shoulder arthroplasty, is a successful, pain-relieving option for many people. During the procedure, the humeral head and the glenoid bone are replaced with metal and plastic components to alleviate pain and improve function. This surgical procedure is very difficult and limited to expert centres. The two main problems are the minimal surgical incision and limited access to the operated structures. The success of such procedure is related to optimal prosthesis positioning. For TSA, separating the humeral head in the 3D scanner images would allow enhancing the vision field for the surgeon on the glenoid surface. So far, none of the existing systems or software packages makes it possible to obtain such 3D surface model automatically from CT images and this is probably one of the reasons for very limited success of Computer Assisted Orthopaedic Surgery (CAOS) applications for shoulder surgery. This kind of application often has been limited due to CT-image segmentation for severe pathologic cases and patient to image registration. The aim of this paper is to present a new image guided planning software based on CT scan of the patient and using bony structure recognition, morphological and anatomical analysis for the operated region. Volumetric preoperative CT datasets have been used to derive a surface model shape of the shoulder. The proposed planning software could be used with a conventional localisation system, which locates in 3D and in real time position and orientation for surgical tools using passive markers associated to rigid bodies that will be fixed on the patient bone and on the surgical instruments. 20 series of patients aged from 42 years to 91 years (mean age of 71 years) were analysed. The first step of this planning software is fully automatic segmentation method based on 3D shape recognition algorithms applied to each object detected in the volume. The second step is a specific processing that only treats the region between the humerus and the glenoid surface in order to separate possible contact areas. The third step is a full morphological analysis of anatomical structure of the bone. The glenoid surface and the glenoid vault are detected and a 3D version and inclination angle of the glenoid surface are computed. These parameters are very important to define an optimal path for drilling and reaming glenoid surface. The surgeon can easily modify the position of the implant in 3D aided by 3D and 2D view of the patient anatomy. The glenoid version/inclination angle and the glenoid vault are computed for each postion in real time to help the surgeon to evaluate the implant position and orientation. In summary, preoperative planning, 3D CT modelling and intraoperative tracking produced improved accuracy of glenoid implantation. The current paper has presented new planning software in the world of image guided surgery focused on shoulder arthroplasty. Within our approach, we propose, to use pattern recognition instead of manual picking of landmarks to avoid user intervention, in addition to potentially reducing the procedure time. A very important role is played by 3D data sets to visualise specific anatomical structures of the patient. The automatic segmentation of arthritic joints with bone recognition is intended to form a solid basis for the registration. The results of this methodology were tested on arthritic patients to prove that it is not just easy and fast to perform but also very accurate so it realises all conditions for the clinical use in OR